• [deleted]

BrillouinEnergy's explanation for LENR posits an endothermic proton capturing an electron to form an ultra cold neuron when the system has 780kev available. PNNL supercomputer simulations agree this should happen. But a good quantum thermo theory could also help.

At least Occam's Razor selects that theory because it explains more of the known LENR effects than Widom-Larsen.

This sounds like a good Ph.D. project or a starter project, but why not go for the gold? Science desperately needs a microscopic decay of some sort.

"The systems we are building are getting smaller and smaller," says Oppenheim. Nanoscale devices, biological motors and quantum computers are just some of the tiny technologies we are trying to perfect. How does thermodynamics work on this quantum level? Oppenheim has recently been awarded an FQXi grant of over $60,000 to investigate."

"It turns out there are rules of thermodynamics for quantum systems," says Oppenheim. Rather than thinking of the second law as the notion that entropy always increases in a closed system, Oppenheim prefers to picture it as stating that the "free energy" always decreases."

"Explaining how thermodynamics works on the quantum scale is surely a key step in developing the technologies of tomorrow."

Thermodynamics is all about a reversible micro scale that ends up irreversible at the macro scale, a result of chaos. So, starting from the completely reversivle micro scale, you end up having to invent a new micro microscopic irreversibility, i.e. a free energy that is always decreasing, in order to get your nice microscopic machines to provide work between two atom reservoirs.

Are there such machines? How about the neural computer that we call our brain? Quantum computers should be coming. The squid coils of graivty Casmir effect should also show that slow decay. The scourge of photosynthesis has always been the large amount of free energy that nature wastes in getting the photon energy to point to the desired product.

A very slow matter decay over time would provide a nice free energy driver for getting these confused reversible micromachines to work in the right direction.

"It says the entropy (disorder) of a closed system always increases. "

Good. That qualification of "(disorder)" clarifies that this is not the real original entropy defined by Clausius. Clausius' entropy remains unexplained. The difference is important. Clausius' thermodynamic entropy does not increase in a closed system.

James Putnam

    Entropy Always Increases : Not Even Wrong

    The version of the second law of thermodynamics known as "Entropy always increases" (which, according to A. Eddington, holds "the supreme position among the laws of Nature") is actually a theorem deduced by Clausius in 1865:

    Jos Uffink, Bluff your Way in the Second Law of Thermodynamics, p. 37: "Hence we obtain: THE ENTROPY PRINCIPLE (Clausius' version) For every nicht umkehrbar [irreversible] process in an adiabatically isolated system which begins and ends in an equilibrium state, the entropy of the final state is greater than or equal to that of the initial state. For every umkehrbar [reversible] process in an adiabatical system, the entropy of the final state is equal to that of the initial state."

    Clausius' deduction was based on three postulates:

    Postulate 1 (implicit): The entropy is a state function.

    Postulate 2: Clausius' inequality (formula 10 on p. 33 in Uffink's paper) is correct.

    Postulate 3: Any irreversible process can be closed by a reversible process to become a cycle.

    All the three postulates are false or at least unjustified:

    Uffink, p.39: "A more important objection, it seems to me, is that Clausius bases his conclusion that the entropy increases in a nicht umkehrbar [irreversible] process on the assumption that such a process can be closed by an umkehrbar [reversible] process to become a cycle. This is essential for the definition of the entropy difference between the initial and final states. But the assumption is far from obvious for a system more complex than an ideal gas, or for states far from equilibrium, or for processes other than the simple exchange of heat and work. Thus, the generalisation to all transformations occurring in Nature is somewhat rash."

    If it were not for the falsehood of Postulate 1, "Entropy always increases" would be a wrong conclusion derived from false premises. The falsehood of Postulate 1 converts "Entropy always increases" into a statement that is "not even wrong".

    Pentcho Valev

    In my message above, I stated that Clausius' thermodynamic entropy remains unexplained. I meant unexplained officially by physicists. I have explained it here and other places. As I have previously stated here temperature is an artificially indefinable property. Theoretical physicists arbitrarily declared it to be indefinable and it remains an undefined property to this day except at my website. After I defined mass, the definition for temperature followed easily. One must know the definition of temperature, defined directly from its empirical evidence, in order to learn what Clausius' thermodynamic entropy is. This is important because his entropy is the original real entropy that truly does represent, mathematically, the second law of thermodynamics.

    James Putnam

    Of course even the best made quantum computers cannot actually transmute a piece of lead into a piece of gold. But even the cheapest quantum computer can produce every bit of information that has ever been mentioned about a piece of lead and a piece of gold within seconds.

    Joe Fisher

    25 days later
    • [deleted]

    Even without quantum mechanics, thermodynamic laws are incomplete. They do not explain relation between quantity of heat transferred and rise in temperature.

      a month later

      Hi dear anonymous,

      all is deterministic in fact and objective respecting the thermodynamic laws.

      Have you already thought about rotating quantum spheres and cosmological spheres and the universal sphere.

      Incomplete yes but ....

      Regards

      Steve

      6 months later

      Against the Second Law of Thermodynamics

      https://www.scientificexploration.org/edgescience/24

      Daniel P. Sheehan, Beyond the Second Law of Thermodynamics: "These culminated in 2012-13 with a series of laboratory experiments that showed true second law breakdown. The demonstration was straightforward. A small, closed, high- temperature cavity contained two metal catalysts (rhenium and tungsten), which were known to dissociate molecular hydro- gen (H2) to different degrees (Figure 1). (Rhenium dissociates hydrogen molecules into atoms better than tungsten does; conversely, tungsten recombines hydrogen atoms back into hydrogen molecules better than rhenium.) Because the dissociation reaction (H2 -> 2H) is endothermic (absorbs heat), and the recombination reaction (2H -> H2) is exothermic (liberates heat), when hydrogen was introduced into the cavity, the rhenium surfaces cooled (up to more than 125 K) relative to the tungsten (Figure 2). Because the hydrogen-metal reactions were ongoing in the sealed cavity, the rhenium stayed cooler than the tungsten indefinitely. This permanent temperature difference--this steady-state nonequilibrium--is expressly forbidden by the second law, not just because the system won't settle down to a single-temperature equilibrium, but because this steady-state temperature difference can, in principle, be used to drive a heat engine (or produce electricity) solely by converting heat back into work, which is a violation of one of the most fundamental statements of the second law (Kelvin- Planck formulation)."

      The second law of thermodynamics is almost obviously false for chemical systems. Consider the (valid) argument that, if catalysts can shift chemical equilibrium, the second law would be violated:

      https://www.boundless.com/chemistry/textbooks/boundless-chemistry-textbook/chemical-equilibrium-14/factors-that-affect-chemical-equilibrium-106/the-effect-of-a-catalyst-447-3459/

      "In the presence of a catalyst, both the forward and reverse reaction rates will speed up equally, thereby allowing the system to reach equilibrium faster. However, it is very important to keep in mind that the addition of a catalyst has no effect whatsoever on the final equilibrium position of the reaction. It simply gets it there faster. (...) To reiterate, catalysts do not affect the equilibrium state of a reaction. In the presence of a catalyst, the same amounts of reactants and products will be present at equilibrium as there would be in the uncatalyzed reaction. To state this in chemical terms, catalysts affect the kinetics, but not the thermodynamics, of a reaction. If the addition of catalysts could possibly alter the equilibrium state of the reaction, this would violate the second rule of thermodynamics..."

      It is evident that, for the dissociation-association reaction

      A B C,

      a catalyst cannot speed up both the forward and reverse reaction rates equally, due to the entirely different forward and reverse catalytic mechanisms. In the forward (dissociation) reaction, the catalyst should just meet and split A. In the reverse (association) reaction, the catalyst should first get together B and C, which, if the diffusion factor is predominant, could be highly improbable.

      Catalysts do shift chemical equilibrium, in violation of the second law of thermodynamics.

      I have started the same discussion (and it has developed in an interesting way) here:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL_iNGh8CNo

      Chemical Thermodynamics - Second Law / Entropy Review

      Pentcho Valev

        The dissociation-association reaction above is:

        A = B C

        A dissociates into B and C, and B and C recombine to give A.

        Pentcho Valev

        A perpetual motion machine of the second kind published in a prestigious journal and no reaction at all from the scientific community:

        http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/103/16/10.1063/1.4825269

        Electricity generated from ambient heat across a silicon surface, Guoan Tai, Zihan Xu, and Jinsong Liu, Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 163902 (2013): "We report generation of electricity from the limitless thermal motion of ions across a two-dimensional (2D) silicon (Si) surface at room temperature. (...) ...limitless ambient heat, which is universally present in the form of kinetic energy from molecular, particle, and ion sources, has not yet been reported to generate electricity. (...) This study provides insights into the development of self-charging technologies to harvest energy from ambient heat, and the power output is comparable to several environmental energy harvesting techniques such as ZnO nanogenerator, liquid and gas flow-induced electricity generation across carbon nanotube thin films and graphene, although this remains a challenge to the second law of thermodynamics..."

        There is some small reaction but only the technological effect is discussed, the violation of the second law of thermodynamics is not even mentioned:

        http://sciencequestionswithchris.wordpress.com/2013/10/17/could-electronic-devices-charge-themselves-without-being-plugged-in-to-an-electricity-source/

        "...electronic devices can charge their batteries through various methods without being plugged into a source of electricity. What all the different methods have in common is that they absorb energy that is in some other form (heat, light, vibrations, radio waves, etc.) from the external environment and then convert the energy into electrochemical energy that is stored in the device's batteries. (...) The ambient heat in the natural environment can be captured and converted to electricity. There are many ways to do this, but the basic concept is to funnel the random thermal motion of ions or electrons into a more ordered motion of charge, which constitutes an electrical current. This funneling is often accomplished by layering various materials with different thermal and electrical properties. For instance, the researchers Guoan Tai, Zihan Xu, and Jinsong Liu have recently demonstrated the conversion of heat to electricity using the ion layer that forms between silicon and a copper(II) chloride solution."

        Pentcho Valev

        " ... the violation of the second law of thermodynamics is not even mentioned:"

        How thoughtless of the authors not to mention something that exists only in your mind.

        Another perpetual motion machine of the second kind:

        Self-Charged Graphene Battery Harvests Electricity from Thermal Energy of the Environment, Zihan Xu et al: "Moreover, the thermal velocity of ions can be maintained by the external environment, which means it is unlimited. However, little study has been reported on converting the ionic thermal energy into electricity. Here we present a graphene device with asymmetric electrodes configuration to capture such ionic thermal energy and convert it into electricity. (...) To exclude the possibility of chemical reaction, we performed control experiments... (...) In conclusion, we could not find any evidences that support the opinion that the induced voltage came from chemical reaction. The mechanism for electricity generation by graphene in solution is a pure physical process..."

        No reaction from the scientific community, except that UCLA researchers present the discovery as their own:

        "...scientists in Hong Kong built a graphene battery that turns ambient heat into electric current. This technology was picked up by UCLA researchers who claimed this same discovery as their own, seen in the video below:

        The Super Supercapacitor"

        Pentcho Valev

          Hi Mr Valev,

          The perpetual motion is relevant.I amasking me if it is possible in space.In logic ,the gravitation and the perpetualmotion are linked, after all our quantum and cosmologicalspheres turn in a dance of perpetual motions in evolution of complexification due to bosonic encodings and gravitational.If we want.If we xant to check a kind ofartificial gravitation due to a rotation in space, so we can check th gravition Inside a kind of space ship in rotation.The rotaion and the gravitation are correlated.If we arrive to give the energy for this rotation in space, so we can check this gravitation in creating a kind of g in space.The rotation can be perpetual , only an energy at the beginning is necessary in fact.The perpetualmotion is everywhere in us, around us,above us, everywhere this gravitation is an universal equilibrium correlated with this graviation at all scales.The rotations, the sphères, the gravitation are foundamentals simply.This force can be checked withtherotating sphères.We can utilise the energy of gravitation like we utilise the electromagnetic and thermodynamical energy.It is just a different mechanicbut linked with these rotating sphères.The internatinal space station can be improved with the rotation implying this artificialgravity Inside the space ship .The microgravity and zero gravity are not relevant for our naturalequilibriums, biological mainly.Rotations, pressions, volumesbecome essential likeisessentialthe intrinsic biosphere for the autarcy of the system, composting adding to vegetal multiplication are essentials also and the recycling of water.The rotations can be utlised forthe energy also more other adds.

          "Graphene Converts Heat Into Electricity. The team--led by Prof Ian Kinloch, Prof Robert Freer, and Yue Lin--added a small amount of graphene to strontium titanium oxide. The resulting composite was able to convert heat that would otherwise be wasted into an electric current over a broad temperature range, beginning at room temperature."

          "Beginning at room temperature"? And no cold body to provide the temperature gradient? Then this is a violation of the second law of thermodynamics par excellence. The implication is that any writing based on the concept of entropy is not even wrong. Einstein's 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect is an example.

          Pentcho Valev

          a month later

          "Ultrasmall engines bend second law of thermodynamics (...) Over the last few decades, physicists have gradually explored heat flow at the quantum level, intrigued by the possibility of finding violations of thermodynamics' second law. So far, the second law has held strong."

          It hasn't. There are violations even at the macroscopic level, some published in prestigious journals. See my comments on the paper.

          Pentcho Valev

            a month later

            let's rebegin quietly .Show me your postulate against the second law.Prove us in live with the good settings, the good substitutatings.....show me the experiment with the détails where we see a violation of this law?You can even utilize the Riemann Zeta Functions with x=pi.Explain in an experiment where we have this viloation?With what kind of machine and experiment ?How are the Tools utilised for these experiments?Life is a reasult of evolution and the gravitation is a different force than with our standard model.So it is not a violation.

            In all thermodynamical process , general or local ,we shall have always this increasing entropy.It is logic.It is foundamental,at all scales being Under the special relativity and the standard model.If you said us that this second law is not violated but that we have a bridge in condensed matter near the planck scale and the zero absolute.There I can agree because this gravitation is a different force than our themo.But if you rest in the special relativity with bosons fermion, baryons and c , never you can have a violation.Furthermore I beleive strogly that even for this gravitation, we have an irreversibility considering the entropy.It is logic in fact.Carnot should agree and Boltzman also.