Rebuttal to Schmelzer and Tropin: Glass Transition, Crystallization of Glass-Forming Melts, and Entropy

TL;DR

This paper refutes an outdated critique of modern glass science, emphasizing the importance of current scientific understanding over antiquated philosophical views, and aims to clarify misconceptions for researchers and students.

Contribution

It provides a clear rebuttal to a flawed critique, reaffirming the validity of contemporary theories and experimental findings in glass physics.

Findings

Modern glass science is supported by recent theory and experiments.

The critique by Schmelzer and Tropin is based on outdated philosophy.

Clarifies misconceptions to prevent confusion among students.

Abstract

In a recent article, Schmelzer and Tropin [Entropy 20 [2] 103 (2018)] presented an unfounded, confusing critique of several aspects of modern glass science. Relying on pre-Socratic Greek philosophy and state-of-the-art scientific understanding from the 1920s-1930s, Schmelzer and Tropin propagate an antiquated view of glass physics that is at odds with well-accepted knowledge in the field from both theory and experiments conducted in the post-World War II era. The objective of this short letter is to elucidate and extinguish their critique. This rebuttal is directed to our colleagues and especially to students who might otherwise become confused.