3 ms·
> is far from “being it” as a definition of the concept of entropy in physics. I simply do not understand why you say this. Entropy in physics is defined using
by prof-dr-ir 2y ago
> is far from “being it” as a definition of the concept of entropy in physics.
I simply do not understand why you say this. Entropy in physics is defined using exactly the same equation. The only thing I need to add is the choice of probability distribution (i.e. the choice of ensemble).
I really do not see a better "definition of the concept of entropy in physics".
(For quantum systems one can nitpick a bit about density matrices, but in my view that is merely a technicality on how to extend probability distributions to Hilbert spaces.)
- kgwgk 2y agoI’d say that the concept of entropy “in physics” is about (even better: starts with) the choice of a probability distribution. Without that you have just a number associated with each probability distribution - distributions without any physical meaning so those numbers won’t have any physical meaning either. But that’s fine, I accept that you may think that it’s just a little detail. (Quantum mechanics has no mystery either. ih/2pi dA/dt = AH - HA That’s it. The only thing one needs to add is a choice of operators.)
- prof-dr-ir 2y agoSarcasm aside, I really do not think you are making much sense. Obviously one first introduces the relevant probability distributions (at least the micro-canonical ensemble). But once you have those, your comment still does not offer a better way to introduce entropy other than what I wrote. What did you have in mind? In other words, how did you think I should change this part of my course?