|
Not much wonder finding a gold nugget is so difficult, eh ?
If the aim of a scientific theory is to make predictions to certain degrees of accuracy, then it would seem that breaking components down and quantifying their state of 'measurables', such as entropy, in the case of gold ore formation, seems to not get us very far.
The idea of using entropy as a measure inside a given discrete system, where both reversibility and irreversibility are occurring, would seem to only push the problem onto defining the boundaries of where that system starts and finishes .. (eg in this case: is it within the dominion of the atoms, the nuggets, the ore deposit, the mountain, the region, the continent, the earth, the solar system, the galaxy ….).
Deciding upon which of the measurables within a system has the greatest sensitivity on the overall deposit outcomes, boils down to a bunch of decisions between the random and non-random ones. The number to choose from, could be enormous in a very complex system. When time is considered, the outcome seems to become even less certain.
Quantification of those variables if/when they change over time would seem to call for direct measurement of a given system, as opposed to models based on entropy/thermodynamics. But this approach would only lead to information about a given system, and would not necessarily be able to be extrapolated to another system even having the same critical measurables.
Cheers
|