Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #535247 > unrolled thread

Ergodic Mechanical Systems

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Ergodic Mechanical Systems Lorn James <jl33@query.info> - 2015-11-25 00:00 +0000
    Ergodic Mechanical Systems john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 07:19 -0800
      Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 10:25 -0600
        Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 09:54 -0800
          Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 12:30 -0600
            Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 10:45 -0800
              Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 13:14 -0600
                Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 11:50 -0800
                  Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 14:40 -0600
                    Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Lester Thorpe <lt11@thorpe.info> - 2015-11-26 01:07 +0000
                      Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 20:51 -0500
                        Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Lester Thorpe <lt11@thorpe.info> - 2015-11-26 02:46 +0000
                    Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-11-26 01:31 +0000
                      Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-11-25 19:53 -0600
                        Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-26 01:51 -0500
                        Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-11 22:18 +0100
                          Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-11 15:44 -0600
                            Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-12-12 20:50 +0100
                      Re: Ergodic Mechanical Systems Lester Thorpe <lt11@thorpe.info> - 2015-11-26 02:50 +0000

#535247 — Ergodic Mechanical Systems

There are many formal definitions of an ergodic mechanical system.

1) A system whose time average equals the ensemble (space) average.

2) A system that visits every point in its phase space. 

Etc.

What are some actual, real examples of an ergodic mechanical system?

Also, since a chaotic system approaches an attractor and
does not visit all of its phase space, then a chaotic system
is not ergodic.  Is this a correct statement?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#535346

When people were trying to figure out
what atoms were doing, one of the
goals was to come up with a model
for Benzene. This was never
accomplished, and we settled for
hand waving ("delocalized electrons").
The defenders of this say, "Oh, it
works for metals, too!!" What total
"Math is real" crap!

HERE: model atoms as spinning/precessing
discs, where spin = 1 and precession = 2
http://users.accesscomm.ca/john/BenzeneE.GIF
No problem. No chaos. Absolute symmetry 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535362

On 11/25/2015 9:19 AM, john wrote:
> When people were trying to figure out
> what atoms were doing, one of the
> goals was to come up with a model
> for Benzene. This was never
> accomplished,

I disagree.

> and we settled for
> hand waving ("delocalized electrons").

Not handwaving at all. The model completely agrees in quantitative 
detail with measurement. The fact that you cannot follow it does not 
turn it into handwaving.

It's a cheap tactic to go blind the minute math appears and then you 
say, "Math tricks! Math tricks! The second you introduce math it's just 
handwaving!"

> The defenders of this say, "Oh, it
> works for metals, too!!" What total
> "Math is real" crap!


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535398

Describe a "delocalized electron", Odd.
Is it now a "many-pointed" "point
particle"?
It's a cheap trick to just gloss past
any physical representation using
math. Where is the physical
representation?
You don't got none. You don't got
nothing. Your model is sheep dip, Odd.
YOU are the ones using cheap tricks

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535411

On 11/25/2015 11:54 AM, john wrote:
> Describe a "delocalized electron", Odd.

See? Here's what's funny, John. You say something is nonsense and is 
handwaving, and then you ask what it means.

Are you in the habit of saying that things cannot be right just because 
you have no idea what they mean?

> Is it now a "many-pointed" "point
> particle"?
> It's a cheap trick to just gloss past
> any physical representation using
> math. Where is the physical
> representation?

I think you're under the impression that ANYTHING that is real must be 
visualizable, like a macroscopic, ordinary material object. If that's 
right, then you tell me what you believe the physical representation of 
light is. What's its shape? Where is its boundary? What's its 
composition? How do the component pieces touch each other and move?

Or do you not think light is real?

> You don't got none. You don't got
> nothing. Your model is sheep dip, Odd.
> YOU are the ones using cheap tricks
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535416

Odd, you have NO idea how your
"point particle" electron having
NO volume can suddenly spread out
over whatever volume you need in
order to complete your model.
You have no model.
You have mathematical sheep dip.

You ask ME to answer the question-
and then totally avoid my question.
So that's my answer- you HAVE no
answer.
But I knew that

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535419

On 11/25/2015 12:45 PM, john wrote:
> Odd, you have NO idea how your
> "point particle" electron having
> NO volume can suddenly spread out
> over whatever volume you need in
> order to complete your model.

That's because they don't "suddenly spread out" over some other volume.
Where did you read that they do?

> You have no model.

Sure there's a model. But you don't seem to have any idea what it is. 
Instead you make up stuff like point particles suddenly spreading out 
over some volume and say that makes no sense. Of COURSE it makes no 
sense, you just made it up.

> You have mathematical sheep dip.
>
> You ask ME to answer the question-
> and then totally avoid my question.

Yes, I asked you to answer what you think a ray is. So far you haven't 
answered very well. So far your answer for a ray doesn't match what 
alpha rays or beta rays are, and your answer doesn't distinguish rays 
from particles very well, which makes your question about "Photons -- 
are they rays or particles?" seem pretty nonsensical.

> So that's my answer- you HAVE no
> answer.
> But I knew that
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535431

If you look back and READ, Odd,
it wasn't my question.
And you still haven't given ANY
explanation for delocalized electrons.
So.
I guess we're as far as we get on this one.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535449

On 11/25/2015 1:50 PM, john wrote:
> If you look back and READ, Odd,
> it wasn't my question.
> And you still haven't given ANY
> explanation for delocalized electrons.

https://www.google.com/search?q=delocalized+electrons&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

I honestly don't know why this is hard for you.

Delocalized electrons simply mean that the electron is not associated 
with a particular atom or a particular bond. Conduction electrons in 
metals drift through the WHOLE METAL, which is of course what makes 
those substances metals. In benzene, the delocalized electrons drift 
across all the C-C bonds.

Now, you say such stuff is illogical nonsense. Perhaps you can explain 
what is nonsensical and illogical about metals and what makes them metals.

> So.
> I guess we're as far as we get on this one.
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535531

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:40:35 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> Delocalized electrons simply mean that ...
>

Gentlemen, gentlemen, you are advised to stay on topic, and
the topic of this thread is ERGODIC SYSTEMS.

I encourage you, if you are unfamiliar with ergodic theory,
to look it up.

I seek a concrete, real world example of an ergodic system.
After searching through many pages of abstract theory I find
no concrete examples of any kind.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535535

On 11/25/2015 08:07 PM, Lester Thorpe wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 14:40:35 -0600, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> Delocalized electrons simply mean that ...
>>
>
> Gentlemen, gentlemen, you are advised to stay on topic, and
> the topic of this thread is ERGODIC SYSTEMS.
>
> I encourage you, if you are unfamiliar with ergodic theory,
> to look it up.
>
> I seek a concrete, real world example of an ergodic system.
> After searching through many pages of abstract theory I find
> no concrete examples of any kind.

Don't expect Boinker to know anything. He can only repeat what others 
have told him.

If you can find no examples you haven't looked very hard. Ergodic 
systems are common in information theory.  For example the noise in an 
ensemble of resistors is an ergodic system.

And pay no attention to HVAC. He knows nothing as well. He doesn't 
believe in ergodic systems because of the word "god" he found in there.


-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535548

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 20:51:51 -0500, benj wrote:

> 
>  Ergodic 
> systems are common in information theory.  For example the noise in an 
> ensemble of resistors is an ergodic system.
> 

What purpose, beyond illustrating an ergodic system, does an ensemble
of resistors serve?  (That is, the noise time average of ONE resistor
equals the average at a given time over ALL resistors.)

What about MECHANICAL systems?  What about chaos?  As indicated in
the original post, a chaotic system only "explores" a subset of
its total phase space, namely the attractor.  Does this mean that
all chaotic systems are NOT ergodic.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535534

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> Delocalized electrons simply mean that the electron is not associated
> with a particular atom or a particular bond. Conduction electrons in
> metals drift through the WHOLE METAL, which is of course what makes
> those substances metals.

That is _not_ the defining property of a metal, but of a conductor.  
Instead, metals can be defined in two ways: in astrophysics, all elements 
that are heavier than helium; in chemistry, all elements with certain 
chemical properties.

> In benzene, the delocalized electrons drift across all the C-C bonds.

No.
 

PointedEars
-- 
Q: How many theoretical physicists specializing in general relativity
   does it take to change a light bulb?  
A: Two: one to hold the bulb and one to rotate the universe.
(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535536

On 11/25/2015 7:31 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>> Delocalized electrons simply mean that the electron is not associated
>> with a particular atom or a particular bond. Conduction electrons in
>> metals drift through the WHOLE METAL, which is of course what makes
>> those substances metals.
>
> That is _not_ the defining property of a metal, but of a conductor.
> Instead, metals can be defined in two ways: in astrophysics, all elements
> that are heavier than helium; in chemistry, all elements with certain
> chemical properties.

And what are the chemical properties that are emblematic of metals?

>
>> In benzene, the delocalized electrons drift across all the C-C bonds.
>
> No.
>
>
> PointedEars
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535578

On 11/25/2015 08:53 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 11/25/2015 7:31 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>
>>> Delocalized electrons simply mean that the electron is not associated
>>> with a particular atom or a particular bond. Conduction electrons in
>>> metals drift through the WHOLE METAL, which is of course what makes
>>> those substances metals.
>>
>> That is _not_ the defining property of a metal, but of a conductor.
>> Instead, metals can be defined in two ways: in astrophysics, all elements
>> that are heavier than helium; in chemistry, all elements with certain
>> chemical properties.
>
> And what are the chemical properties that are emblematic of metals?
>
>>
>>> In benzene, the delocalized electrons drift across all the C-C bonds.
>>
>> No.


Hey Boinker, I thought you knew it all!  Perhaps you need to read a 
fresehman text again? Do you want some titles? I'll give you a couple to 
look up! <snort>!



-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538654

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 11/25/2015 7:31 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> Delocalized electrons simply mean that the electron is not associated
>>> with a particular atom or a particular bond. Conduction electrons in
>>> metals drift through the WHOLE METAL, which is of course what makes
>>> those substances metals.
>>
>> That is _not_ the defining property of a metal, but of a conductor.
>> Instead, metals can be defined in two ways: in astrophysics, all elements
>> that are heavier than helium; in chemistry, all elements with certain
>> chemical properties.
> 
> And what are the chemical properties that are emblematic of metals?

“Emblematic” does not translate here.  But if you mean “characteristic”, 
then you are committing the “if A, then B; B, therefore A” fallacy 
(affirming the consequent), because not all electrical conductors are 
metals.


PointedEars
-- 
Q: What did the female magnet say to the male magnet?  
A: From the back, I found you repulsive, but from the front
   I find myself very attracted to you.
(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538660

On 12/11/2015 3:18 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>> On 11/25/2015 7:31 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> Delocalized electrons simply mean that the electron is not associated
>>>> with a particular atom or a particular bond. Conduction electrons in
>>>> metals drift through the WHOLE METAL, which is of course what makes
>>>> those substances metals.
>>>
>>> That is _not_ the defining property of a metal, but of a conductor.
>>> Instead, metals can be defined in two ways: in astrophysics, all elements
>>> that are heavier than helium; in chemistry, all elements with certain
>>> chemical properties.
>>
>> And what are the chemical properties that are emblematic of metals?
>
> “Emblematic” does not translate here.  But if you mean “characteristic”,
> then you are committing the “if A, then B; B, therefore A” fallacy
> (affirming the consequent), because not all electrical conductors are
> metals.

Referring to what I actually said, maybe you might want to cite an 
element where conduction elements drift through the whole body of the 
element, and yet are not metals.

>
>
> PointedEars
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538767

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 12/11/2015 3:18 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> On 11/25/2015 7:31 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>> Delocalized electrons simply mean that the electron is not associated
>>>>> with a particular atom or a particular bond. Conduction electrons in
>>>>> metals drift through the WHOLE METAL, which is of course what makes
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> those substances metals.
>> […]
> 
> Referring to what I actually said, maybe you might want to cite an
> element where conduction elements drift through the whole body of the
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> element, and yet are not metals.
  ^^^^^^^
Given that you are proceeding from a false assumption to begin with, I do 
not want to do that.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_and_conductivity#In_metals>


PointedEars
-- 
Two neutrinos go through a bar ...

(from: WolframAlpha)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535549

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 01:31:52 +0000, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> 
>> In benzene, the delocalized electrons drift across all the C-C bonds.
> 
> No.
>  

Yes, they do, in a sense.

In benzene, and all "aromatic" molecules, the wave function is composed
by adding/subtracting together all the atomic orbitals.  This creates
a wave function that encompasses the entire carbon backbone.

The electrons do not "drift."  The electrons are the extended wave function.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web