To anyone interested in learning physics, I suggest reading https://www.susanrigetti.com/physics
Do not try to learn anything from the submitted article, it promotes a, shall we say, "non-traditional" view of physics that is unlikely to be helpful.
Do not try to learn anything from the submitted article, it promotes a, shall we say, "non-traditional" view of physics that is unlikely to be helpful.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.09914
It appears to be an example of argument by italics. I’m not convinced that it has any real content — it seems to be trying to say that the author thinks all systems are either being observed or they aren’t, and that there are therefore at least two microstates.
I think this is entirely missing the point and is mostly wrong. Even in the highly classical case of a gas, you have a box full of gas, with n particles and some volume V, etc. Those parameters form the macro state. Now you count microstates, take the log, and get the entropy. But nowhere in the count is a set of states where the gas is observed and a set where it isn’t. If you have a box of gas with n particle, etc, it’s implied that the gas exists!
So I don’t buy it. I’ll stick with S >= 0.
So does the "maximum force" argument, which is given in this paper:
https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0309118
It is, to say the least, not generally accepted as a valid argument.
Maximum power seems especially odd — power is extensive. If you have two maximum power systems, don’t you end up with double the power?
So is force. Two maximum force systems should also end up with double the force.
Admittedly, power has much the the same problem. Saying that P <= P_max is some sort of physical law requires a lot more explanation of what it would mean than the paper even tries to give it.
S ≥ k ln2 is incorrect, as you say. A system whose state is fully known has no entropy. One can either see this through counting the number of microstates (which is 1) or by applying Shannon's definition of entropy to the trivial probability distribution which is 1 for precisely one state.
At some point you'll need math, I recommend https://www.amazon.com/No-bullshit-guide-linear-algebra/dp/0... (I actually started here), and for calculus, "No BS Guide to Math/Physics" by the same author. These books both include a review of high school math (i.e. trig) which i needed. For DiffEq I currently recommend Logan's "A First Course in Differential Equations", this is where I am now and I found this the most gentle after trying several textbooks recommended from r/math. Context: I am an adult with an engineering degree from 20 yrs ago.