OBJECTIVES OF A FUZZY  ENTROPY MODEL

               

      at 30 000 feet:

Just for fun.

To return to Rudolf Clausius's observation. Noting a constant relationship between the transfer of an infinitesimal quantity of heat and the variation in corresponding temperature, he defines a mathematical being that he called Entropy, cause of evolution in Greek. Did he want already to give it the role of a driving force? In any case, he bequeathed an interesting tool to us for modeling Evolution. (to see the page Formulae)

To push the "how?" farther by speaking of this Entropy, a function of state that may seem an abstraction difficult to grasp. When C Shannon asked J von Neumann how he was to name his information theory, the physician-mathematician answered by a joke of an astonishing prescience: ”Speak about Entropy, no one knows what Entropy really is!". Besides, there are equivalent versions of its consequence, the second law of thermodynamics. Does this "fuzzy" explain the weak development of research in this field, even if it profits now from the contribution of the quantum theory? Yet if necessary, the examples of the chapter "Obviousness" will show the reader how we are subjected to Entropy like we are subjected to gravity, not only in the use of heat engines. If we must, probably in a near future, manage the energies transformations, renewable or not, we must today better model the Entropy. Even if we must name it “Fuzzy Entropy”, in waiting of more convincing theoretical bases. A situation that reminds the periods of bases crises in mathematics.

To try to specify the necessary link, theorized by Ilya Prigogine, between: 

  • a thermodynamic singularity of intern quite low Entropy, in stationary state far from equilibrium,
  • the extern Entropy production of universe.

To try to theorize the phenomena in the form of hypothetical Fuzzy Entropic Fields, or perhaps of a Fuzzy Entropy Meta-Field, in the vein of Fuzzy Logic, the "fuzzy" of quantum space or the Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) in cosmology. (ref 53)

A brick for the philosophical current building, the "constructionism"?

Following in E. Schrödinger’s footsteps (“what is Life?”), to apply knowledge of Fuzzy Entropic Fields to biology, in the expectation of a better explanation for the ubiquity of life, its proliferation, complexity, swift resurgence after a mass extinction. Also, an explanation of cases of convergence, so that of the marsupial goat or the sabre teeth marsupial tiger, and their placental homologues. (ref 35) A convergence sometimes repetitive, sometimes even double with development of a defense in a prey and recycling in the predator. (ref 51)

Maybe to consolidate the neo-Darwinism, considered by some as a tautology. Maybe to introduce some determinism, at least statistical, chaotic or ergodic, where appears the not very convincing model of self-organization, which reminds the flies’ spontaneous generation.

To examine how the assessment destruction–production of Entropy would be translated into cosmology, and if one could model it in the form of one Fuzzy Entropic Field, or more. Maybe to show its (or their) role with gravity field in an expending Universe. Today Entropic Depletion force is tested at the most micrometric scale (ref 8 - 9 - 11), but there are theoretical openings. (ref 25)

In short, to give the Entropy a more objective character, against a current tendency to give it an anthropic character, knowing that beyond the enormous mass of analytical data that Science produces, a place remains for the synthesis.

In a way probably naive and certainly presumptuous, this study aims to create a collective work by contribution from interested net surfers, particularly from young scientists who have difficulties making the most of their potential. For their elders, it is generally too late. The phenomenon is known: their cerebral connections being preferentially cabled for the works that gratified them. Their brains specialized (ref 95) and have more difficulties to grasp new prospects. Examples abound. (ref 56) Somebody even said: “truth never prevails, the opponents die”. To read Benoît Mendelbrot's confidences, among others, on the slow recognition of fractal geometry.

However, we will see that the principal obstacle to the acceptance of these new prospects resides in our own nature.

      That’s all.

     

        Notice:

      “The retired and amateur creator of this site engages himself to make no material profit”.

      Having received no comment on my thought for three years, I wonder about the relevance of this too angelic promise, which I will have probably to disavow.

      If I want that scientists take in account this present thesis, I will have possibly to use, some time, the commercial dissemination system of knowledge.