[Archive!] Pure mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc.: brain-training problems not related to trade in any way - page 468

 
Mathemat:

Not everything is right here. But the "highlighted" in regular font is exactly what illustrates the Le Chatelier principle.

??? In what way?
 

Cod: Философски размышляя, откуда атомы, участвующие в реакции, знают, что есть "внешнее" воздействие, а что есть "внутреннее"?

The thought is certainly an interesting one. But atoms don't know. It is the system as a whole that knows. Thermodynamics (physic chemistry in particular) is the science of the behaviour of large piles of particles.

Under fixed external conditions (in fact, even in a closed tank), the reaction settles down so that a dynamic equilibrium is established in the rate of change of concentration of substances involved in it. If the conditions in the tank change (temperature, for example), the equilibrium is rearranged. The reason for the rearrangement is the external influence.

 
Cod:
??? In what way?
The higher the concentration of combustion products, the stronger the reaction shifts to the left side, i.e. the weaker the fire. Removing combustion products from the reaction zone is one of the key techniques for starting a fire.
 
Mathemat:

The thought is certainly an interesting one. But atoms don't know. It is the system as a whole that knows. Thermodynamics (physic chemistry in particular) is the science of the behaviour of large piles of particles.

Under fixed external conditions (in fact, even in a closed tank), the reaction settles down so that a dynamic equilibrium is established in the rate of change in the concentrations of the substances involved in it. If the conditions in the tank change (temperature, for example), the equilibrium is rearranged. The reason for the rearrangement is the external influence.


If I am not mistaken, the initial condition was about fire and Antarctica, i.e. it was not about closed system (if I am wrong, sorry, I do not want to rewind, it is a big branch).

And what is becoming established, even I, a humanist, understand.

In general, thermodynamics comes to one boring and uninteresting conclusion: guys, miracles do not happen. And if you want them, you'll have to pay out of your own pocket.

:)

 
Mathemat:

But atoms do not know. It is the system as a whole that knows. Thermodynamics (physic chemistry in particular) is the science of the behaviour of large piles of particles.

Okay. I'm going to flood the place, fair warning.

"System" - what is it? Is it something you've isolated from the world around you because it's easier for you to think that way? Is Earth-Sun a system? Then how far would you have to move the Earth away from the Sun for them to cease to be a system? A hundred parsecs? A million? And the gravity between them would disappear? Give a definition of a system.

IMHO - this is purely anthropocentric fiction. There are no systems, there are ways of mentally simplifying the world whereby we get to count something. There are no systems and "heaps of particles", who has ever seen a particle, an "electron" for example? It's all wizardry....

But the fact that mathematics sometimes works and predicts is a miracle.

 
Cod:

There are no systems, there are ways of mentally simplifying the world in which we get to count something. There are no systems and "piles of particles", who has ever seen a particle, "electron" for example? It's all wizardry....

The electron has a charge.

If there are two electrons, they will interact, and it will be a system, i.e. an electron under Coulomb forces will do things that are not peculiar to it without interaction with another electron.

That's what gives birth to a system. That is, in a system - a bunch of particles - has properties different from the properties of a single particle.

Draw a parallel with finnings.

 
sergeev:

1. The electron has a charge.

2. If there are two electrons,

1. Is the electron an object? Have you seen it? Does it exist? Or is it just a way of formalising the world we observe? I won't say anything about the charge, because it is a property of what was asked in the first question - see point 1.

2. Where will be? At what distance they were not yet, they were separate, and then suddenly there were "two electrons" - and immediately a "system"?

Come to think of it, it's not an idle question.

 
Cod:

Think about it, it's not an idle question.

It is not a frivolous question, but there is no need to clutter up the thread. I understand that the occasion is great, the temptation is great, etc.

What's the constructive part?

 
MetaDriver:

It's not an idle question, but there's no need to clutter up the thread. I understand that the occasion is great, the temptation is great, etc.

What's the point of being constructive?


What do you mean by constructive, dear MetaDriver? Is it constructive if I transfer 30 rubles to you to webmani?

 

I like what you said.

Cod:

Hey, scratchies! We crossed paths, so I give you a flaming hello!

:)

Hello to you too,

let's live together.