Talk:Nonextensive entropy

Untitled

I am wondering if we should simply redirect to Tsallis entropy? Any opinions?--Smcgrother 02:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect might be a good idea. Do you want to go ahead with the merge? --HappyCamper 16:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, maybe I should mention why I did not put the content in Tsallis entropy here...there are other definitions of nonextensive entropy in the literature, although by far, most people equate "nonextensive entropy" with "Tsallis entropy". So, for this reason, the merge is probably a good thing to do. --HappyCamper 16:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tsallis' entropy is a particular non-extensive form that is not shown to be unique, and is not based on first principles. So it should be clearly stated that it is a particular formulation that may be not suited to all possible physical systems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.76.200.234 (talk) 22:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extensivity

At the moment the article says: "Entropy is considered to be an extensive property, i.e., that its value depends on the amount of material present. Constantino Tsallis has proposed a nonextensive entropy, which is a generalization of the traditional Boltzmann-Gibbs entropy."

Certainly thermodynamic entropy is extensive in classical thermodynamics, however it's not true at all that Gibbs entropy needs to be generalized in order to become nonextensive. Gibbs entropy is extensive for extensive systems, and non-extensive for non-extensive systems. Gibbs' 1902 book carefully treated both cases in full generality.

Is it possible that the term "nonextensive" has a nonstandard meaning in this article? If so it might be good to clarify that, and to make the opening discussion of the article focus on the conventional meaning. Nanite (talk) 14:03, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]