re: #218 ludwigvanquixote

Well, alrighty then. I doubt you are suggesting that physics and chemistry progress exclusively as thought experiments. (Thermo is a bit of a different story.) We both know that empiricism plays a decisive role, throughout the scientific process.

If things are as you depict them, then you truly can’t blame folks for overlooking evidence. - You presuppose a “sufficient” grounding in physics and chemistry.

Thermodynamics presents a simpler issue: what knowledge of thermo is required to participate in the discussion? I’ve got an old copy of Lee and Sears right here in the room with me. I’d love an excuse to spend some quality time with it. What do I need to look at?