In a recent article, Schmelzer and Tropin [Entropy 2018, 20, 103] presented a critique of several aspects of modern glass science, including various features of glass transition and relaxation, crystallization,… Click to show full abstract
In a recent article, Schmelzer and Tropin [Entropy 2018, 20, 103] presented a critique of several aspects of modern glass science, including various features of glass transition and relaxation, crystallization, and the definition of glass itself. We argue that these criticisms are at odds with well-accepted knowledge in the field from both theory and experiments. The objective of this short comment is to clarify several of these issues.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.