"I'm going to ask a favor of you."
"I surmise from your statements concerning the Laws of Thermodynamics, that we may have some issues here deriving from some idealistic hierarchy
between theoretical (pure) science and applied (practical) science."
Remember that practical science does not have nearly the information that theoretical science has, so practical science will not have nearly as many
possible explanations or results as theoretical.
"I would like to understand your comments concerning the thermodynamic laws. Just because they were derived via practical applications does not
diminish their worth, nor invalidate them (which pure science has not done to date)."
So what's your question exactly?
"I will state the context from whence I speak so that you understand my biases a little more, and then, if you don't mind, please state yours either
here or in u2u. I don't need details, just a "label"."
"I am an aerospace engineer, so YES I fall on the practical science side."
Good. A real world basis always brings interesting proof. So where's the question?
A note on high school physics programs for college:
High school physics teachers don't need that much physics. They need tons of classes on adolescent development, but not many on physics. The
primary concern of a teacher is that they can teach well and convey what information they know... that does not mean they always know all of the
information. I was correcting the math of my high school physics teacher before the semester was out. I still believe she was a great teacher, but
physics is a much deeper rabbit hole than what you see in high school.