Entropy - Sixty Symbols

[ambarigreyson3000]

im using this excuse next time i have to clean my room



[motionapplied]

interesting that it's not called "law of entropy". and it's interesting that it seems to be a "paradox" (if only you'd know what "para-" and "dicere"means...) to the "law of conservation"

of energy. but that's just a repetition of the former "paradox" of light being a particle, a wave (and a field) - which is the result of not giving any data about the degrees of the scale dimension these phenomena are observed (who are named homonymously).

[HybridAffliction]

Wow, I want to go to the University of Nottingham and study physics/quantum physics/theoretical physics etc. XD XD (I'm just finishing my GCSE's, so it's not that unlikely i do go XD)

[aluisious]

@HybridAffliction I hope you like math. I mean really like math, the kind of person who likes to solve math problems for fun. I had the opportunity to go to UCLA to study physics, but I didn't like math. I could do it, and I thought I'd just grit my teeth and slog through it. Turns out that if you don't actually enjoy doing math, studying physics is a little like trying to be a chef who doesn't like using ingredients.

I'm still very impressed with physics and physicists.

[blakenator123]

thank god you smashed that vase, I did not understand what he meant when he said something about dropping a vase haha

[Entrepreneur101]

Each element (⁴⁸₂₆Ti, ¹⁶₈O, ¹H, etc) water (i.e., H₂O = O₂ ⇆ H₂) has its own matter phase state (e.g., solid ⇆ liquid ⇆ gas).

Increase Of Entropy: ICE (a solid) → WATER (a liquid) → STEAM (a gas).

Decrease Of Entropy: STEAM (a gas) → WATER (a liquid) → ICE (a solid).

As for physics, physical law(s) &, or analytical logic, a decrease of entropy represent a increase in weight & a decrease in pressure.

Also, a increase of entropy represent a decrease in weight & a increase in pressure.

[Ulti2k]

uuh at 1:06 i smell philandering :-)

[EightAlek]

"unless you try really hard and puts lots of work in, entropy will always increase" That's really laughable, how is someone like that allowed to teach?

[MegaBEANER1000]

@EightAlek hard to take your comment seriously when we look at the other comments you've posted on other videos, you obviously don't know the man and your questioning is ability to teach over a statement that you don't fully understand.

[vertexgo]

@MegaBEANER1000 ...nothing does follow from what comments somebody makes on other videos. you can't type (of course: YOU can...): this content's undifferentiated and not contextual enough because of the comments you made on other videos (without even telling if these comments are undifferentiated and/or not contextual enough). "fully understand" - to understand fully - that's like you telling that pi stops at a certain point for sure...

[Mikhinja]

@EightAlek I don't mean to upset you, but that's exactly how you approach teaching I think. How else can you explain something to someone who hasn't come accross anything remotely similar to the topic in mind, but by using analogies - which in this type of scenario will surely be quite poor.

Instead of trolling I would consider much more helpful if you could provide a better analogy or means of explaining to the general public in a 5 minute video.

[1MrKoolbad]

e = mc sq is not a true statement

[vertexgo]

@1MrKoolbad: to most people on the planet it means nothing at all. and to those who say that it means something to them - most of them don't apply it so that some product and/or service comes out of it.

[Aviatorsmith]

@1MrKoolbad The physicists over there know that. They are simplifying it for normal people who watch these videos. There is another video of the equation which shows the proper equation e^2 = m^2*c^4 + p^2*c^2

[wolfgangouille]

Weirdest way to write omega.

[coldlogic1]

@ispravljat achievement unlocked: wtf?!

[pyrrho314]

this is a great channel

[sly3d]

I have a question and nobody seems to be able giving me the right answer.

I want to measure Entropy of the whole Universe 1 second after Big Bang and today’s Universe Entropy and figure out which is larger. From laws of thermodynamic it seems that now we have to have larger Entropy, because the “arrow of time” and the fact that in closed systems Entropy always expand.

But on the other hand today we have the Universe with average temperature of 3 K and very organized structure of everything...

[sly3d]

@sly3d ... Earth is moving around Sun, Sun around Sagittarius A, and all of the galaxies are in pretty determined positions on cosmic web, while 1 second after Big Bang the temperature of Universe was 10^24 K, it was crazy soup of smashing particles (quarks) and photons, and in this hell you won’t see any sign of order, that’s mean the Entropy of the Universe was very high in comparison to present days.

So what is the answer?

[wolterh6]

@sly3d I'd say, but consider I am not an expert and I do not expect to be immutably correct, that at that point, energy was all concentrated in one region, one relatively close to the epicenter of the Big Bang. Today, that spot or region is unknown, because entropy has and is distributing all that energy through the immensity of the universe.

[vinwoir123]

Boltzman never actually wrote this equation Plank did. Plank also asked for k to be the Plank constant. Boltzman always wrote it as R/N. So Plank only got h :)

[Gytax0]

Can someone explain me, please this: you say it's NOT impossible for, for example, milk molecules in tea to come together again. It's just really hard. Is the hard possibility that molecules CAN be concentrated again by someone ELSE, or the hard possibility is that they can come together by themselves?

[Every1Tubes]

@Gytax0 Entropy always increases in an *isolated* system (like the whole universe!) so the milk in the tea, if left alone, is statistically prohibited from lowering its own entropy. If some other system interacts with the tea, the entropy of the tea can decrease -- but entropy will always be generated somewhere else.

[liquidstl]

@Every1Tubes Yeah you can do work on a room to decrease its entropy ( AC) but the work that the air conditioner does adds even more entropy to the world

[zolikei]

man, i wish my physics professor could explain like this... :-/

he's just so freakin bored in class... :(

[stevjen1]

Why is omega in brackets? I don't think the formula has brackets? Does omega multiply with something?Anyone know?

[thernk]

@stevjen1

The brackets are there for disambiguation;

ln x + y for example could mean either ln(x+y) or ln(x) + y.

[captwasabi]

So it's not impossible that Charlie Theron will appear at my door begging me pleasure her as she has never been pleasured before. It's just highly highly improbable.

So what you're saying is that there is at least a possibilty of this happening!

WOOT!

[Zee96969696]

Boltman went nuts from all the maths and physics, thats why hes dead now

[mommy2128]

I am confused in reference to energy. The vase used potential energy to create disorder. In the other video you used kinetic energy to shuffle the cards around to create disorder. Does it take energy to create entropy? I thought objects "naturally" moved towards entropy if no energy were put into the system. Like with the "teenagers room" it would naturally become disordered even if the teenager was absent. The room would collect dust and objects deteriorate.

I could also put energy in to clean.

[terrymorse]

@mommy2128 Does it take energy to create entropy? Well, considering a closed system in thermodynamic equilibrium, it will take energy to change that system's entropy. That energy can be in the form of work or heat.

[puncheex]

@terrymorse: No. Entropy isn't a substance or even a quality of matter; it is a computation of how well spread the heat in the system is. Heat is unique as a form of energy; it can only do work when it is sequestered away from non-heat. You can have a room full of metal, water and so on; if it is all uniformly raised to 100 degrees (any system) there is lots of energy there, but it cannot be converted to any other form of energy (i.e., do work), unless access is made to a cold place as well.

[terrymorse]

@puncheex Not sure I understand your "no" reply. I stated that the only way to increase the entropy of a system in equilibrium is to add energy to the system. Do you disagree?

I don't find fault with anything else you write, although I think entropy *could* be considered a "quality" of matter, since it depends on average molecular kinetic energy. I also prefer to use the term "heat" as the *transfer* of energy, not as a measure of internal thermal energy. But that's a terminology nitpick.

[puncheex]

@terrymorse: OK, I guess I misunderstood what you were getting at. Yes, an influx of energy in to a system is a necessary, but not sufficient, requirement for an entropy decrease.

[Moriarty2112]

@puncheex #

An influx of energy isn't in fact required to change the entropy of a system. The key example of this is the adiabatic free expansion of an ideal gas - the internal energy of the gas doesn't change (adiabatic: no heat input; free expansion: no work done). Yet there *is* a change in entropy (irreversible process).

This is a subtle aspect of entropy. I've seen at least one textbook get it wrong by equating the terms adiabatic and isentropic.

Philip Moriarty (first person in video)

[puncheex]

@Moriarty2112: OK, thanks for that. That's pretty subtle, all right.

[puncheex]

@mommy2128: In the context of thermodynamics, things "orderly" show low entropy; high entropy is total chaos, which is defined as matter being homogenized and mixed evenly and energy being completely disbursed and even throughout. Humans create low entropy situations: clay dug from the ground and pottery shaped out of it. To the extant that that pottery gets broken and crushed, it returns to a high entropy state. Humans can do that only because weeat fuel which is concentrated solar energy.

[brt5470]

Love the beginning.

[MillyVanillification]

IMHO Entropy produces "order" and order produces entropy. We have observed that life developed on one planet. So where's the entropy here? A broken cup of coffe is a good example. In a hundred million years some of the particles of this cup may resemble the teeth of a human being or the skin of an ant.

[puncheex]

@MillyVanillification: Entropy is a measure of the evenness to which heat is distributed. One of the hallmarks of life is that it can absorb energy and create order out of chaos in completely unrelated ways, such as throwing a vase on a pottery wheel. In a 100,000,000 yrs a pottery cup will have been reduced to a pile of sand, thereby throwing away most of the entropy the potter put into the clay; it will even exceed the clay, as it now includes glass enamel and remnant coffee - more randomness.

[supercal333]

With regard to entropy is the Bouncing Balls video (watch?v=SRGf0Mq2Zwg) a way of explaining the 2nd law of thermodynamics?... as in why heat always flows from hot objects to cooler objects but never the other way around?

[Fomelogo]

say i have a question. Why do leds bright so weirdly when recorded on camera?

[chrisofnottingham]

I've just been told a helpful way to think about thermodynamic Entropy and it is; Entropy is a measure of how much unavailable energy there is in a system.

So work can be done inside a system by using temperature differences to run an engine or tipping things over to use potential energy. Afterwards, the system still contains the same overall energy as before (C of E) but the unavailable energy has gone up, due to averaging out the differences. And doing any work always makes this happen.

[z0tx]

Am I the only one to have jumped when the vase broke?

[smeghead666]

I wish I could've spent one day learning physics here whilst I was at secondary school may have gained some inspiration towards not being a hopeless nothing:(

[sirsideways]

My physics teacher used the amusing analogy of a teenager's bedroom to explain entropy.

I'm enjoying the sixtysymbols videos a lot...keep up the good work.

[ArcaneInquisitor]

@sirsideways Yeah, I've seen that analogy in a lot of first year chem texts. I suppose they want to make it relatable.

[Sep3lio]

Perhaps to continue on entropy you could do a video about the eventual heat death of the universe. That could be quite neat.

[samgee2007]

why people are facing so much of problem in understanding entropy?

[thetotalvidwatcher]

Entropy sounds like a serious physiological condition, not a mathematical equation.

[BorysPomianek]

I enjoy these videos greatly!

Thank you

[PandaBasher]

I remember this guy, he was doing a lecture on nano particles on a trip I went on to nottingham uni. Great lecture.

[leatherman7553]

so... if you were to put a thousand monkeys in a room with a thousand typewriters

if given enough time could they not write the works of Skakespear?

[sidewaysfcs0718]

and another great example is our universe

the universe is expanding

it goes from a very low entropy stage , the Big Bang , when everything was clumped together and symetric, to what we have today , complex galaxies stars and stuff

and its expanding so its temperature is lower ..

back around the big bang the avg temperature was around 10*25 degrees kelvin ..thats alot

[sidewaysfcs0718]

another law of thermodynamics is that as entropy increases tempeperature decreases

and u can proove this very easy ..

spray some perfume on your clothes ...the perfume landing on your body is colder then the perfume then comes directly out of the spray

as it comes out , it disperses , it goes from a vapory/liquid form to gas form , increasing its entropy therefore decreasing its temperature.

whats really happening is as the molecules get further appart they bang against each other slower

[terrymorse]

@sidewaysfcs0718 "another law of thermodynamics is that as entropy increases tempeperature decreases"

This is not true. Increasing a substance's temperature increases its entropy, not the other way around. At constant pressure and temperature, entropy varies by log (Temperature).

[bng44270]

The grave said, s=k log(w)

Since ln and log are different, was the engraver wrong?

[Moriarty2112]

@bng44270:

Thanks for raising this. I wrote down different forms of the equation at the start of the video because I was trying to remember (unsuccessfully!) the *precise* form that was engraved on the tomb. (We do many of these videos "off the cuff" with no preparation).

"ln" represents a natural log (i.e. log to base e). "Log" is also generally taken to mean "log to the base e". So the equation(s) I write down and that on the tomb are all consistent.

Philip (bloke at start of video)

[bng44270]

ah, I always connect log with log base 10

got it. PEACE!!!!!!

[bellsticker]

@Moriarty2112

i thought "Log" alone is generally taken as Log to the base of 10, because of its application in a calculator. Also, "Log" on a calculator is called Standard Log. So to say Log and Ln are the same is wrong, isn't it? o.O

[Moriarty2112]

@bellsticker Check out, for example, the Wikipedia entry on "natural logarithm". Note, in particular, the section entitled "Notational Conventions" and the following sentence:

"Mathematicians, statisticians, and some engineers generally understand either "log(x)" or "ln(x)" to mean loge(x), i.e., the natural logarithm of x, and write "log10(x)" if the base 10 logarithm of x is intended."

Many physicists will also take log(x) to mean ln(x).

Best wishes,

Philip

[darthzydar]

ln is just log to the base e. They are used interchangeably. W or omega is the number of states in the system. k (or k suffix B) is the Boltzmann constant, which is nothing but the reciprocal of the Avogadro number.

[benkettle]

i though K=the molar gas constant/Na

[Lavabug]

I always thought it was log, not the natural log, not sure?

[rithem412]

@Lavabug - Remember your log rules. You can use log base whatever and lump in the 1/loge in with the K since it is a constant.

It's also pretty likely that log meant ln in statistical mechanics. For CS people log means log base 2, so the convention varies from field to field.

[Frostfirepenls]

I always remembered it as ds=R*T*ln(vf/vi)

[Gitars5]

the letter you are refering to isnt w its ω (lower case Ω) :)

[rithem412]

@bng44270-No. ln(x)=ln(x)/ln(10) . 1/ln(10) is just a constant that gets lumped in with the k.

Another explanation for this supposed error is that writing log without specifying a base implies a base which depends on your field. In math and statistical mechanics log(x) means log base e of x. In computer science log(x) means log base 2 of x.

[samuelkim1]

@bng44270 although not as common, log without any subscript can also represent ln

[tadthudz]

@bng44270 ln is natural logarithm right? o.o it's lnw=log(base e)w? so it's not wrong?

[ThatGuyFromAustria]

@bng44270, without looking it up, mind that ln was of OMEGA, and since it is not ln(w) but log(w), I guess it is correct.

[wolterh6]

@bng44270 But consider also that log and ln are not all that different. Multiplying either by a constant would make their results equal, take for example the equation ln(n) = ln(10)*log(n), let n be real number.

So, according to that, while the k constant is different, either equation is valid and exact, acknowledging that the original equation used a base-10 logarithm and an unaltered Boltzman constant K_b.

[wkrepelin]

@bng44270 depending on the context log can mean natural log. I am confident that the engraver did what they were instructed to and in the context there is no error.

[acs197]

@bng44270 That's right! ln and log are NOT the same!!! ln has base e and log a base of 10.

[TallCatsMakeGoodHats]

For example: Time does not exist. The chance of it existing is impossible.

[ThaRussian]

time is a man made creation based on patterns of our surroundings, we can choose to follow time or we can not, since time is so vital to the organization of human interaction we choose to follow it and therefore we create the effect of its existance, however in theory it does not exist unless we create it

[TallCatsMakeGoodHats]

Time is perceived due to light. Since light is perceived by the human eye (science). Humans are not gods. Other things expirence time. Please be rational. The measure of time was created, but to say time is created as a 'human' concept is false.

[ThaRussian]

you first stated that time does not exist, i am agreeing with you only pointing out that it is a perception, whether other things experience time as a measurement we do not know, perhaps other organisms/things only act intrinsically w/o being aware of time, light is perceived by us in patterns around which we organize ourselves, to say that time is not a human concept is irrational because we do not know what other organisms think, esp. how they perceive their surroundings

[TallCatsMakeGoodHats]

I left a comment on your profile.

[Mitropoulosfan]

If things were reversible then we d not perceive the Time, being perpetual creatures, probably Gods. The irreversibility (Entropy) measures also Time for us. But even the Gods went down from the Olympus occasionbally to get one human adventure or two!

[TallCatsMakeGoodHats]

All math is math. Physics is physics. But reality does not exist in science. Just ideas.

[DrCish]

Read below first. To make a believer of the seemingly impossible out of you, a mathematical scientist, compare KN/(K+N+1) with lnW as ln((K+N-1)!/(K!(N-1)!) over a variety systems of K energy units distributed over N molecules, and you will find a standard statistical correlation ranging from 99.3% to 99.7 %, the KN/(K+N+1) function having super firm physical roots. I have run into a hundred physicists who start with the premise, St. Ludwig cannot be wrong. This genius rather was inaccurate

[DrCish]

Read below first. One more obvious thing to clarify. It is the notion of temperature as the arithmetic mean of energy that is at the physical root of the problem, for temp. is inherently a biased average, the faster, higher energy, molecules, "recording" their energies more often. The ratio of the energy to this biased energy average is the function that has the near perfect 99% numerical fit to B's S=klnW function, which explains entropy sensibly # of energetically significant molecules.

[DrCish]

Read below first. The energy dispersion is properly understood functionally as over molecules, not over the W states, which makes intuitive sense of it. It is the assumption of indistinguishable (discrete) energy units as leads to the use of the wrong combinatorial that is B's error. Test yourself on MS Excel with 50,000 distinguishable units dispersed randomly over 5000 containers (or molecules) to generate an obvious Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution, the rest very clear. Reply if curious.

[DrCish]

My apologies. I was more trying to call your attention to the "error" than insult you. I am happy you replied. I taught thermo to a good number of science students over the years, so I am quite familiar with the subject and hardly speaking in a rant. Though an inorganic biochemist, I got my degree in the physics dept., so I am well aware of the problems. They are quite fascinating. In brief, there exists a function that has a 99% numerical fit to S=klnW that finally makes sense of entropy.

[DrCish]

The primary problem with understanding entropy is that Boltzmann, inarguably a genius, got it wrong in S=klnW. This fits numerically but a function that has a 99% correlation with it and derives from the proper sense of temperature for REAL gases as a biased energy average, not the arithmetic average, is what explains entropy proper. Always funny hearing young physical chemistry professors thinking they are giving the tablets from the mountain when they babble on and on about Boltzmann's error

[Moriarty2112]

@DrCish: As the person who "babbles" about Boltzmann in the video, could I ask you why, if the Boltzmann formula/hypothesis is so badly flawed, that it features heavily in practically every statistical mechanics textbook discussion of entropy?

I suggest you look up textbooks on stat. mech. by any of the following: Pauli (yes, *that* Pauli), Kittel, Bowley and Sanchez, Seddon and Gale, Schwabl, Chabay and Sherwood. Why does each of these authors spend so much time on Boltzmann's "error"?

[Moriarty2112]

@DrCish: P.S. I'm a physicist, not a physical chemist, by the way. (Although in my research area - nanoscience/surface science - it can be a moot distinction!).

You also might be interested in the video response we posted to the entropy video a few weeks ago (see above) which outlines the motivation for the Sixty Symbols videos.

Philip

[azamm500]

how we use it in open system like space

[HumanChemistry101]

To correct an earlier comment, I have been recently making a thermodynamics symbols etymology table, over the last few days (with 30+ references so far), at the EoHT wiki, and have found that Carnot was using the symbol s for heat in 1824, and I have come to conclude that S was assigned to entropy as heat divided by temperature by Clausius (1865) on this initial use.

[imgordonfreeman]

1:00 gordonfreeman

[Qtyled]

haha nice

[HumanChemistry101]

As for your comment about romance, Polish sociologist Leon Winiarski taught a course for six-years (1894-1900), at the University of Geneva, themed on the postulate of hunger and love functioning as two forms of thermodynamics potential; and how energy and entropy relate to this, using Clausius and Lagrange as course material.

[Moriarty2112]

HumanChemistry101: If I understand you correctly, you *are* suggesting that the (romantic) relationships of groups of humans are associated with a thermodynamic entropy (and other functions of state)! This is very worrying. Could I suggest that you Google the following: Frank L. Lambert Entropy is Simple - If We Avoid the Briar Patches. You seem to be making the same type of fundamental error as Lambert points out in his essay re. confusing thermodynamic and Shannon's information entropy.

[HumanChemistry101]

It was never my intention to fill up your video page with all these comments. But quickly, Lambert is an idiot (he gets all his views from Kelvin; and has never read Clausius). Ive argued with him before. Shannons use of the term entropy, in his theories, was originally a joke and mistake that he regrets (although most dont know this).

[HumanChemistry101]

As for your *worries* (regarding state functions of humans), quoting from Gibbs (1876): the comprehension of the laws which govern any material system is greatly facilitated by considering the energy and entropy of the system in the various states of which it is capable. A society is one such material system. If you think that you are exempt from these laws, that is your prerogative.

[Moriarty2112]

...sigh... HC101, Where did Gibbs state that "a society is one such material system"? He didn't - that is your particular (incorrect) reading of the application of thermodynamics. It's a shame that you dislike Lambert's writings as he has discussed very clearly just why the association of a thermodynamic entropy with "everyday" systems (e.g. sock drawers, messy rooms and romantic liaisons) is so badly flawed.

[PenguinJin]

So, why are we exempt from this application of thermodynamics? Why would energy alter its behavior in a fundamental way when it began manifesting as the patterns of human behavior? Recursion is everywhere.

[Moriarty2112]

@PenguinJin: That's a great question but it's impossible to do justice to it wihin the 500 character limit. What we'll aim to do at some point is post a short video response to your question. Briefly, however, the key points are: (i) that an arrangement of students (or socks, or objects in a room) will not *spontaneously* rearrange themselves (unlike the milk molecules mentioned in the video), and (ii) there is no change in the thermodynamic free energy of, e.g., socks if we rearrange them.

[6manchesterutd6]

Interesting, u guys didnt explain much of the formula though! I guess ill do some research to satisfy my curiousity haha

[Moriarty2112]

HumanChemistry101: After I responded to your points (see below), I visited your website. I quote: "A human chemical reaction is a change in which one or more human molecules or human molecular compounds... form a new compound or human molecular structure. This is a modern interpretation, in which people are viewed as molecules, of the older "love the chemical reaction" view of life and romance, in which human interactions are described in mechanistic terms." Hmmm.....

[HumanChemistry101]

If, by way of this comment, you are trying to be derogatory, you may like to view the page: human thermodynamics (objections to), where you will find similar views to your own; or go to the HT pioneers page (listing the works of 169+ individuals, including 7 Nobel Laureates); each of which are pages at the EoHT wiki (all being terms which can be Googled). Also, visit the human molecule page (a 140 year old term). Why did you remove all your comments?

[Moriarty2112]

First, I removed the comments because I screwed up (ermm, twice) trying to get them in the right order. I wanted one to follow the other (note the "contd..") and YouTube's comments uploading process didn't work as I imagined. I'm very happy to restore them if you want - you'll just see multiple repeats of the same comment.

As regards "human thermodynamics", you seem to be including pioneers of far-from-equilibrium self-organisation such as Prigogine in your list of HT pioneers. (contd...)

[HumanChemistry101]

As commented above, Prigogine only made speculations of application to society in general. Each pioneer is unique, in their own theory. American engineer William Fairburn, for instance, in his 1914 booklet Human Chemistry, was the first to suggest that systems of humans (such as students in field) could be quantified in terms of energy and entropy measures. Your field analogy was reasonable; beyond that one has to make thermodynamic tables with entropy values for each molecular structure.

[HumanChemistry101]

Prigogine was one of the founders of the Belgian school of thermodynamics; a school built on the work of Willard Gibbs. Prigogine argued that his thermodynamics theories were applicable to human society. Hence, he pioneered a certain human thermodynamics point of view. I note from your homepage that you to are interested in nanothermodynamics and nanoscale self organization.

[HumanChemistry101]

This guy needs to get his facts straight before making any more videos: (a) the Poincare recurrence theorem is from dynamics; having nothing to do with thermodynamics; (b) Clausius developed the theory and symbol of entropy, not Boltzmann; (c) the symbol S was introduced, almost certainly, in honor of S. Carnot; (d) Boltzmann never used the equation shown on his tomb; it was Planck who introduced that equation. Check out my recent video: What is entropy? (for a correct presentation).

[Moriarty2112]

(Contd from previous comment): (b) I am very well aware of the contributions that Clausius and Carnot made but the fundamental (logarithmic) connection between thermodynamic entropy and the probabilities associated with different configurations of a system was made by Boltzmann; (c) Yes, take your point.

The point of these videos is not to give an exhaustive account of some aspect of physics - that, as you know, is impossible in five minutes.

Enjoyed your video, by the way!

[HumanChemistry101]

Yes, your video is nice, quaint, and fun to watch at certain points, but it is overly simplistic and but you are misleading people on key points. I quote: the concept [of the symbol S] was developed by a guy named Ludwig Boltzmann. In the correct sense, Boltzmann was an invariable student of Clausius who was trying to substantiate his mentors second principle on statistics and probability.

[Moriarty2112]

The concept of S - *in the context of the equation written down at the start* - was developed "by a guy named Ludwig Boltzmann". Please explain to me why this equation is carved into Boltzmann's tombstone if he didn't play the central role in developing the underlying concept. Planck certainly wrote it down in the form we know it today but he gave full credit to Boltzmann for deriving the relationship between entropy and probability. Why is it not known as Planck's/Clausius'/Carnot's equation?!

[HumanChemistry101]

Of course Boltzmann was a significant individual. My point is that your video gives the impression that Boltzmann invented the concept of entropy. You might like the page entropy formulations, for a chronological listing of most of the main entropy formulas (dating back to 350BC).

[Moriarty2112]

If that was the impression you think the video puts across, I apologise. Carnot's (and others') ideas on entropy of course predate those of Boltzmann by quite a number of years. However, dS=dQ/T is a very different formalism of entropy as compared to S=k ln (W). While of course they both describe the same quantity, entropy, it took Boltzmann's genius to elucidate the link between the macroscopic states and microscopic configurations of a system.

[HumanChemistry101]

Visit the Poincare recurrence theorem at the EoHT wiki to further views and references on this matter.

[cookiecamp]

is this what that mathematicaion called john nash (if im correct) explained?

[fergustus1]

how does one measure enthropy,what are the units,joules,newtons?and can someone give me a comparitive element against which to judge a"single unit"

[KeyManDan]

Well... in technical thermodynamics S is (kJ)/(kg*K)...

Better remember that kJ part, or you might get a B insted of A on a test... :D

[johnclavis]

If it were up to me, I'd measure it in "boltzmanns"! :)

[mehdisl3]

yes I wanted to mention Life and all self organized system too. i think it s a good idea to make a video and survey the self organized system like Life thermodynamiclly

[zunathanzu]

what about the law of conservation of energy? and what about nuclear physics? Matter can be transformed into energy. I just like to argue. I'm sorry, you are probably right, I just like to argue my friend.

[zunathanzu]

thelleht

Then How do you explain the formation of planets, stars, moons, solar systems? Are those just tiny part too? It seems to me that most things I can think of go from a state of disorder to a state of order, and not the other way around. Imagine the mess after the big bang, surely things are more ordered now.

[strek0655]

But you arent taking enthalpy into consideration. The death of the universe is most likely to be the heat death where there is no more enthalpy and only entropy...

[zunathanzu]

ahh but with life.. its not continuing downward. First we started with one tiny cell that defied entropy be being ordered, but this cell divided, further defying entropy. It continued to divide and eventually order in creased on planet earth as it became dominated by very ordered organisms.

[paulruddick]

Parkinson Law

[toterer]

he cant write for nuts.hahah

[zunathanzu]

thelleht

even if life is a tiny blip, it is a blimp in defiance of entropy :)

[EdofEngland]

Lol.

The notion of of our air collecting together and buggering off is truely a profound one, made all the finer by the nazi-esq way he points.

Can anyone tell me the name of this very cool physics dude?

[sixtysymbols]

Professor Phil Moriarty is the main speaker, with extra bits from Professor Mike Merrifield.... Details of all our scientists can be found at the main sixty symbols website.

[asifyoucare41]

this is the first sixty symbol video i have watched.phew. i wasn't too confused. i like disorder! so entropy is cool by me

i do have one question. how can we tell the difference between highly improbable and impossible? if one is a realist, then something which is so highly improbable that it has never been witnessed, could be considered impossible. on the flip side:all that has yet to be seen could be considered equally possible but we just haven't discovered yet how it could be probable

[Brucey117]

Can anyone confirm what the omega symbol stands for in this equation? I think i read somewhere that it was "the number of states with the same energy"

[sophitia42]

Ironically enough: we just started talking about entropy in my Chemistry class today and we used the Boltzmann equation.

Great video.

[Moriarty2112]

Hi all - thanks for the comments on the video. I'm going to be a pedantic physicist, I'm afraid, and point out that when I talk about the "entropy" of the students, it's **really** important to note that this is just an analogy. Entropy and the 2nd law of thermodynamics are very abused concepts. An arrangement of the students *does not* have an associated thermodynamic entropy - just like the reason your sock drawer gets messy has nothing to do with the second law. Happy to discuss this...

[itsabomberscope]

The sock drawer is a mystery which will never be solved! lol. I had a drawer full of socks, and now its almost empty. Where do they go! haha

[Moriarty2112]

Douglas Adams suggested that the countless biros that go missing every day all drop through wormholes in space-time and end up on a planet entirely populated by biro life-forms. I'm pretty certain something similar happens with socks...

[marylov]

that is funny. but instead of ending up on a planet, maybe they end up in ur dog's stomach. just like mine, most of the time, with a bunch of other stuff, weird dog, yeah.

[ajp06u]

You should do a video explaining how this proves evolution is impossible... or not! I was in one of your lectures a few years ago (I believe it was F31ST1, although I hear the first year syllabus has been dumbed down somewhat since!) and very much enjoyed the tirade of anger and absolute incredulity that resulted. It's been recounted to friends on multiple occasions. Maybe you and Richard Dawkins should get together?

[tumest]

Boltzmann's grave was a constant source of in jokes and terror in my p-chem 2 class.

[zunathanzu]

this is true, if entropy was absolute rule in the universe there would be no order

[Lambda3e]

zunathanzu: No this is incorrect. The second law of thermodynamics just says that the overall entropy of a closed system will increase with time. However, out of this disorder caused by the entropy increasing, order can arise.

[zunathanzu]

Lambda3e

I'm confused :P how can increased disorder create order?

[fergustus1]

its much easier to conceive on a large scale,some consider that within a stable,and non-expansive universe,the dispersion associated with enthropy will result in a consisitent and equal heat at a minimum energy value throughout the universe,all stemming from higher energy reactions degrading,resulting in increased enthropy aand decreased chaos(consider the potential enrgy of the vase compared to the potential energy of a shard of the vase)

[zunathanzu]

ahh but life is like if the vase broke, shards of it would form into little tea cups and some of the pottery would go through fusion and fission to transform into tea that fills those cups. This is unlikely, but somehow from the entropy of the universe we still have cups of tea.

[puncheex]

@fergustus1: Yes.  A high entropy universe is one in which the matter and the energy are both homogenized and spread evenly over all of space. Since our universe is expanding, that would ultimately be a space with no matter and at absolute zero temperature.

[3tool]

u make science cool

[Acid113377]

love the videos ... great work... keep it up!!

[cjpendleton1993]

Wooohooo first comment, loving the videos they inspire me to become a scientist so much (im just doing my GCSE's at the moment)