Talk:Entropy
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Entropy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14Auto-archiving period: 100 days  |
 | Entropy was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | ||||||||||||||||
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
|
/Available Energy '03-(Nov)'05 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Discussion-free POV tag removed edit
There was an instance of Template:POV dated November 2022 buried in the middle of the Carnot cycle section. Baffled, I tried to find any relevant discussion, and could not. If there had been discussion, I would've changed the tag to {{POV statement}} (or moved the existing tag to the top of the article if it was genuinely meant to apply to the entire thing), but without any indication of why neutrality might be disputed it appears to be a case of WP:DRIVEBY. As such, I simply removed it. -- Proginoskes (talk) 06:39, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
"Economics" edit
The section on Entropy#Economics (near the bottom, under Interdisciplinary Applications) strikes me as very oddly written, and focusing a ton of effusive praise solely on the works of one Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen. I think it'd be better if this could be toned down and made into a more generalized overview, instead of a section just crediting this one guy with being the brightest mind since sliced bread. Hornpipe2 (talk) 05:22, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
- It was added by Gaeanautes (talk · contribs). He has also contributed over 80% of the article for Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen in the same style. It has been questioned on the talk page at Talk:Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen#NPOV in introduction. While Georgescu-Roegen is very distinguished in his field, the article prose makes overly use of WP:PUFFERY and the WP:TONE is a too dramatic rather then academic. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 10:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
"Ludwig Boltzmann... found the link between the microscopic interactions, which fluctuate about an average configuration, to the macroscopically observable behavior, in form of a simple logarithmic law, with a proportionality constant, the Boltzmann constant, that has become one of the defining universal constants for the modern International System of Units (SI)". edit
Max Planck derived the equation, not Boltzmann, and Max Planck introduced the Boltzmann constant, not Boltzmann. 90.154.71.24 (talk) 18:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)