|
Sent: Wednesday, March 19,
2003 9:40 PM
Hi Marcia,
Keep learning more
about the thermo, particularly since uncovering Michael Leyton's work.
So it's been learn, revise, learn, revise, etc. Dog labor in a way, but
making much progress. Here's a little summary.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy
cannot logically be equated to a change in form of energy! So physics
errs completely when it assumes both energy and work are in units of the
joule. Rigorously, energy is in joules, and work has to be in the
CHANGE OF FORM of joules of type one energy into joules of type two
energy. The two things --- joules and change of form of joules --- are
not the same thing at all. Adding "joules" and "change of form of
joules" into a sum and calling it joules is a non sequitur.
So we
have found appreciable errors in the present thermodynamics.
Fortunately, we have also run across the astounding work of Professor
Michael Leyton.
Here are
some rough but startling and revolutionary things that come out of my
initial review of Leyton's rigorous new group theoretic methods
establishing hierarchies of symmetry. In my opinion his work is going
to initiate the next great revolution in physics, almost certainly, as
profound as was the discovery of broken symmetry with Nobel Prize
awarded to Lee and Yang in 1957.
1.
With the Leyton effect, a
broken symmetry at one level now also GENERATES a new symmetry at the
next higher level, as well as "infolding" all the lower symmetries and
broken symmetries. The present group theoretic methods used since the
prediction and discovery of broken symmetry in 1957 generate only the
LOWER level symmetry. They do not generate a higher reordering and
higher symmetry. Hence the present symmetry theory wrongly excludes
nature's fundamental negative entropy mechanism, the direct generation
(from disorder at one level) of order at the next higher level. This
work by Leyton totally destroys the present second law of
thermodynamics, which of course has been falsified experimentally to
quite a significant degree already (to cubic micron in size, and for up
to two seconds in duration, based on statistical fluctuation alone). My
solution to the source charge problem (which Leyton's work beautifully
fits and GENERATES) also falsifies the second law totally, because it
includes the negentropy.
2.
This work by Leyton also
resolves the present greatest problem in all of thermodynamics: Its
asymmetry. In other words, for a century it has been severely puzzling
that, if entropy can only remain the same or increase in progressive
interactions, then how in the dickens did the entropy ever get so low in
the first place, to provide the initial order? In other words, if one
puts it bluntly, the presently accepted second law of thermodynamics is
an oxymoron, implicitly assuming its own contradiction has first
occurred to provide the initial controlled order that is supposed to
either remain the same or be progressively disordered and decontrolled.
Now for the very first time we have the answer, rigorously, with
rigorous group theoretic methods establishing it.
3.
This work by Leyton also
solves what is perhaps the greatest problem in modern physics today: the
problem that, with the uncovering of new broken symmetries, puzzlingly
there also do appear new symmetries at higher levels. As Weinberg
points out, this problem has been driving much of the particle physics
work for some years. There has previously been utterly no theoretical
justification for that appearance of new higher symmetry (a priori a
negative entropy operation of consuming positive entropy at the lower
level to form negative entropy and order at the higher level), since
negative entropy was prohibited except for short statistical
fluctuations as "temporary little flukes". Now there is a rigorous,
continuous process, guaranteed mathematically, repeatedly from one level
to another. So what is perhaps the greatest problem in particle physics
today is also solved by Michael Leyton's work.
4.
Note that D. K. Evans and
Rondoni were startled to find that a NESS (nonequilibrium steady state)
system theoretically could produce negative entropy, and this negative
entropy could increase more negatively toward negative infinity as time
passes. They were rather startled at such results, and felt that no
real physical system could exhibit such a Gibbs entropy. However, being
careful scientists, they also pointed out that "the problem remained"
for deterministic dissipative systems. I noticed that the source charge
is indeed such a dissipative system (emits observable photons in all
directions continuously), and the resulting macroscopic fields comprised
of those emitted photons are deterministic (ordered, hence a Leyton
effect has been evoked) as a function of radius, to any size level
desired and for any time duration desired. Hence that production of
negative entropy accomplished by every source charge completely destroys
the present second law of thermodynamics. I've already written the
formal resolution of the second law, by changing it so the new form is
consistent with experiment and known violations of the present second
law formulation. The new statement is also consistent with Leyton's
effect of hierarchies of symmetries, and in fact Leyton's work can be
taken to predict that revised form of the second law.
5.
I also found a flaw in the
first law. Presently the first law defines the change of magnitude of
an external parameter as work, and that is false for electrodynamics.
The change of MAGNITUDE of potential energy in a given form, is just
regauging and is freely permitted by gauge freedom. It is only the
change of FORM of the energy that constitutes work. So the present
first law is flawed, and it too must be revised --- as presently stated,
it specifically excludes gauge freedom, which exclusion is contradicted
by a vast part of physics, both theoretically and experimentally. So we
corrected that statement of the first law also. Energy and work CANNOT
be logically equated! Work is the change of form of energy, not energy
itself. There should never be a balance equation equating work to
energy, and the units should actually be different. Energy is in
joules, but work should be in CHANGE OF FORM OF INITIAL JOULES INPUT TO
THE WORK PROCESS OR MECHANISM. All thermodynamics is flawed by this
error, endemic throughout its entire structure. In an energy balance
equation, work terms should only appear so as to mark where and when the
FORM of energy is changed. A separate energy term should be used to
represent the energy in its new form after work has been done to change
it from its previous form. All balance should be done with energy terms
only, without any of the work terms being added, even if they are used
to show where energy form is changed. E.g., when energy is dissipated in
a load, it is true that energy form is changed and work is done.
However, the work has nothing at all to do with the ENERGY BALANCE.
When the work is done and the form of the input energy is thereby
changed, one still has all the energy remaining in its new "dissipated"
form. THAT is the term -- the remaining energy in different form --
that must be used instead of the work done, in any energy balance
equation.
6.
We also did a neat little
analysis on the old saw of forbidden perpetual motion, which usual
prohibition is just plain stupid. Newton's first law requires and
prescribes perpetual motion, once an entity is placed in any state of
motion (including rest or zero motion), until the moving entity is acted
on by an external force to change it. So perpetual motion is not only
not forbidden, it is REQUIRED for every object set in motion. Else all
mechanics and physics is destroyed. What is logically wrong is that the
usual statements then equate "perpetual motion" as being a system
performing work continuously, with zero energy input. That such a
latter "continuous working system with no energy input" is forbidden, is
quite true. But that has nothing to do with perpetual motion, for an
object in perpetual motion (say, a mass moving in an inertial frame)
requires no energy input and does no work at all. To equate the two
statements (work-free perpetual motion, and continuous working machine
without any energy input) is to commit a logical non sequitur. So the
standard stupid statements dealing with "dirty old forbidden perpetual
motion machines" advance a false premise, then a true statement, then
equate the two and assume that the true statement proves the false one!
I use Planck's statement as the perfect example of this. That is the
simplest logical error that could be made; it is inexplicable that more
than a century of thermodynamicists and physicists have just accepted
such nonsense and logical violation without simple logical analysis. A
machine that perpetually does work, e.g., but also perpetually
(continuously) receives the necessary energy (from whatever source,
including from the active environment), is jolly well permitted; we use
that principle every time we power up an electric motor or electrical
machine.
7.
Leyton's hierarchies of
symmetry now clearly show the procedure for electrodynamics, from start
to finish --- from the virtual particle flux of the vacuum to the
production of the fields and potentials to the conservation of energy in
the universe. Starting with the present virtual particle flux of the
vacuum and the source charge, one can directly show the prediction and
experimental emergence of those internested hierarchies of successfully
higher symmetries. In the latest work I've fiddled with on it, it
covers the waterfront from the virtual energy of the vacuum throughout
all intervening levels, to how the energy turns into observable energy
on the charge, is radiated from the charge (deterministic dissipation
process) to have deterministic ordered macroscopic fields and potentials
(external parameters of the source charge as a system), how these
"orderings" can then be dissipated (new broken symmetry at that level)
to generate useful work in engines and devices, and then --- and this is
shockingly new --- the automatic generation at the next higher level
(the entire observable universe) of a great new symmetry and ordering
--- and that is the conservation of energy law itself! Now realize that
if we posit that the universe came from something else, then there is
something outside the observable universe. In that "larger
superuniverse", then, there also is a symmetry generated by broken
symmetry in the observable universe. This allows the big bang (assuming
it happened), inflation, all sorts of things, while retaining balance
and conservation (and symmetry) in the superuniverse, yet creation and
expansion of the observable universe.
8.
The beautiful, beautiful
thing I realized is this: Leyton's effect means that the electrical
charge as a thermodynamic system GENERATES its own external parameters,
negentropically! Steam in a steam engine cannot do that, for it cannot
generate the cylinder of the steam cylinder, the boiler, the piping,
etc. But the photons emitted by the charge can and do form ordered
macroscopic EM fields and potentials, ordered as a function of radial
distance. Negentropy is now not a dirty word, but that half of the
thermodynamics process that the old guys left out, because the steam in
a steam engine does not generate its own external parameters (the
cylinder, boiler, etc. to bound it and establish ordering). In
electrodynamics, the fundamental system --- the source charge --- does
indeed GENERATE its own system external parameters --- the associated EM
fields, potentials, and joules of observable EM energy of the universe.
And that does not previously explicitly appear in thermodynamics and
physics anywhere, except for the odd and erroneous assumption in
electrodynamics that all EM fields and potentials and their energy are
somehow CREATED FROM NOTHING AT ALL by their associated source charges
(the long-vexing source charge problem, which I fundamentally solved in
1999 and published in 2000, but now have found rigorous support and
proof for, in Leyton's work.
9.
The energy conservation
law -- that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but it can be
changed in form -- should have shown us something long ago. Positive
entropy, being in effect a kind of "lost energy", can be changed in form
(else there can be no conservation of energy law at all). But the only
other form is negative entropy! So one can change entropy into negative
entropy, and negative entropy into positive entropy, and Leyton's work
clearly shows and proves exactly how that works, and the exact mechanism
by which it works.
10.
I believe Leyton's work is
the next great revolution in physics, equal to or even greater than the
discovery of broken symmetry in 1957. It "cinches" this business of
practical EM energy being available from the vacuum.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Y'all have a good one,
Tom
|