|
Sent: Wednesday, June 25,
2003 9:44 AM
Subject: RE: Question
Dear Professor S
For some time I've been working on two
papers: one on the mechanism for low energy nuclear reactions in
chemistry, and one on the thermodynamics of permissible COP>1.0
electrical power systems etc.
A true negative resistor will of course
produce negative entropy. So one confronts the second law of
thermodynamics. The Second Law would have us believe there can be no
such thing as negative resistance.
That is not true, but the answer is a
bit complicated.
The second law is based on statistical
mechanics, of course, since modern thermodynamics is based on it. As
such, it does not really apply to very small numbers of things. Also,
in the last decade or so the Second Law is under very heavy attack, and
violations are now being proven at increasing level. The latest work
[1] by Wang et al. has experimentally demonstrated violation of the
second law (production of negative entropy, with reactions running
backwards) in certain solutions at the cubic micron level for up to two
seconds. This is based totally on the transient fluctuations in the
reactions (and thus in their statistics) that occurs, and is based on
the rigorous transient fluctuation theorem by Evans and Searles [2] as
extended by Crooks [3].
In water, e.g., a cubic micron contains
some 30 billion ions and molecules. So formation of regions of 30
billion ions where reactions run backwards as shown by Wang et al., is
obviously a significant effect in chemistry.
It is also a significant effect in
other ways. In such a "reaction reversal zone", we argue that the law
of attraction and repulsion of charges is also reversed momentarily.
Thus momentarily like charges attract and unlike charges repel. This
suddenly has great import for nuclear reactions. It means that the
Coulomb barrier between like charges (e.g., between two deuterons in a
deuterated solution) is momentarily the Coulomb ATTRACTOR. So within
the normal Brownian motion the two deuterons can attract so closely
together that each enters significantly into the strong force region of
the other, forming a quasi-nucleus bound momentarily by the strong
forces.
In hot fusion reactions, the only
reason for use of high energy and high temperature is to forcibly drive
like charged particles together into each other's strong force regions,
forming a quasi-nucleus. From there, two reactions can occur. Many
(even most) such quasi-nuclei will simply fission apart again, without
any stable fusion nucleus being formed. Some, however, that are a
little deeper into each other's strong force region, will undergo an
energy balancing reaction (spit out a particle, emit a photon, flip a
quark, etc.) and then tighten (decay) into a stable fusion nucleus.
That is what hot fusion already tells us and has long since proven.
Once the quasi-nucleus stage is
reached, all need for high energy and high temperature ceases, even in
hot fusion. The reactions from there on proceed without regard to what
happened before formation of the quasi-nucleus.
Hence in the reversal zone, once a
quasi-nucleus is indeed formed by reversal of the Coulomb barrier to a
Coulomb attractor, there is no difference between that case and the
ordinary hot fusion case.
In other words, the formation of
reversal zones is a cogent and powerful argument that a real mechanism
exists for cold fusion after all, and Coulomb barrier inversion is the
mechanism enabling it (enabling a new low energy and low temperature
route to the formation of quasi-nuclei).
It's also a negative resistance effect,
since the Coulomb barrier is analogous to the back emf in a special
circuit. So the problem is for the "current" (the projectile particle
in motion) to move against the back emf (the Coulomb barrier). By
reversing the barrier itself into an attractor, to the external observer
it has become a true negative resistance situation, producing negative
entropy and temporary reversal of the law of attraction and repulsion of
charges.
The negative resistance (time reversal)
effect is also powerfully shown in the work of Shoulders [4], showing
persistent clusters of like charges under appropriate conditions.
This is the gist of that work I've been
doing.
The solution to the source charge
problem I advanced some time ago (2000), assumed that such reversal
zones occur, but at the time there was no powerful experimental evidence
of such available. Now there is, with the work of Wang and Evans et al.
Also, for the total proof of true
negative resistance, please be aware of Michael Leyton's work [5].
Particle physics has been largely proceeding (since 1872) on Felix
Klein's geometry [6] and on Klein's Erlanger project approach [7]. In
Klein geometry, a broken symmetry at one level reduces the overall group
symmetry and all information of the previous symmetry is lost. Leyton
[5] extended the geometry into a better, object-oriented geometry, and
originated extended and more powerful group theoretic methods, thus
uncovering the hierarchies of symmetry --- which can only be called the
"self-organizing universe", in my opinion. In Leyton geometry, a broken
symmetry at a given level generates a new symmetry at the next higher
level, with a layer that retains all the lower symmetry information. I
call this automatic generation of the next higher symmetry the Leyton
Effect.
Breaking symmetry at the new higher
level will in turn generate a still higher symmetry, etc. by the Leyton
Effect. So Leyton's hierarchies of symmetry now like the entire
universe together, from the virtual state flux (total disorder) to the
entire universe, and at all levels in between.
In my view, the Leyton effect is a true
negative entropy mechanism. Applied to the source charge, it matches
all the levels of my proposed solution [8] to the charge's production of
its ordered external EM fields and potentials, expanding across the
universe at light speed from the time of formation of the charge. Thus
the source charge steadily consumes positive entropy of the vacuum's
virtual state (i.e., absorbs virtual photons from the virtual photon gas
of the vacuum), converts these absorptions to unitarily increasing mass,
and when the mass-energy's virtual change has grown enough for an
observable photon, it decays to emit an observable photon. Thus the
source charge continuously emits real, observable photons in all
directions, forming and continuously replenishing its associated EM
fields and potentials at light speed, and yet it has no observable EM
energy input.
Note the true "Maxwell's Demon" used by
the source charge. By converting repetitive absorptions of disordered
EM energy (virtual photons) in the virtual state into virtual mass
increases of a unitary mass, coherent integration of the virtual mass
increases occurs -- and that is a true Maxwell's demon. When the
virtual (subquantal) increase in mass reaches the quantum level for a
photon, the excited mass-energy state decays by observable photon
emission. This effect thus really does coherently integrate random,
disordered energy in completely unusable (virtual) form, into energy in
completely usable (observable) form.
In the conventional EM model, it is of
course assumed that all EM potentials and fields come from their
respective source charges. But the implied assumption is that the
charge creates its fields and potentials (and their energy) right out of
nothing at all. This has been a problem for a century, but has just
been ignored in classical Maxwell-Heaviside EM and in electrical
engineering.
Now we know that the source charge is
actually a true negative resistor. It absorbs environmental energy in
peculiar form (disordered virtual photons), coherently integrates that
disordered energy into ordered mass-energy (a totally negative entropy
function of coherent integration of disorder into order), and re-emits
the absorbed energy as real observable ordered energy. Leyton's Effect
shows how the fields are ordered as a function of distance, etc.
Note that Leyton's hierarchies of
symmetry and the Leyton effect complete destroy the present statement of
the second law of entropy, which does not permit the production of
negative entropy. With the experimental proof by Wang, Evans et al.
that negative entropy is a significant effect in chemistry, and with the
experimental example of the ubiquitous source charge producing ordered
macroscopic fields and energy to any size level and time duration
desired, the present second law is dead.
Actually it has always been an
oxymoron, implicitly assuming that its own contradiction has first
occurred.
The Leyton effect and hierarchies of
symmetry also solve the vexing century-old temporal asymmetry problem of
thermodynamics.
So I corrected the second law and
proposed the following statement of it (hope to submit a paper to a
journal on it):
"First a negative entropy interaction
occurs to produce some controlled order. Then that initial controlled
order will either remain the same or be progressively disordered and
decontrolled by subject entropic interactions, unless additioinal
negative entropy interactions occur and intervene."
That statement is now consistent with
experiment and with theory.
Evans and Rondoni [9] showed that in
theory a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) system can produce negative
entropy continuously, so that the entropy decreases continuously and
negatively, toward negative infinity, as time passes. Startled at the
theoretical work, they felt that no physical system could exhibit such a
continuous negative entropy production. To the contrary, I've nominated
the source charge system, including its virtual state energy input and
its observable state energy output, as a true entropy-to-negentropy
converter, and the first physical system example of the NESS system type
shown by Evans and Rondoni.
Best wishes,
Tom Bearden
1. G.
M. Wang, E. M. Sevick, Emil Mittag, Debra J. Searles, and Denis J.
Evans, "Experimental Demonstration of Violations of the Second Law of
Thermodynamics for Small Systems and Short Time Scales," Phys. Rev.
Lett., 89(5), 29 July 2002, 050601
2. D.
J. Evans and D. J. Searles, "Equilibrium microstates which generate
second law violating steady states," Phys. Rev. E, Vol. 50, 1994,
p. 1645-1648
3. Gavin
E. Crooks, "Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the
nonequilibrium work relation for free energy differences," Phys. Rev.
E, Vol. 60, 1999, p. 2721-2726.
4. Kenneth R. Shoulders, U.S. Patent
#5,153,901; U.S. Patent # 5,018,180; U.S. Patent # 5,123,039; and U.S.
patents # 5,054,046; 5,054,047; 5,148,461. See also Kenneth R.
Shoulders and Steve Shoulders, "Observations on the Role of Charge
Clusters in Nuclear Cluster Reactions," J. New Energy 1(3), Fall 1996,
p. 111-121.
5.
Michael Leyton, A Generative Theory of
Shape, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001
6.
Felix Klein, "Vergleichende Betrachtungen
über neuere geometrische Forschungen." 1872.
7.
I. M. Yaglom, Felix Klein and
Sophus Lie: Evolution of the Idea of Symmetry in the Nineteenth Century,
Birkhäuser, Boston, MA, 1988
8.
T. E. Bearden, "Giant Negentropy from the
Common Dipole," Proceedings of Congress 2000, St. Petersburg,
Russia, Vol. 1, July 2000 , p. 86-98. Also published in Journal of
New Energy, 5(1), Summer 2000, p. 11-23. See also M.
W. Evans, T. E. Bearden, and A. Labounsky, "The Most General Form of the
Vector Potential in Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters,
15(3), June 2002, p. 245-261
9.
D. J. Evans and Lamberto
Rondoni, "Comments on the Entropy of Nonequilibrium Steady States,"
J. Stat. Phys., 109(3-4), Nov. 2002, p. 895-920.
|