>The way we deal with notions of open and closed in thermodynamics is
>quite clear and unambiguous. Three types of system are possible:
>1) isolated: enclosed by a "skin" through which matter and energy can
>not pass: such systems must go to thermodynamic equilibrium.
>2) closed: enclosed by a skin through which energy may pass but matter
>may not: these systems are therefore able to maintain steady states
>away from equilibrium as long as matter can be recycled through cycles
within
>3) open: both energy and matter can flow through. anything goes as
>long as the first and second laws are obeyed.
>
>I suggest very strongly that we do not loose sight of these
>definitions, since they are so widely (I'd say universally) accepted.
>>
Your #1 is a theoretical construct used for measurement approximations. It
is more commonly called "closed".
Your #2 and #3 are both open systems. Prigogine would probably call your #2
(with the appropriate organization) a dissipative structure.