What Entropy Is Not. ENTROPY; or Thermodynamics from an Engineer's Stand Point, and The Reversibility Of Thermodynamics. -By James Swinburne Reviewed by Prof. Sidney A. Reeve. This little book is the outcome of an earnest discussion upon the topic of entropy and the principles of thermodynamics, which appeared in the London engineering periodicals of the winter of 1902-3. This discussion was precipitated by some remarks upon entropy made by Mr. Swinburne in his address, as President, before the British Institute of Electrical Engineers, in December, 1902. It afterwards led to the publication by him of a serial article beginning in the London "Engineering" of August 28th, 1903, of which papers the present volume is an elaboration. It is the work of an engineer, not of a mathematical physicist. It is popular in its diction, and simple in its manner of presentation. It aims to present the subject of entropy in keeping with its treatment by the highest authorities, and yet in such simple guise as to rob it of its mystery. This is an aim much to be commended. The usefulness of the entropy-diagram in actual engineering work has grown to be such that the live engineer earnestly wishes to know just what entropy is. The need for just such a volume is indeed quite ripe. Appreciation of this need, too, and of the importance of Mr. Swinburne's errand, is apparent in the style of presentation; the paper, typography and binding of the book are excellent, the price is small, and all conditions favor, therefore, the success of his literary and educational enterprise. It is only when question is raised as to the validity of Mr. Swinburne's teachings that the value of the volume becomes questionable. He is orthodox, but is he true to nature? His statements need examination. His opening line is this: "It may be well to begin by stating that I have no peculiar theories as regards entropy, and that I am merely trying to explain...." Yet six pages later, at his real entry upon his topic, he says: "In order to get a clear idea as to what entropy is, it is best to begin by stating clearly what it is not. It is not any form of energy, nor a quantity of the dimensions of energy. It is not heat-weight. It is not equal by the substance. The temperature-entropy diagram is not a heat-diagram at all." It is not to the point at present to say that almost every one of these statements may be sweepingly denied, though your reviewer does not hesitate in denying them. It is to the point, however, to note that a writer who places such dogmatic blanket assertions as these in his premises, without support, certainly has notions of entropy which are not only preconceived, but which are different from those of other eminent men, and which should be presented as conclusions, not as premises. Mr. Swinburne's own idea of entropy is hard to determine. He opens his argument thus: "Energy is indestructible; but it exists in many forms, such as potential, kinetic, electric, magnetic energy on the one hand, and heat upon the other. All of these, except heat, are interchangeable.... All can be changed into heat; but heat can only be partly changed into the other forms.... The term 'dissipation of energy is generally used to denote degradation of work (including all other forms of energy there with) into heat.... -Engineering News, Volume 51