Based on the provided sources, P.W. Atkins’ ideas on the physical nature of entropy fit into the collection as a prominent defense of the objective, physical interpretation of entropy—often articulated through concepts of “disorder” and “energy dispersal”—placing him in direct opposition to “informational” or “subjective” interpretations.
Here is a detailed breakdown of how his ideas fit with the rest of the collection:
1. Entropy as “Disorder” vs. “Information”
Atkins is frequently cited as a leading proponent of defining entropy as a measure of disorder or randomness[1][2].
• The Conflict: This stance places him in conflict with authors like Arieh Ben-Naim, who argue that entropy is identical to Shannon’s missing information. Ben-Naim criticizes Atkins for rejecting the information-theoretic definition. Atkins explicitly rejected the “information” label in his preface to The Second Law (1984), arguing that associating entropy with information risks making it appear “subjective” or “all in the mind”[3].
• The Irony: Ben-Naim counters that Atkins’ preferred terms—“disorder” and “disorganized”—are actually more subjective and vague than the precise mathematical definition of information[4][6]. Ben-Naim views Atkins’ rejection of information theory as a “corruption” that mystifies the concept of entropy[7].
2. Defense of Objectivity (Alignment with Denbigh)
Atkins aligns closely with K.G. and J.S. Denbigh, whose book Entropy in Relation to Incomplete Knowledge he reviewed favorably[8][9].
• Objective Property: Like the Denbighs, Atkins argues that entropy is a fully objective property of a physical system, independent of an observer’s knowledge[10][11]. He supports their effort to refute the idea that entropy is merely a measure of human ignorance (an “anthropomorphic” concept), a view famously held by E.T. Jaynes and G.N. Lewis[9][12].
• Rejection of Subjectivism: Atkins praises the Denbighs for “spiking the windmill” of subjectivism, maintaining that the “fog” of subjectivity should be dispelled from thermodynamics[10].
3. Evolution to “Energy Dispersal” (Alignment with Lambert & Leff)
While Atkins is famous for the “disorder” metaphor, the sources indicate his ideas align with the “energy dispersal” school of thought in his later works.
• Spring of Change: In Galileo’s Finger (2003), Atkins describes entropy as the “spring of change,” driven by the “purposeless collapse of energy and matter into disorder”[13][14].
• **Spreading:**Frank Lambert notes that Atkins, along with Harvey Leff, moved toward explaining entropy as the spreading and sharing of energy[15]. This connects Atkins to the pedagogical movement (represented by Leff and Lambert in this collection) that seeks to replace the confusing “disorder” metaphor with the more physically grounded concept of energy dispersal[16].
4. Entropy and Life
Atkins posits that the Second Law accounts for the emergence of the complex, ordered forms characteristic of life, describing organisms as “efflorescences” driven by the universal drift toward degradation[14][17].
• **Critique:**Ben-Naim aggressively dismisses these claims. He argues that Atkins’ promise to explain how the Second Law accounts for life remains unfulfilled and characterizes Atkins’ statements on the matter (e.g., that the Second Law “liberates the human spirit”) as “empty,” “ambiguous,” and “nonsense”[17].
• Support: Conversely, Robert Fleck cites Atkins extensively to illustrate the “bleakness” and “purposelessness” of a universe driven by entropy, yet acknowledges Atkins’ view that this same decay allows for the transient structure of life[21].
Summary of Relationships
| Perspective | Atkins’ Fit |
|---|---|
| Objectivists (Denbigh) | Ally: Atkins champions the view that entropy is an objective physical reality, not a mental construct. |
| Informationalists (Ben-Naim, Tribus) | Opponent: Atkins rejects the “entropy = information” identity to avoid subjectivism; Ben-Naim criticizes this rejection as the source of confusion. |
| Pedagogues (Lambert, Leff) | Convergent: Atkins’ later focus on “energy dispersal” and “spreading” supports their move away from static “disorder” metaphors. |
| Subjectivists (Jaynes) | Opponent: Atkins explicitly rejects the Jaynesian view that entropy is a measure of observer ignorance/uncertainty. |
References
[1] A Theory of Emergence and Entropy in System of Systems.pdf [2] Johnson - A Theory of Emergence and Entropy in Systems of Systems.pdf [3] Ben-Naim - Entropy and Information Theory - Uses and Misuses.pdf [4] [Book] Ben-Naim - A Farewell To Entropy Statistical Thermodynamics Based On Information.pdf [6] [Book] Ben-Naim - Entropy demystified the second law of thermodynamics reduced to plain common sense.pdf [7] [Book] Ben-Naim - A Farewell To Entropy Statistical Thermodynamics Based On Information.pdf [8] Atkins 1986 - Entropy in Relation to Complete Knowledge.pdf [9] Atkins 1986 - Entropy in Relation to Complete Knowledge.pdf [10] Atkins 1986 - Entropy in Relation to Complete Knowledge.pdf [11] Atkins 1986 - Entropy in Relation to Complete Knowledge.pdf [12] [Book] Tame - Approaches to Entropy.pdf [13] [Book] Fleck - Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics or why things tend to go wrong and seem to get worse.pdf [14] [Book] Fleck - Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics or why things tend to go wrong and seem to get worse.pdf [15] lambert2002 entropy is simple.pdf [16] lambert2002 entropy is simple.pdf [17] Ben Naim - Can entropy apply to living systems.pdf [21] [Book] Fleck - Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics or why things tend to go wrong and seem to get worse.pdf