Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!brahms!weemba
From: weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Matthew P. Wiener)
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Thermodynamics / Statistical Physics
Message-ID: <12736@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Fri, 28-Mar-86 04:01:57 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12736
Posted: Fri Mar 28 04:01:57 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Mar-86 00:58:46 EST
References: <12662@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <541@umich.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: weemba@brahms.UUCP (Matthew P. Wiener)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 11
Xref: watmath net.physics:4000 net.philosophy:4740

In article <541@umich.UUCP> torek@zippy.UUCP (Paul V. Torek ) writes:
>Heat is too the same thing as its microphysical realization, and it was
>even 200 years ago.  What are different are our *ideas* of temperature and
>mean kinetic energy.  Pardon my naive realism, but the idea of a thing
>and the thing itself are different.

No one denied that heat and td-heat (the microphysical realization of heat)
are the same thing.  Indeed I said as much in my article.  What is unclear
is whether 'heat' and 'td-heat' *mean* the same thing.

ucbvax!brahms!weemba	Matthew P Wiener/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720