Quibbles

[Martin]

This thread can be for physics-related quibbles of all kinds. Sometimes persistent quibbles can interrupt the flow of discussion on an otherwise good thread. Sometime they're good--and make a valuable point, and then we move on. But sometimes they just obstruct things and promote useless conflict between people.

 

So what I'm hoping is that this thread can be a quibble basket, for when a nitpick conflict begins to obstruct some physics discussion.

[Fred56]

My first nit is yourdad's problem with heat/entropy -anyone want to "sort out" his concept for him?

[Mr Skeptic]

My first nit is yourdad's problem with heat/entropy -anyone want to "sort out" his concept for him?

 

Sure, but I would rather he explain his position himself first.

 

-----

 

Can we post some random questions here too?

 

Here's one I've been wondering about: If you replaced all the charges e in the universe with magnetic monopoles, would it be possible to tell the difference? The obvious things like putting it in an electric field wouldn't work, because you wouldn't know for sure whether you had a magnetic or electric field if you didn't know whether e was an electric monopole or a magnetic monopole.

[Fred56]

what I'm hoping is that this thread can be a quibble basket, for when a nitpick conflict begins to obstruct some physics discussion.

I could be wrong, but maybe this is meant to be where the quibble stops.

[DrDNA]

I could be wrong, but maybe this is meant to be where the quibble stops.

 

You mean The Quibble Stops Here?

[ydoaPs]

My first nit is yourdad's problem with heat/entropy -anyone want to "sort out" his concept for him?

Yes, I need the "sorting out." You say that as though I'm not a nuclear mechanic. Nuclear mechanics work on heat engines. We know all about heat, entropy, enthalpy, etc.

 

Swansont taught physics at the school I attended(well, he taught when it was located in Orlando). So, if I have any misunderstanding, it is his fault!

 

Here's one I've been wondering about: If you replaced all the charges e in the universe with magnetic monopoles, would it be possible to tell the difference? The obvious things like putting it in an electric field wouldn't work, because you wouldn't know for sure whether you had a magnetic or electric field if you didn't know whether e was an electric monopole or a magnetic monopole.

I was under the impression that [math]\nabla\cdot{B}=0[/math] meant there are no magnetic monopoles.

[Mr Skeptic]

Yes, I need the "sorting out." You say that as though I'm not a nuclear mechanic. Nuclear mechanics work on heat engines. We know all about heat, entropy, enthalpy, etc.

 

Swansont taught physics at the school I attended(well, he taught when it was located in Orlando). So, if I have any misunderstanding, it is his fault!

 

Well, either you or Fred56 may need sorting out, and I suppose this is the thread to do it.

 

It would also be the thread to sort out Fred56's notion of time.

 

I was under the impression that [math]\nabla\cdot{B}=0[/math] meant there are no magnetic monopoles.

 

Yes, I'm aware of that. I'm also aware that saying "e is an electric charge" means that e is an electric charge. Obviously e is an electric charge by definition. I was asking a "what if" question. Could you tell whether e is an electric monopole or a magnetic monopole? If all e charges in the universe were replaced with a magnetic monopole, would you be able to tell the difference? Or would it be like with matter/antimatter, where you have to just say one is matter and the other antimatter?

 

Basically I am asking, is there proof that e is an electric monopole rather than a magnetic monopole, or do we just define it to be so?

[DrDNA]

Aren't quibbles cute little furry critters that reproduce like crazy and almost took over the Enterprize?

[ydoaPs]

My first nit is yourdad's problem with heat/entropy -anyone want to "sort out" his concept for him?

Perhaps you should elaborate as to the what exactly my "problem with heat/entropy" is.

[Fred56]

yourdad:

In another post you initially stated (except you were tired, I guess) that entropy is a measure of "unavailable work" ?

Entropy isn't heat. Heat is (kinetic) "motion" (of particles of gas/liquid...), entropy is a measure of change. Heat disperses (this is one of its properties), and entropy is a metric of that dispersal or diffusion_

"Work" is a measure of heat "transfer" (entropic "flow"), over time, and this is "lost" to the thermodynamic system (in your case a nuclear reactor) as work. So it "needs" to produce more (heat stuff) to replace it.

 

It would also be the thread to sort out Fred56's notion of time.

Please, someone, anyone? I have absolutely no idea what time (it) is...

Except for this one...

Time is an apparent property of (classical) entropy/distance. It's appearance (to us), is an artefact of our own brains, and the way they are built. The brain “uses” change to “see” change in the external world. It's all relative. There is no time (we "imagine" it), there is diffusion (separation) of mass due to entropy.

What was that, mate? (from the Survivors Guide):

Though the nuances, especially of the derogative form, may be easily familiar to a native Antipodean, the non-native speaker may well run into difficulties with it. One should be especially careful of the laconic-derogative. This is used -almost exclusively, in the interrogative statement: “you farkkin' us around, mate?”. This is never given a rising or falling tone, but spoken neutrally, usually with some emphasis. When any non-native speaker hears the laconic-derogative form, it is probably already too late to any invoke any possibility of avoiding an Antipodean “sorting-out”.

 

{sort-out: v.tr. To correct or make good. To admonish (often by physical means) for a perceived insult or moral/ethical infraction. The sortee may be injured, (possibly with a bottle (hopefully already empty -the non-Antipodean may be somewhat reassured by the fact there is a good probability of it being nearly so at least), or other available object). The term is used as a sense of action, and the object may (be permitted to) “sort-out” the infraction themselves (effect repair or reparation), however if not (the attempt is perceived as ineffective), will be themselves “sorted-out”.}

 

Spoken interrogatively, with a rising tone, “mate?” often means either: “are you (my friend)?” or “what (are you trying to do)?”, or “excuse me?”, and usually comes after some other phrase, e.g.: “what happened, mate?”, or “you ok, mate?”. Sometimes the endearment form appears in this context (“oh, mate!”) which often expresses immediate concern, e.g. for a non-native who has encountered the laconic-derogative form (see above).

(BTW there is no such thing AFAIK as a laconic-derogative “anything”)

[swansont]

yourdad:

In another post you initially stated (except you were tired, I guess) that entropy is a measure of "unavailable work" ?

Entropy isn't heat. Heat is (kinetic) "motion" (of particles of gas/liquid...), entropy is a measure of change. Heat disperses (this is one of its properties), and entropy is a metric of that dispersal or diffusion_

"Work" is a measure of heat "transfer" (entropic "flow"), over time, and this is "lost" to the thermodynamic system (in your case a nuclear reactor) as work. So it "needs" to produce more (heat stuff) to replace it.

 

Entropy does tell you how much heat is available to do work. In a closed system, at maximum entropy, no heat is available. At minimum entropy, all of it is available. This is one reason the Gibbs free energy is a useful quantity. G = H - TS = U + PV - TS. The amount of energy available to do work does not include the TS term.

 

Heat isn't a thing, it's a process — energy flow. Entropy can tell you if that energy flow can do work.

[Fred56]

Heat isn't a thing, it's a process — energy flow.

You mean, something maybe like this:

Heat is (kinetic) "motion" (of particles of gas/liquid...), ..Heat disperses (this is one of its properties),

?

[swansont]

"heat disperses" implies that it is a thing. Particles don't have to be flowing on order to get heat transfer (conduction), and motion of particles, as in vibration, does not necessarily imply heat flow.

[Fred56]

You seem to be referring to modes of energy diffusion other than kinematic...

I'm fairly sure the standard definition of heat describes it as the "motion" of atoms or molecules. as I have...

Is heat flow not due to this "coupled kinematics" -(vibrational, rotational, translational)...? I was under the impression that emr plays a significant role only once something gets pretty "hot"? Are we discussing whether IR heats things or hot things emit IR... (of which they of course, do both)?

[ydoaPs]

I'm fairly sure the standard definition of heat describes it as the "motion" of atoms or molecules.

 

Nope. That's temperature.

[swansont]

You seem to be referring to modes of energy diffusion other than kinematic...

I'm fairly sure the standard definition of heat describes it as the "motion" of atoms or molecules. as I have...

Is heat flow not due to this "coupled kinematics" -(vibrational, rotational, translational)...? I was under the impression that emr plays a significant role only once something gets pretty "hot"? Are we discussing whether IR heats things or hot things emit IR... (of which they of course, do both)?

 

EMR is one form of heat transfer, though it is true that it generally only has a large role for hotter items.

[Mr Skeptic]

Well, looks like swansont and yourdadonapogos cleared up heat for Fred56.

[Spyman]

Since he appears to have been banned, a guess all quibbles with Fred56 has ended.

[DrDNA]

Fred banned? No way! What happened?

[ParanoiA]

Fred banned? No way! What happened?

 

Yeah, no kidding. I saw a post of his in politics that's apparently been deleted, but I don't know what happened to him.

[DrDNA]

Maybe he touched the big, red DO NOT TOUCH button.

[swansont]

Maybe he touched the big, red DO NOT TOUCH button.

 

I believe it's temporary (like being checked into detox)

[Spyman]

Fred banned? No way! What happened?

Probably to much quibbling...

 

 

I believe it's temporary (like being checked into detox)

I thought temporary was labeled "Suspended" ?

[insane_alien]

He was given warning points for trolling then he insulted YT(who gave hime the first warning) in a PM which earned him a temporary ban.

[Spyman]

He was given warning points for trolling then he insulted YT(who gave hime the first warning) in a PM which earned him a temporary ban.

Like I said, to much quibbling.

 

But what I asked about was: the difference between "Banned" and "Suspended" ?

(Both seems to have the ability to be "Temporary" and "Permanent".)