Why don't we have a Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics section

  • Thread starter Prathyush
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the potential addition of a Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics subforum on a physics forum. While the importance and breadth of the topic are acknowledged, some argue that adding a subforum may not necessarily increase traffic and could even have a negative impact. Others suggest that the topic could be posted in existing subforums, such as Classical Physics or Atomic and Condensed Matter, depending on the specific focus of the question.
  • #1
Prathyush
212
16
I was wondering why there is no Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics section. I understand there is some overlap with Atomic and Condensed matter Physics, but I think topic is sufficiently broad to attract its own category.

It should be a container for topics including Non-Equilibrium thermodynamics, physics of thermalization, and other formal developments in the subject of statistical mechanics.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Subforums are created to channel existing traffic, not in hope they will attract traffic. It never works.

Even then sometimes adding a subforum ends in the traffic on the subject dying instead of growing.
 
  • #3
In my opinion Statistical Mechanics and thermodynamics is one of the pillars of modern physics. I am not suggesting a sub forum to grow traffic but because of the importance, breath and depth of the topic.
 
  • #4
Prathyush said:
I am not suggesting a sub forum to grow traffic but because of the importance, breath and depth of the topic.

But that's even worse. You're saying you aren't arguing for this because it will help the forum run better. You're saying the forum should be reorganized even if doesn't make it run better because the present arrangement doesn't match your idea of relative importance (even though PF isn't organized in terms of importance).
 
  • #5
Vanadium 50 said:
But that's even worse. You're saying you aren't arguing for this because it will help the forum run better. You're saying the forum should be reorganized even if doesn't make it run better because the present arrangement doesn't match your idea of relative importance (even though PF isn't organized in terms of importance).

While I think the forum is better organized, if you add this(or equivalent) subcategory. I am indeed only suggesting it only because of how important and foundational I think the topic is. However I will not insist as this is a very old forum with its own nuanced rules and I am a relatively rare visitor.
 
  • #6
Inactive forums are bad. People don't check them because there is rarely something happening, reducing the number of answers, and making them even less active.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link, russ_watters and Greg Bernhardt
  • #7
In the current absence of a Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics subforum, a member could choose to post in either the Classical Physics subforum or the Atomic and Condensed Matter subforum.
 
  • #8
symbolipoint said:
In the current absence of a Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics subforum, a member could choose to post in either the Classical Physics subforum or the Atomic and Condensed Matter subforum.
Unless there is a very important component related to atomic or condensed matter physics, it should be posted in Classical Physics, or Chemistry if it relates to physical chemistry. For homework questions, we usually accept them in the physics HH, chemistry HH, and engineering HH forums.
 

Related to Why don't we have a Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics section

1. Why is there no Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics section in science?

Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics are relatively new fields of study that have emerged from the intersection of physics and theology. As such, they are not yet widely recognized or accepted as mainstream scientific disciplines.

2. Is Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics a legitimate branch of science?

While there is ongoing debate about the validity and relevance of Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics, many scientists consider it to be a legitimate field of study. It combines principles from both physics and theology to explore the relationship between the physical world and spiritual beliefs.

3. How does Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics differ from traditional physics?

Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics differ from traditional physics in that they incorporate theological concepts and beliefs into the study of physical phenomena. This can include exploring the role of divine intervention in natural processes or examining the spiritual implications of physical laws.

4. Are there any notable scientists or researchers in Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics?

Yes, there are several notable scientists who have made contributions to Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics. Some of these include John Polkinghorne, Frank J. Tipler, and Bernard d'Espagnat. However, the field is still relatively small and there are not as many prominent figures as in other branches of science.

5. Will Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics ever become a mainstream field of study?

It is difficult to predict the future of any scientific field, but it is possible that Theomodynamics and Statistical Mechanics could gain more recognition and acceptance in the future. As our understanding of the universe and spirituality continues to evolve, there may be more interest and funding for research in this area.

Similar threads

  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
781
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
1
Views
543
Replies
3
Views
911
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
6
Views
873
Back
Top