Re: Virtual Particle confusion
From: alexi (apredtechenski.no.spam_at_austin.rr.com)
Date: 03/02/05
- Next message: heinrich_neumaier_at_yahoo.com: "Grand unification issue"
- Previous message: Franz Heymann: "Re: Attraction vs repulsion - why does it depend on spin?"
- Maybe in reply to: PD: "Re: Virtual Particle confusion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 05:51:52 GMT
"Ranando King" <rk@magictouchcorp.com> wrote in message
news:421f853f_1@news.vic.com...
>
> How so? The word "random" is neither stated nor implied in the definition
of
> temperature. The motion of the particles of a substance whos temperature
is
> being measured is not random. If you know the postition, orientation,
> velocity (speed & direction), mass, charge, and necessary outside factors
> like boundary conditions on the container of all the particles at any
> selected point, you can predict the motion of every individual particle
both
> forward and backward in time using a painfully long series of simultaneous
> equations.
No, no "painfully long series" can help you to predict anything
forward. The system of colliding particles is a big billiard
with a negative curvature, and therefore forms a hyperbolical
system, so even an ideal classic mechanical motion will
end up on a true stochastic attractor. Please take some
readings on the nonlinear theory of dynamical systems
and "strange attractors".
Regards,
- aap
- Next message: heinrich_neumaier_at_yahoo.com: "Grand unification issue"
- Previous message: Franz Heymann: "Re: Attraction vs repulsion - why does it depend on spin?"
- Maybe in reply to: PD: "Re: Virtual Particle confusion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
