Talk:Entropy production

Entropy production or generation

Dear all, according to scientific epistemology entropy is involuntarily generated, and not produced because production requires a voluntary action towards a material, social, economic, personal, etc. goal. Since three decades the formulation "Entropy production" (which dates to Fermi Thermodynamics) is consequently abandoned in favour of " entropy generation" as introduced by SZARGUT. I invite you to think to the denomination because the use of entropy generation that refers to 90% of the available texts is much more useful. Please consider the possibility of changing the main title into "entropy generation" and using a link to from "entropy production". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeronauticengineer67 (talk • contribs) 07:59, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Heat engines are "cyclic machines"?

Who says heat engines are cyclic machines? Never heard of turbines or rockets? There is absolutely nothing that requires a heat engine to be cyclic. --Damorbel (talk) 10:04, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"at which the heat flow \dot Q enters the system"

What does "at which the heat flow \dot Q enters the system" mean? What is the 'temperature' and what precisely is flowing? Are we dealing with mass transfer? --Damorbel (talk) 10:30, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It means the heat transfer rate (change in energy divided by the time elapsed) occurs at the said temperature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.89.11.242 (talk) 22:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Avogadro number vs. Avogadro constant

In Entropy production § Microscopic interpretation, there is a dimensional inconsistency. This clearly comes from the confusion between "the number of entities in one mole" (with unit 1) and "the molar entity number" (my term, really the Avogadro constant, with unit mol⁻¹). The symbols S_m and S_mi are also not adequately defined, so this prevents me from correcting this. Note that R = N_Ak, not Nk (where N_A is the Avogadro constant and N is the Avogadro number). My preference would be to avoid designating 1 mole as the quantity under consideration. DMacks, you may be interested, as you have just been working on that. 172.82.46.195 (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed it. 172.82.46.195 (talk) 00:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]