Talk:Closed system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Physics      (Rated Start-Class) Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics. Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. WikiProject Systems     (Rated Start-Class) Systems science Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to Systems science. Systems rating: Start Class Top importance  Field: Cybernetics Please update this rating as the article progresses, or if the rating is inaccurate. Please also add comments to suggest improvements to the article.

Contents 1 Some title 2 closed systems does not exist in nature 3 Definition 4 practicabilities... ? 5 toll roads? 6 WHEN? 7 Clarifications 8 Little blog 9 WikiProject class rating

[edit] Some title

The meme complexity of a closed system decreases over time hence intelligence without learning, economics without trade, decisions without input or ecosystems which are cut constricted by industrial development all tend toward lower complexity.

Please source this comment that complexity necessarily decreases over time in all closed systems. It appears to be easily contradicted. For example, you can consider the human population of the earth to be a closed system. There are no other inhabited planets (or if there are, they aren't talking to us). Yet human knowledge not only increases, but the very pace of knowledge continues to increase. An isolationist state may have fewer trade opportunities than a state with active connections to other states, yet it can still have a robust and growing economy based on the domestic market. Rossami 23:21, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] closed systems does not exist in nature

In the strict sense of "closed" systems, their exist only when they are formal systems, because all "real systems" or "systems in nature" are open.

[edit] Definition

There doesn't seem to be much of a consistent defintion for a closed system. Some scientists define it as a system whose boundaries are impermeable to energy and mass cannot flow. Others (such as in the thermodynamics article) differentiate between closed systems and 'isolated systems' where the former applies only to mass flow and the latter applies to both matter and energy. And then there are definitions in systems theory and cybernetics, etc. which apply mainly to information flow. See also the definition closed ecological system. Methinks we should divide this article into subsections with different definitions. -Wiccan Quagga 07:35, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Excellent point above from Wiccan Quagga regarding definitions. User Rossami's fallacy (from the viewpoint of thermodynamics) is similar to a fallacy that creationists were using on engineering campuses in the early 80s. A law of thermodynamics was held to be invalid because a tree creates a seed which grows into a tree. Either the tree or seed must obviously and self evidently be more or less complex that the other and thus the entire concept of a closed system increasing in entropy or decreasing in complexity (organization) is obviously invalid. Notice how conveniently the argument disregards sunshine adding energy to this alleged "closed system" and the waste heat radiating at the rest of the universe (background temp. of 4 degrees kelvin compared to Earth Average of ... 50 degree C?? guarantees a net heat flux).

Likewise how can one consider a population of humans a "closed system"? A human enjoys sunshine and gets a tan while surfing. A telescope can be used to observe quasars and pulsars at the other end of the perceived universe. A president has a brain hemorhage, decides he is chosen by God, and launches both the VSE and an Iraqi War. One exports metal, energy, mass and information to the moon, mars and beyond while the other blots out designated anti american terrorists (along with professional patriots) on the other side of the planet. Meteorites rain down nutrients and chemicals from the sky while salmon carry phosperous uphill to North America's Northwestern forests.

If a definition of a "closed system" exists for ecology or sociology or information theory then it should be provided rather than alleged in general terms and labeled so the readers (and wikipedians) can avoid the Garbage In Garbage Out fallacies that various groups would like to propagate to confuse the rest of us.

[edit] practicabilities... ?

I think the following sentence is slightly... vague / non-understandable. I would edit it myself but I can't decide how it was meant - replacing "practicabilities" with "feasibilities" doesn't sound right, although it is a synonym:

"Sometimes the practicabilities of thermal isolation are discussed but never whether thermal isolation is completely achievable in principle."

Seems like it needs rewording. Fresheneesz 03:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] toll roads?

In my opinion, toll roads and closed systems just don't belong to one another. I think that the notion of a closed system in the context of thermodynamics is so important that it should be contained in its own page and closed system toll roads should occupy another. S.riccardelli 22:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)s.riccardelli

That section should just be moved to the Toll roads page. --George100 10:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Moved to Toll_road#Closed_system --George100 07:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WHEN?

When the hell did closed system start NOT meaning the same as an isolated system? Fresheneesz 21:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

In thermodynamics "Closed system" has always been different from an "isolated system". Ϙ 18:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clarifications

In physics, there is actually four, possibly five, different conceptual developments of closed systems concepts. The first began with reference to Newtonian mechanics, the second with nineteenth century thermodynamics, the third throughout the twentieth century with Lorentz, Einstein, and Minkowski, and finally with conceptual developments in quantum theory and wave mechanics. See Heisenberg (1999) Physics and Philosophy, New York: Prometheus Books, pp. 93-109. The third and fourth stages eventually led to more open systems concepts, but closed/open system concepts really need be considered in relation to work since that time if one were to define further conceptual developments. --Kenneth M Burke 01:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

(... See Talk:Open system (system theory) --Kenneth M Burke 16:30, 25 August 2007 (UTC))

This is a nice story about "the conceptual developments of closed systems concepts" in physics. I copied this text into the Physical system article. - Mdd 18:44, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Little blog

I moved the following comments from the article here. - Mdd 20:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Mrs. Rykse,Kenowa Hills Middle Science teacher is currently teaching us about this stuff. She said that closed systems have to do with something about science and energy. Also about friction and stuff liek this. We are also learning about energy which includes, potential, gravitational potential, kinetic energy, and other types of energy. Hope you enjoyed my little blog!!

Thanks, next time put your comments on a discussion page. - Mdd 20:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)