The entropy of systems

[GD] "How twisted is that?"

I suppose it qualifies. I was really hopeing for something more along the lines of serious.

===

Why not quote from Wikipedia for the dictionary definitions?

And, its OK to spend some time thinking about the discussions before you post them. (I would, if it were my theory.)

Of course, that means also spending some time thinking about the definitions of the GD-versions of these words. Remember, the survival of your theory is at stake.

LB

I am serious. Did you understand my definition?

here is the dictionary version:

"Equilibrium
a state of balance between opposing forces or actions that is either static (as in a body acted on by forces whose resultant is zero) or dynamic (as in a reversible chemical reaction when the rates of reaction in both directions are equal)"

I am saying that gravity is a non-equilibrium force because acceleration is present.

You are saying that equilibrium means two forces counteract each other but the acceleration of gravity is always present.

These definitions are not the same.

If you cannot understand this, then we cannot go any further in this discussion.

Thank you. Your answer for Q1 is reasonable. It might be useful if you let us know which dictionary this comes from, but that is a minor point.

Suggestion - spend some time thinking about this definition.

Hint - pretend that the parenthetical parts are not there. They are merely examples, and MANY other systems could be used as equally valid examples. Don't let these stated examples hobble your imagination.

===

[GD] "I am saying that gravity is ... "
[GD] "You are saying that equilibrium means ... "

[GD] "These definitions are not the same."

I noticed that too. It frequently happens when one tries to compare an apple to an orange.

Suggestion - try answering Q2 next.

Hint - the answer to Q2 should begin something like: "GD-equilibrium means ... "

LB

I gave you my definition of equilibrium already:
no acceleration & no forces acting on a body, and I will add: that its energy state remains unchanging or constant.

Note: the dictionary version I had right the first time.

I know of nothing in this world which remains unchanging.

I would like you to give me an example of equilibrium (where no forces act on a body).

[GD] Answer 2: GD-equilibrium means a state of balance with no acceleration and no forces acting on a body, and where the energy levels of the body remain unchanging or constant.

That's a very restrictive definition. Do you mean literally no forces of any kind and any strength?

[GD] "I know of nothing in this world which remains unchanging."

Right off hand I can't think of anything either. I see now why you claim that nothing is in GD-equilibrium.

===

[GD] "I would like you to give me an example of equilibrium."

Since you have begun answering my questions, I guess I ought to answer some of yours. An example of a system in static equilibrium would be someone sitting in a chair. An example of a system in dynamic equilibrium would be two bodies orbiting their mutual center of mass.

===

When you are ready to post your answer 3, you might include a brief comment about <u>why</u> you made the definition of GD-equilibrium so restrictive.

LB

[] Two faster than light gravitons, chatting about the nature of the matter universe, might well agree with GD. They would see bits of quantum coherence. The idea of forces operating would seem odd to them but they would accept forces operating between them. They would see their fellow gravitons interacting with the matter regions and changing the superposed waveforms of that part of space. If we said to them, that this created quantum decoherence in our part of the universe, I think they would have to accept the notion of forces operating, though I'm sure it would confuse them no end [8D][]