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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Prathyush
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the absence of a dedicated Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics section in the forum, despite the topic's significance in modern physics. Participants argue that while there is overlap with Atomic and Condensed Matter Physics, the breadth and depth of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics warrant their own category. Concerns are raised about the potential for a new subforum to become inactive, which could discourage user engagement. The current structure allows users to post relevant topics in either Classical Physics or Atomic and Condensed Matter subforums. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the importance of organizing the forum to reflect foundational topics in physics.
Prathyush
Messages
211
Reaction score
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
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.
 
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.
 
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).
 
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.
 
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
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.
 
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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K