"Art Unwin" wrote in message
...
To be frank,, most of this group have asked for a definition of the
term equilibrium,

and which you have never supplied, despite your claim that it has to be
satified for everything.

this despite the fact that there is no law of
physics in this universe that does not expect the condition of
equilibrium as a a given for the validity of any law with respect to
our universe.

which laws specifically require equilibrium? any law that talks about
energy transfer, which is most of them, require non-equilibrium. energy can
not flow where everything is in equilibrium, by definition! oh, but wait,
you have not supplied that definition yet, so you must have a different
definition in which energy can flow despite equilibrium... lets hear it art,
that is worthy of a Nobel prize for sure!

This is in addition to all suppliers of technical
information to Maxwell to condense into a smaller number, all
specifically stated that the information given were valid ONLY under
the conditions of equilibrium

Give quotes. i want to see in the original writings where Gauss, Ampere,
Coulomb, Ohm, Lorentz, etc all require some kind of equilibrium. Come on
art, you claim to be above all of us who have studied such things for years,
and yet you can not define even your most basic condition that you keep
ranting about.

So your homework assignment is to in one equation do this: Define
Equilibrium.