"US 'doomed' if creationist president elected: scientists"

[Naraoia]

yeah, i guess thats right. it would be sad if only half of the people believed say, the laws of thermodynamics....

then again, i dont know if half of the people even know what that is. =)

I only "know" the second one and that only because entropy is weird and cool

 

[Vene]

I only "know" the second one and that only because entropy is weird and cool

Do more chemistry!

But I'd put a lot of science as weird and cool.

 

[Naraoia]

Do more chemistry!

IB standard level chemistry makes even entropy appear dull Apart from the lots of idiotic giggling chemistry wasn't the biggest experience of my high school years. I'm sure it's intriguing on a slightly deeper level, though.

(In fact I will do more chemistry, biochemistry at least. Beware, test tubes, I'm coming again! )

 

[Cabal]

Technically, most people should know the first law of thermo. It's little more than a restatement of the conservation of energy.

Change in internal energy of system = Change in heat energy - Work done on system.

 

[NOTW]

Technically, most people should know the first law of thermo. It's little more than a restatement of the conservation of energy.

Change in internal energy of system = Change in heat energy - Work done on system.

I say do not partition science.
If you're going to be in any science-related field, you have got to know all 3 laws of thermodynamics.

 

[Cabal]

Don't forget the zeroth law.

 

[Naraoia]

Technically, most people should know the first law of thermo. It's little more than a restatement of the conservation of energy.

Change in internal energy of system = Change in heat energy - Work done on system.

Oh well. It may be that most people know the first law, but most of them have no idea it's the first law of thermodynamics.

 

[Naraoia]

I say do not partition science.
If you're going to be in any science-related field, you have got to know all 3 laws of thermodynamics.

Really? I wonder where they come into, say, cognitive science or taxonomy

Besides, you can't avoid partitioning science with the sheer amount of scientific knowledge now available. No one person could be just a "scientist" (even though some wish they could :o).

 

[Vene]

Oh well. It may be that most people know the first law, but most of them have no idea it's the first law of thermodynamics.

And the third law is that as temperature approached absolute zero the entropy deceases.

 

[Chalnoth]

And the third law is that as temperature approached absolute zero the entropy deceases.

The entropy dies?

 

[mpok1519]

yes.

at absolute zero, all energy ceases to exist.

 

[Naraoia]

yes.

at absolute zero, all energy ceases to exist.

Does quantum uncertainty even allow absolute zero? (I have a feeling that I've asked a stupid question but as Grand Master Rhee allegedly said... fifteen seconds of embarrassment, lifetime knowledge.)

 

[Cabal]

No, it doesn't. Also I think there's something else about adiabatic curves can't have singularities...hence, no actual processes at absolute zero....I think I'm talking out my backside now, but there were classical explanations for it before zero point energy came along.

As an aside, I am enjoying this nice scientist banter. Too bad it's not gonna last.

 

[Vene]

The entropy dies?

I don't know if dies is the right word, but I was under the impression that entropy was one of those properties that could be created or destroyed. And it looks like others have the same idea.

 

[mpok1519]

the entropy doesn't die; its just dormant until absolute zero ceases.

 

[Chalnoth]

I don't know if dies is the right word, but I was under the impression that entropy was one of those properties that could be created or destroyed. And it looks like others have the same idea.

Well, a zero-temperature state would be a state where, quantum mechanically, the entire system is in its ground state. Since the ground state is unique, this would also describe a zero-entropy situation. What we learn from thermodynamics, however, is that one can only asymptotically approach zero entropy in a particular system: one can never actually reach zero entropy. Then there's the whole mess about quantum fluctuations messing the whole thing up anyway.

 

[Vene]

Well, a zero-temperature state would be a state where, quantum mechanically, the entire system is in its ground state. Since the ground state is unique, this would also describe a zero-entropy situation. What we learn from thermodynamics, however, is that one can only asymptotically approach zero entropy in a particular system: one can never actually reach zero entropy. Then there's the whole mess about quantum fluctuations messing the whole thing up anyway.

Which is also why I didn't say it goes to zero, I just said that it decreases. But I have to admit that physics isn't my strong point (I mostly know where it overlaps with chemistry). And quantum mechanics just makes my head hurt at this point.

 

[RealityCheck]

Well, a zero-temperature state would be a state where, quantum mechanically, the entire system is in its ground state. Since the ground state is unique, this would also describe a zero-entropy situation. What we learn from thermodynamics, however, is that one can only asymptotically approach zero entropy in a particular system: one can never actually reach zero entropy. Then there's the whole mess about quantum fluctuations messing the whole thing up anyway.

It would also create a problem for fermions, which cannot occupy the same state within a system.

 

[RealityCheck]

Anyway, as far as a creationist president goes...

Yeah. If Huckabee is elected, we're doomed. Not just for his lack of interest in genuine science, but for his lack of anything resembling an economic or foreign policy.

 

[Chalnoth]

Which is also why I didn't say it goes to zero, I just said that it decreases. But I have to admit that physics isn't my strong point (I mostly know where it overlaps with chemistry). And quantum mechanics just makes my head hurt at this point.

Actually, you said it deceases. Hence my previous attempt at a joke

It would also create a problem for fermions, which cannot occupy the same state within a system.

Actually, not really. This just changes what you mean by the ground state of a multi-particle system made up of fermions (all energy states up to N filled, where N is the number of particles). The ground (lowest-energy) state is still unique, and thus zero entropy.

The only way it wouldn't be zero-entropy would be if the tail end, where the highest-energy fermions reside, includes non-filled degenerate energy eigenstates.