W4U and SSB have entirely missed the point. I suspect they're more interested in arguing than discussing. Indeed.
Is entropy the opposite of harmony? I'd say that it's a measurement of disharmony? But, that would depend on how we define harmony. Oh no, here we go again. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No. Energy being spread out does not imply anything about harmony. Harmony, to extend it from its musical meaning, would imply sets of sine waves that are multiples of one another, so that you get constructive interference creating a new sine wave. This is the reason that consonant intervals in music sound pleasing. If you start talking about harmony, you are essentially talking about waves rather than statistics. As it happens, it has been said (by Peter Atkins, I think) that physical chemistry is built on two great pillars: statistical mechanics and quantum mechanics. We have been talking about the first in our discussion of entropy. You sound as if you may now be starting to embark on the second.
I've been thunking about this. I don't think kilograms are logarithmic, or metres or seconds. What does that leave so there are "lots" of physical things, quantified logarithmically? For say, a gas in a container, would it be acceptable to have a logarithmic volume? Why or why not?
I'll need to think about that a bit. I suppose order can take the form of regular repeating patterns. And a sine wave is a regular repeating pattern. But I think this is stretching things to a point at which there is not really any insight to be had.
Quite a few physical things in chemistry are derived from logarithmic expressions, such as anything to do with equilibrium constants (pH is a case in point), free energy relationships, etc. Basically anything where exponents come into play is likely to involve logs somewhere along the line. But I suppose it depends what you mean by a "thing". I'm sure you can employ the no-true-scotsman principle to define "thing" so as to exclude anything like that, if you want to.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Agree feel the effects of gravity on the brick and feather Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And as noted in this screenshot Gravity Force is also known as Weight But but but it does not say Weight Force Consider this - there is a colony on the moon They request a kg of XYZ Do they mean a Earth kg XYZ, or a Moon kg of XYZ? The concept has a different value depending on location Now it would not matter if the moon orders a mass of XYZ Earth would know the exact amount of mass of XYZ to send Even the colony on Pluto would get the same mass if so ordered, but ordering a kg would again bring up Earth kg or Pluto kg Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
In communications theory, the transmission of information involves error-correction. So you have to transmit information in an encoded form such that errors can be detected and corrected. Error detection is 'entropic' because there is uncertainty--random changes--so you need an encoding that means every bit (or character) is checked. Indeed the nature of transmission of information is intrinsically uncertain. The work done detecting and correcting errors also doesn't contribute to the information content which is something transmission has to preserve.
I dug this up in regard to your question. Not sure if this is what you were asking. IMO, it seems to adress Harmony v Diffusion (Order v Disorder) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5312126/
That's really beautiful Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! In my mind, I had it sorted out, as something perhaps metaphorical/philosophical. But, how great that there's a scientific explanation.
It just struck me that "weight" occupies a similar abstract philosophical concept as your "age".......Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! yes?
Yes There is no lump of age out there waiting to be discovered or time, or speed, or ......... I am guessing that the number of non existent stuff out there which will never be found is fairly large Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
But that does not mean the weight is not physical. Unlike say energy, or momentum, or entropy (which this thread was about, once upon a time) - or indeed mass, for that matter - weight is directly measurable. You cannot get more physical than that.
This is a sticky point with me (I guess) The directly measurable feature is GRAVITY, not the MASS Take the MASS to the Moon it's weight changes Take same mass to Jupiter, weight changes again For me a feature which changes in such a manner is OK as a concept but not something with a presence (the presence is GRAVITY, which is being measured) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Not true. A spring balance or load cell directly measures force. Nothing else. The force can be weight of an object or a pull from a locomotive or the tension in a cable or anything. Force can be measured directly. Gravity (or gravitation) is a theory Newton invented, to account for the observation of one particular kind of force, exerted between objects due to something called their "mass", which is another thing we can't measure directly.
Mass is measured by using a balance comparing a known mass against a unknown mass Currently I am mass / weight / force overloaded Break time for me Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
All that does is compare two forces. You then infer a mass ratio from that, by assuming F=mg applies to both, g being a constant. There is no way that I can think of that measures mass directly.