I propose to answer two questions:— (1) Is the Theory of Gases a true physical theory as valuable as any other physical theory? (2) What can we deman… - Ludwig Boltzmann

Let us now tum to the second matter in dispute between us [about the rejection of philosophy in virtually all senses]. That the majority of students don't understand philosophy doesn't bother me. But can any two people understand philosophical [i.e. metaphysical] questions [and agree upon what it is that they understand]? Is there any sense at all in breaking one's head over such questions? Shouldn't the irresistible pressure [Drang] to philosophize be compared with the nausea caused by migraine headaches? As if something could still struggle its strangled way out, even though nothing is actually there at all? My opinion about the high, majestic task of philosophy is to make things clear, in order to finally heal mankind from these terrible migraine headaches. Now, I am one who hopes not to make you angry by my forthrightness, but the first duty of philosophy as love of wisdom is complete frankness. Through my study of Schopenhauer, I am learning Greek ways of thinking again, but piecemeal.

Available energy is the main object at stake in the struggle for existence and the evolution of the world.

If this assumption were correct, our world would return more and more to ; but because the whole universe is so great, it might be probable that at some future time some other world might deviate as far from thermal equilibrium as our world does at present. Then the aforementioned H-curve would form a representation of what takes place in the universe. The summits of the curve would represent the worlds where visible motion and life exist.