TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Entropy: A little understood concept in physics [video]

231 点作者 guptarohit将近 2 年前

32 条评论

javajosh将近 2 年前
Entropy only made sense when I learned it from the perspective of statistical thermodynamics. It&#x27;s a very programmerly understanding, IMHO, and it&#x27;s quite intuitive. EXCEPT that the language used is ridiculous: <i>grand canonical ensemble</i> indeed! Anyway, the idea that a system can be in some number of specific states, and that equilibrium is that unique situation where the number of possible specific states is at its maximum, really spoke to me.
评论 #36564107 未加载
评论 #36562546 未加载
评论 #36566971 未加载
评论 #36562418 未加载
floatrock将近 2 年前
The part that was new to me was the bit about how a space full of life tends toward more entropy faster than the same amount of space without life.<p>Like the best ideas, it’s simple and makes sense if you think about it, but it’s still a really interesting framing that the complex machinery of life is really just the most efficient “entropy converter”.<p>If there’s something about the arrow of time that speeds towards the heat death of the universe, we’re just helping it go a tiny bit faster here on our floating speck of dust.
评论 #36562940 未加载
评论 #36563209 未加载
评论 #36564097 未加载
评论 #36565995 未加载
评论 #36565317 未加载
ctafur将近 2 年前
According to entropy, and thermodynamics in general, I can&#x27;t recommend enough the notes [0] of prof. Zhigang Suo of Harvard. It&#x27;s a new way of presenting thermodynamics and I finally get it... contrary to when I took a thermo course at university.<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.google.com&#x2F;document&#x2F;d&#x2F;10Vi8s-azYq9auysBSK3SFSWZx64NUGnqBkmHYYQU9Bw&#x2F;edit" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.google.com&#x2F;document&#x2F;d&#x2F;10Vi8s-azYq9auysBSK3SFSWZ...</a><p>Also prof. Suo puts entropy as the main character of the &quot;play&quot;. The other concepts (temperature, etc.) are defined from entropy.
hospitalJail将近 2 年前
Last night me and my wife were deciding if we should watch The Witcher or this video.<p>I decided I didn&#x27;t have the brainpower&#x2F;mental capacity to think about The Witcher and that this video on Entropy would be easier to digest.
评论 #36562634 未加载
TexanFeller将近 2 年前
I recently enjoyed this presentation by Sean Carroll that touches on definitional and philosophical issues with entropy. The talk made me feel less stupid for not feeling entirely comfortable with how entropy was explained to me before. Turns out there are a few different ways to define and quantify entropy that are used in different contexts and they each have some unresolved philosophical issues.<p>&quot;Can you get time out of Quantum Mechanics?&quot;: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;nqQrGk7Vzd4" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;nqQrGk7Vzd4</a>
评论 #36561097 未加载
评论 #36564884 未加载
评论 #36566404 未加载
antimora将近 2 年前
The video did not explain why the sun is a low entropy source. I found this explaining what I am sharing with you:<p>So, the sun is a low-entropy source of energy, and Earth (and everything on it) increases that entropy as it uses and then reradiates that energy. This process is entirely consistent with the second law of thermodynamics.<p>The relationship between light frequency and entropy comes from the fact that entropy is a measure of disorder or randomness. High-frequency light, such as ultraviolet or visible light, is more ordered and less random than lower-frequency light, such as infrared or microwave light.<p>This is due to how light is structured. Light is made up of particles called photons, and each photon carries a certain amount of energy. The energy of a photon is directly proportional to its frequency: higher-frequency photons carry more energy than lower-frequency ones.<p>So, if you have a fixed amount of energy to distribute among photons, you can do so in many more ways (i.e., with higher entropy) if you use low-energy, low-frequency photons. That&#x27;s because you would need many more of them to carry the same total amount of energy.<p>On the other hand, if you use high-energy, high-frequency photons, you would need fewer of them to carry the same total amount of energy. There are fewer ways to distribute the energy (i.e., lower entropy), so this arrangement is more ordered and less random.<p>Therefore, high-frequency light is considered a lower-entropy form of energy compared to low-frequency light, because the energy is concentrated in fewer, more energetic photons.
评论 #36564813 未加载
评论 #36565081 未加载
spuz将近 2 年前
I think the concept would be easier for me to understand if we talked about the inverse of entropy - i.e. some kind of measurement for the concentration of useful energy or &quot;order&quot;. I think it would then be more intuitive to say that this measurement always decreases. Do we even have a word for the opposite of entropy?
评论 #36561415 未加载
评论 #36561614 未加载
评论 #36678105 未加载
评论 #36561434 未加载
评论 #36564153 未加载
评论 #36563378 未加载
评论 #36561427 未加载
评论 #36564183 未加载
评论 #36564671 未加载
评论 #36562797 未加载
评论 #36563332 未加载
评论 #36561834 未加载
评论 #36561359 未加载
antimora将近 2 年前
Just recently I also watch a video by Sabine Hossenfelder called &quot;I don&#x27;t believe the 2nd law of thermodynamics&quot;: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s</a><p>I recommend this video as well.
dist-epoch将近 2 年前
Sabine Hossenfelder also had a video recently on entropy:<p>&gt; I don&#x27;t believe the 2nd law of thermodynamics.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s</a>
评论 #36563101 未加载
评论 #36700926 未加载
4ad将近 2 年前
I hate Veritasium&#x27;s clickbait, and I think most of his videos are very poor, but this one is the exception. It&#x27;s very well put together. The first ten minutes of the video is <i>exactly</i> how I introduce entropy to people.<p>Of course I can&#x27;t give him a pass on how crass it was telling that women he has a PhD in physics (he does not). The video would have been so much better without that two seconds of footage...
评论 #36560366 未加载
评论 #36560611 未加载
评论 #36560407 未加载
评论 #36560779 未加载
评论 #36561148 未加载
评论 #36560968 未加载
Lichtso将近 2 年前
I think the most unintuitive even unsettling aspect of entropy is that the entropy of black holes is proportional to their surface area, not their volume [0]. That is only briefly mentioned in the video and not discussed any further.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Holographic_principle#Black_hole_entropy" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Holographic_principle#Black_ho...</a>
评论 #36567076 未加载
评论 #36584578 未加载
subroutine将近 2 年前
In the video, Derek says the sun provides &quot;a more useful form of energy than earth gives back because it is more concentrated&quot;. I would argue this is not technically true. What makes the energy from the sun useful is that it emits blackbody radiation, and this has photons that are more energetic than heat (IR) radiated back into space. Light with wavelengths between 400-700 nm are used by plants for photosynthesis. Heat radiated back into the atmosphere is mostly in the IR spectrum. This is both quantitatively and qualitatively important due to the quantized properties of electrons orbiting nuclii (IR wavelengths cannot readily to elevate electrons into a greater energy state).<p>see: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;_vK5KPycEvA" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;_vK5KPycEvA</a>
pcwelder将近 2 年前
So the law of increasing entropy is not a fundamental law of the reality because it can be derived from other fundamental equations.<p>Suppose I show you a snapshot of a random universe, would you be able to tell if the entropy of the universe is going to increase or decrease as the time progresses?<p>Let&#x27;s assume that universe&#x27;s entropy would increase. Consider another universe exactly the same as current universe, but all the particles&#x27; velocities reversed. Then this universe&#x27;s entropy would decrease.<p>So you are equally like to select both the universe and hence the original assumption of increasing entropy is wrong.<p>Discarding quantum properties of the particles, is it then fair to say that time&#x27;s direction is unrelated to whether entropy increases or decreases?
评论 #36563701 未加载
评论 #36563678 未加载
评论 #36563880 未加载
评论 #36563594 未加载
topologie将近 2 年前
Related:<p>&quot;I don&#x27;t believe the 2nd law of thermodynamics. (The most uplifting video I&#x27;ll ever make.)&quot; by Sabine Hossenfelder<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s</a>
lisper将近 2 年前
A pithier way to introduce this topic: the first law of thermodynamics, a.k.a. the law of conservation of energy, is that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transformed from one form to another. In light of this, how can there ever be a shortage of energy?<p>[Note that this is intended to be a rhetorical question advanced for the purposes of pedagogy. If you find yourself wanting to post an answer, you have missed the point.]
评论 #36562639 未加载
评论 #36560821 未加载
评论 #36560749 未加载
评论 #36562330 未加载
danq__将近 2 年前
I don&#x27;t think this delivers the intuition in a simple manner. It&#x27;s also not fully correct. People explain entropy in over complicated ways and even in this thread many people explaining it don&#x27;t get it. There is a simple way to think about this and I guarantee if you read my explanation you&#x27;ll understand it more.<p>In essence what you need to realize is that entropy is just a label for an aspect of probability.<p>Things tend to become disordered over time because disordered states are more probable then ordered states. Entropy is thus simply phenomenon of probability... of things moving from a low probability state to a high probability state. That&#x27;s it.<p>That&#x27;s really all there is to it. That&#x27;s all you need to digest, all the complicated math and explanations are all just surrounding the above concept.<p>Entropy is just a high level abstraction of probability. It just allows you to explain things without the intuition of probability bogging you down. For example, explaining life in terms of probability is harder to grasp as it&#x27;s akin to rolling 10 dice and having all the dice roll a 6.
northlondoner将近 2 年前
There are multiple different definitions of Entropy and usage. Boltzmann&#x27;s and Gibbs&#x27;s physical entropy is not strictly equivalent to information entropy of Shannon whereby legend says von Neumann told Shannon that call &#x27;information capacity of a channel&#x27; entropy, as nobody knows it. A great reads from books of Arieh Ben-Naim is highly recommended.
rssoconnor将近 2 年前
While this is a reasonable historical explanation of entropy, and explains that we don&#x27;t gain net energy from the sun, it still misses the mark on what entropy is now known to be.<p>Entropy isn&#x27;t a property of an object, or a system or things in physics. Entropy is a property of our _description_ of systems. More precisely it is a measure of how poorly a given specification of a physical system is, i.e. given description of a systems, typically the pressure &#x2F; volume &#x2F; temperature of a gas or whatnot, how many different physical systems correspond to such a description.<p>In particular, _thermodynamic entropy is Shannon entropy_.<p>In the case where the description of state specifies a volume of phase space wherein a physical state lies within, then the entropy is the logarithm of the volume of this fragment of phase space. If we take this collection of states and see how they evolve in time, then Liouville’s theorem says the volume of phase space will remain constant.<p>If we want to build a reliable machine, i.e. an engine, that can operate in any initial state that is bounded by our description, and ends up win a final state bounded by some other description, well, in order for this machine to preform reliably, the volume of the final description needs to be greater than the volume of the description of the initial state. Otherwise, some possible initial states will fail to end up in the desired final state. This is the essence of the second law of thermodynamics.<p>I want to emphasis this: entropy exists in our heads, not in the world.<p>E.T. Jaynes illustrated this &quot;5. The Gas Mixing Scenario Revisited&quot; in <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.damtp.cam.ac.uk&#x2F;user&#x2F;tong&#x2F;statphys&#x2F;jaynes.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.damtp.cam.ac.uk&#x2F;user&#x2F;tong&#x2F;statphys&#x2F;jaynes.pdf</a> where two imaginary variants of Argon gas are mixed together. If one engineer is ignorant of the different variants of Argon gas, it is impossible to extract work from the gas, but armed with knowledge of the difference (which must be exploitable otherwise they wouldn&#x27;t actually be different) work can be extracted.<p>Knowledge _is_ power.<p>Taking an extreme example, suppose we have two volumes of gas at different volumes &#x2F; pressures &#x2F; temperature. We can compute how much work can be extracted from those gases.<p>But, suppose someone else knows more than just the volume &#x2F; pressure &#x2F; temperature of these gases. This someone happens to know the precise position and velocity of every single molecule of gas (more practically they know the quantum state of the system). This someone now gets to play a the role of Maxwell&#x27;s demon and separate all the high velocity and low velocity molecules of each chamber, opening and closing a gate using their perfect knowledge of where each particle is at each moment in time. From this they can now extract far more work than the ignorant person.<p>In both cases the gas was identical. How much useful work one can extract depends on how precise one&#x27;s knowledge of the state of that gas is.
评论 #36564957 未加载
评论 #36563354 未加载
评论 #36566363 未加载
danq__将近 2 年前
The most intuitive explanation of entropy ever:<p>entropy is a fancy way of explaining probability.<p>Things with higher probability tend to occur over things of lower probability.<p>Thus when certain aspects of the world like configurations of gas particles in a box are allowed to change configurations, they will move towards high probability configurations.<p>High probability configurations tend to be disordered. Hence the reason why we associate entropy with things becoming increasingly disordered. For example... gas particles randomly and evenly filling up an entire box is more probable then all gas particles randomly gathering on one side of the box.<p>If you understand what I just explained than you understand entropy better than the majority of people.
hilbert42将近 2 年前
That&#x27;s an excellent overall summary as he covers almost every aspect of the subject albeit in brief. It would be good if he produced a second video dealing with the low entropy of incoming energy from the sun and the higher entropy of radiated energy from earth and relate that to global warming.<p>In all the debate over global warming little is talked about why say CO2 and other greenhouse gasses increase the earth&#x27;s temperature and how they shift the wavelength of the radiated energy from earth. In other words we need to explain in simple terms why the incoming and outgoing energy can remain the same yet the earth&#x27;s temperature has increased.
评论 #36562534 未加载
评论 #36561479 未加载
评论 #36560619 未加载
martythemaniak将近 2 年前
Great video, but very wrong to cite Jeremy England. Ilya Prigogine came up with the concept of Dissipative Structures and won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1977 for that work. He also has a couple of pop-sci books on he subject that I found super illuminating. They are a little bit challenging to read, but they&#x27;re very thorough and Order out of Chaos in particular has a fantastic summary of 400 years of philosophy of science. Highly recommend reading the OG.
bugs_bunny将近 2 年前
An interesting read related to this is the following article, which begins with von Neumann&#x27;s comment that ``Nobody really knows what entropy really is.&quot;<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.researchgate.net&#x2F;publication&#x2F;228935581_How_physicists_disagree_on_the_meaning_of_entropy" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.researchgate.net&#x2F;publication&#x2F;228935581_How_physi...</a>
szundi将近 2 年前
Just after Sabine’s
评论 #36561934 未加载
wpwpwpw将近 2 年前
I loved this one too and I believe it is an excelent followup: I don&#x27;t believe the 2nd law of thermodynamics. (The most uplifting video I&#x27;ll ever make.) @ <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s</a>
manojlds将近 2 年前
When I was watching the video I was thinking this deserves to be posted on HN and yup, someone already has.
dangitnotagain将近 2 年前
Entropy should be redefined as “the distribution of potential over negative potential.”<p>Whether discussing what is over what may be, or thermal equilibrium, potential distribution describes it all!
lvl102将近 2 年前
I’d like to think of entropy in terms of randomness or rather uniqueness of elements&#x2F;compounds within a system.
thumbuddy将近 2 年前
In my opinion the most misunderstood concept from physics is probably any exponential relationship. I realize we could view entropy to be one of those if we flip the relationship around and equate for microstates making my statement the superset. But generally speaking, Ive seen both lay people and experts struggle to reason about them, especially with complex numbers.
guerrilla将近 2 年前
It&#x27;s actually amazing how bad science popularizers are at explaining entropy. It&#x27;s really not that difficult if they would just take some time and think before they speak (which I&#x27;m sure this video proves based on what people are saying about it.)
max_将近 2 年前
Sad he didn&#x27;t talk about Shannon Entropy
sourcecodeplz将近 2 年前
It was a great video
评论 #36566488 未加载
friend_and_foe将近 2 年前
The video talks about how the earth radiates away the same amount of energy as it gets from the sun, just red shifted. In light of this, let&#x27;s talk about climate change, global warming and the greenhouse effect.