Science topic
Statistical Physics - Science topic
Explore the latest questions and answers in Statistical Physics, and find Statistical Physics experts.
Questions related to Statistical Physics
Scientists conceal discrepancies between the second law of thermodynamics and experiments, using sound speed measurement as an example.Scientists don't need to make themselves like mice just for the sake of the second law of thermodynamics.Below is a specific explanation.
1，According to the second law of thermodynamics, the relationship between the second VIRIAL COEFFICIENT βa of sound velocity and the second VIRIAL COEFFICIENT B of the equation of state can be obtained.
βa=2B+2*(r-1)dB/dT*T+(r-1)2/r*T2*d2B/dT2（1）
2，Scientists obtain βa，r by using resonance method to measure the speed of sound (which is relatively accurate)
3, Through formula (1), scientists obtain Bth. Normal scientists should compare Bth and Btest, but all such papers avoid this comparison.
4,Scientists used statistical mechanics to deduce the relationship between molecular interactions from Bth, and thus achieved great success. Scientists are very foolish and have never considered whether Bth is correct.
5，Scientists compare Bth and Btest privately, and if they match, they have already published it. Because it does not comply, publishing it would offend believers of the second law of thermodynamics.
6，Scientists do not need to conceal facts and boldly disclose the degree of agreement between formula (1) theory and experiment.
7，Scientists conceal discrepancies between the second law of thermodynamics and experiments, using sound speed measurement as an example.Scientists don't need to make themselves like mice just for the sake of the second law of thermodynamics.
Scientists believe that entropy is the direction that governs thermal motion, erasing the dominant role of classical physical science (determinism, entropy reduction).
1. Linear electromagnetic oscillator (LC circuit, CO2 molecule, H2O molecule): Energy storage and conversion have frequency characteristics. This depends on classical physical science, which to some extent governs the direction of thermal motion.
2. The spatial distribution of linear electromagnetic oscillators can be artificially arranged (in the technical field), affecting the spatial and temperature distribution of thermal energy (generating temperature differences), which violates the second and zero laws of thermodynamics.
3. Scientists believe that entropy is the direction that governs thermal motion, erasing the dominant role of classical physical science (determinism, entropy reduction).
4.See image for details
5.Mechanical oscillators can also generate temperature differences and entropy reductions, please refer to the link for details
There is no equilibrium state in an isolated system, and the second and 0th laws of thermodynamics fail.
2. Nonequilibrium fluctuation test
The helium and carbon dioxide in the container are mainly carbon dioxide in the lower part of the container, and are near its critical point, so the fluctuation energy of the gas is large. The upper half of the container is mainly composed of helium, which is a conventional gas. The fluctuation energy is small. The fluctuation energy of the lower part will be transferred to the upper part, which will destroy the thermodynamic equilibrium probability distribution of the upper and lower parts of the container. The average internal energy of the lower gas is converted into fluctuation energy, while the fluctuation energy of the upper gas is converted into average internal energy, resulting in an increase in the temperature of the upper helium and a decrease in the temperature of the lower carbon dioxide. The thermal equilibrium cannot exist, and the 0th law and the 2nd law of thermodynamics fail at the same time.
IAPS84: High precision equation of state for water vapor, with a deviation rate of 15-20% for specific heat and sound speed obtained according to the second law of thermodynamics
Notes:（See image for details）
1. Deviation rate between water vapor thermal properties table IAPS84 and experiment
2. The accuracy of the state equation is very high, with specific heat and sound velocity obtained according to the second law of thermodynamics (Formula 1) ranging from 15% to 20%.
3. In Formula 1, "dP/dT * T" is the contribution of the second law of thermodynamics, which separates the "dP/dT * T" in sound velocity and specific heat and estimates a deviation rate of 40-50% through experimental comparison.
4. The water vapor thermal properties table IAPWS97 has made great progress, which is due to the combination of data.
Notes:
A： Figure 1 is from the authoritative book "The Properties of Gases and Liquids", and the enthalpy change H1 is calculated from the equation of state. From Figure 1A, it can be seen that the accuracy of the state equation is high, but the deviation rate of enthalpy change derived is large. The theoretical basis for the derivation is the differential equation of the second law of thermodynamics.
B， Plot the deviation rate of the state equation (<1%) and enthalpy change deviation rate (as shown in Figure 2), without considering two outliers, and calculate the deviation rate in a regular pattern. The fitted line intersects with the y-axis at point C (0,0.146), and the calculated deviation rate of the differential equation of the second law of thermodynamics is 14.6%.
IAPWS95 uses the second law of thermodynamics (η=1-T1/T2) to calculate the specific heat of water vapor, with theoretical and experimental deviations of 5-15%.
NOTES：
1. The figure above is IAPWS95's calculation of the specific heat of water under high pressure and the experimental deviation rate of 5-15%.
2, the proportion of specific heat determined by the second law of thermodynamics is not large, and the actual deviation rate of the second law of thermodynamics is much larger than 5-15%.
3, at high pressure, the second law of thermodynamics does not hold, and it does not hold at low pressure. The reason "η=1-T1/T2" includes only the temperature (molecular kinetic energy) and does not take into account the potential energy of the molecular interaction.
4，Scientists have long known that using the second law of thermodynamics (η=1-T1/T2) to calculate the thermal properties of working media does not agree with experiments. They favour and protect the second law of thermodynamics, damaging the reputation of the scientific community.
The second law of thermodynamics fears experimental verification under extreme conditions, while relativity welcomes it.
Extreme conditions often validate the correctness of physical theories, while general relativity favors black holes, neutron stars, and large-scale experimental data in the universe. All of these prove the correctness of general relativity, and quantum mechanics is no exception.
The second law of thermodynamics favors simple, non quantitative empirical phenomena. Diffusion, heat conduction, frictional heat generation, rolling dice. High pressure, critical point, low-temperature thermal properties, the second law of thermodynamics, and experiments do not comply. Scientists find many reasons: due to fluctuations, uncertainty, hydrogen bonding, and biased data fitting. Science has developed for hundreds of years, and the technical problems of measurement and data processing have long been solved.
3. Compare the second law of thermodynamics with general relativity. The second law of thermodynamics requires theoretical and experimental agreement under any extreme conditions for this theory to hold true.
It is assumed, quite surprisingly, that the transition matrix models of quantum mechanics are the projection of those of classical statistical physics!
2D QM models can be the projection of 3D classical statistical physics models (Hypercubes) and similarly, 1D QM models can be the projection of 2D classical statistical physics models [1,2].
Ultimately, a strong relationship between classical physics and quantum physics is found.
1- RG, Cairo Techniques Solution of Schrödinger's partial differential equation - Time dependence, March 2024.
2- ANDREI KHRENNIKOV, Endophysics, Time, Quantum and Subjective, pp. 389-407 (2005),
TO QUANTUM MECHANICS BY PROJECTION OF CLASSICAL STATISTICAL MECHANICS ONTO PRESPACE
This is a serious question that has never been answered before.
Cairo Statistical Theory of Techniques shows a rigorous way to combine classical and quantum physics!
Below we prove beyond doubt how any classical energy density (such as EM energy density, gravitational energy density, etc.) evolves spontaneously and inevitably towards an initial quantum steady state.
By quantum steady state here we mean a stationary solution at ψ^2 (ψ^2=ψ. ψ*) rather than ψ itself and in a secondary step, ψ can be found as the SQRT of the solution.
Note that the quantum vector V1 is the projection of the initial unit space of the energy density situation of classical physics which means,
V1 is a 3D spatial state quantum vector for a classical physical situation of 4D energy density.
V1 is a 1D spatial state quantum vector for a classical 2D initial physical situation, as shown in the presented figures.
Here, the starting conditions of the classical physics situation are:
Infinite free space that has neither BC nor source term.
The classic system is contained within a closed control volume with a classic inward-pointing tangle.
For more clarity, we can compare the formation and explosion of the numerous Big Bangs which are subject to the same physical process.
In the following, we present the correct answer to this question through two illustrative examples A (3D geometric shape) and B (2D geometric shape) [1].
1-Example (A) 3D-Cube discretized into 27 equidistant free nodes as shown in fig.1.
Fig,1-Cube discretized into 27 equidistant free nodes as shown in fig.1.
The statistical theory of Cairo techniques defines the transition matrix B of classical physics (27x27) for the control volume.
B(27x27) for RO=0 (RO=0 means free space) is given by,
.0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 1/6 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0 1/6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 0 0 0 0 1/6 0 1/6 0
And the time-independent stationary transfer matrix D(N) for a sufficiently large time N (N is the number of iterations or time jumps dt not to be confused with n the number of free nodes) is given by:
D(N)={1/(I-B) -I}
The numerical values for the inputs of D(N) are,
. . . . . . . . . . . .Line1- 0.11217139924042430 0.39097856453321000 4.6769216489284893E-2 0.39109945997946949 9.3594337527814389E-2 2.8917725571791415E-2 4.6825121038529496E-2 2.8936273137263536E-2 1.1071538930203321E-2Lin2- 0.39245121669051708 9.3427323090059911E-2 2.8815705697913047E-2 9.4099292136797519E-2 5.7873202288345083E-2 2.2118458029200764E-2 2.9057496590432032E-2 2.2174362578445368E-2 1.0013027641488021E-2
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
The matrix D(N) when multiplied by any classical energy density state GT zero will yield the quantum stationary state vector V1 as given below,Line14- 5.9522930308185402E-2 0.11488249791384746 5.7197832143438897E-2 0.11653613666887269 0.45840470771955916 0.11532751395682590 5.8069610117386164E-2 0.11560704495552804 5.7678086265005757E-20.12615384982071848 0.45295668203854378 0.11322885915882226 0.46218312607510498 0.28858852722237699 0.45753292974561188 0.11653613666887269 0.45840470771955916 0.115327513956825900.12138552253472995 7.5702048174876219E-2 5.0296486271624162E-2 0.12615384982071848 0.45295668203854378 0.11322885915882226 5.9522930308185402E-2 0.11488249791384747 5.7197832143438897E-2Etc . . .“To be completed with a double symmetry”
V1=[27/272 37/272 27/272 37/272 25/136 37/272 27/272 37/272 27/272 37/272 25/136 37/272 25/136 67/272 25/136 37/272 25/136 37/272 27/272 37/272 27/272 37/272 25/136 37/272 27/272 37/272 27/272}^T
Note again that:
1- Any classical physical system of energy density contained in free space will evolve towards the quantum state vector provided it is contained in a closed control volume and driven inwards towards the center of mass CM (midpoint MP)
2-From this state it evolves towards another vector depending on the applied external potential V(x,y,z,t) included in the Schrödinger equation (central potential field, finite or infinite potential well, etc.).
3- The quantum vector V1 is the projection of the initial unit space of the energy density situation of classical physics which means,
V1 is a 3D spatial state quantum vector for a classical physical situation of 4D energy density.
V1 is a 1D spatial state quantum vector for a classical 2D initial physical situation, as shown in the presented figures.
1-Useless Math -The Complex Untold Story
- International Journal of Innovative Science and
Research Technology ,
- October 2024
- DOI:
- 10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24OCT1091
Water is at the triple point, and the working fluid includes water, ice, and water vapor. The system volume remains unchanged, maintaining energy exchange with the large heat source while keeping the temperature constant. The equilibrium state has the following equation:
mg+ml+ms=m0
mg/ρg+ml/ρl+ms/ρs=V
There are two equations, three unknown variables,, and an infinite number of equilibrium solutions in a system. The three-phase distribution of matter cannot be determined, and thermodynamics requires that the equilibrium state of a system be unique, which is inconsistent with physical facts. The thermodynamic direction advocated by the second law of thermodynamics will also be lost, such as volume expansion, which cannot determine whether it is the evaporation of liquid water or the transformation of ice into water vapor.
This happened in the teaching practice of the second law of thermodynamics, where they taught students that Carnot efficiency is independent of the working fluid, and that there are physical concepts that can be separated from physical entities. The following is a specific analysis:
Thermal engine system: pistons, containers (geometric boundaries), heat sources (energy boundaries), etc. are all centered around the working fluid, and calculating thermal power conversion is studying the working fluid. The Carnot efficiency is independent of the working fluid, and is detached from physical entities, becoming a concept suspended in the air.
2. This one is wrong, the entire second law of thermodynamics is incorrect.
3. Entropy is the logical successor of Carnot's law and cannot be used to justify it here.
4. Carnot efficiency is reversible thermodynamics and irreversibility cannot be used to justify it here.
The working fluid is the core of the heat engine, and the Carnot efficiency is independent of the working fluid (core). Do you believe in the second law of thermodynamics?
Conclusion of the 2nd law of thermodynamics is that the Carnot efficiency of carbon dioxide, water vapor, liquid water, solid water... is 1-T2/T1. Do you believe it?
- The calculation results of the first and second laws of thermodynamics are different.
- The calculation method of the second law of thermodynamics involves data piecing together, resulting in a compromise between theory and experiment. It is believed to cause differences between the two, and this method is widely adopted.
- If the second law of thermodynamics does not use the piecing together method, its deviation from the experiment will be exposed. This patchwork method is meant to conceal this deviation. It is a shameful behavior.
According to the logic of the second law of thermodynamics, it can be inferred that a person's grades are not related to their intelligence. Do you believe it? The specific derivation is as follows
1. Carnot efficiency (thermal engine function) is independent of the working fluid (thermal engine soul).
2. The function of a heat engine is not related to its soul.
3. Analogous to humans, it can be concluded that a person's academic performance is not related to their intelligence.
4，Do you still believe that Carnot efficiency (thermal engine function) has nothing to do with the working fluid (thermal engine soul).?Is this a low IQ perception?
- The calculation results of the first and second laws of thermodynamics are different.
- The calculation method of the second law of thermodynamics involves data piecing together, resulting in a compromise between theory and experiment. It is believed to cause differences between the two, and this method is widely adopted.
- If the second law of thermodynamics does not use the piecing together method, its deviation from the experiment will be exposed. This patchwork method is meant to conceal this deviation. It is a shameful behavior.
- The second law of thermodynamics creates mathematical paradoxes by substituting formulas in mathematical calculations.
- The second law of thermodynamics can only study the temperature of the heat source and cannot study the working fluid. Please refer to the attached diagram for details
Compared to other scientific laws, the second law of thermodynamics lacks effective "quantitative" experimental support.
- Energy dissipation, directional, without effective “quantitative experimental output”, cannot effectively support the second law of thermodynamics. See image for details
- The second law of thermodynamics is just an empirical illusion, not a natural science.
- Science follows rules and procedures
“actual decomposition voltage < reversible decomposition voltage” indicates an error in the 2nd law of thermodynamics.Please refer to the attached diagram for details.
I hope everyone respects the experiment
C.N.Yang vs Carnot: mathematical symmetry extension vs super empirical fantasy
By comparison, help everyone break free from the empirical quagmire of the second law of thermodynamics. See the picture for details.
The first law of thermodynamics replaces the second law of thermodynamics.Please refer to the attached diagram for details
The second law of thermodynamics switches formulas surreptitiously in mathematical calculations.
For details, see the attached figure.
Abstract: There is heat exchange between two real gases at the same temperature. According to the first law of thermodynamics, the temperature changes of V1 and V2 in adiabatic cycles are not equal to 0. When the temperature change of the cycle is less than 0, thermal work conversion is achieved. Set a single heat source and restore the initial temperature T0 of the system. This is the second type of perpetual motion machine.
Please refer to the attached diagram for details
The foolish logic of the second law of thermodynamics (Kelvin's argument): I am against the second type of perpetual motion machine, so I am right. Please refer to the attached diagram for details.
The second law of thermodynamics: η=1-T1/T2 is only a physical 0-order approximation.(Interaction is castrated) as shown in the picture
The 2nd law of thermodynamics is a conjecture about the efficiency of a heat engine that deviates from reality and has become witchcraft.
Comparing the first and second laws of thermodynamics when studying heat engines, you will find that the second law of thermodynamics is purely speculative.See the picture for details.
- The second law of thermodynamics states that the thermodynamic entropy of an isolated system (dQ=0, ds=dQ/T=0) is constant. Statistics S=k * In (W), is it an increase?
- The second law of thermodynamics ： statistical entropy（S=k*In(W)） of an isolated system increases, while thermodynamic entropy(ds=dQ/T) remains constant.
- Thermodynamic entropy (ds=dQ/T) is not equivalent to statistical entropy {S=k * In (W)}
E - has spatiotemporal continuity, S - is statistical and does not have spatiotemporal continuity. Is it correct to write E = F + S*T together?
The second law of thermodynamics is statistical.S - is statistical and does not have spatiotemporal continuity.
It's hard to imagine a concept that exists outside of time and space.
- The term 'f=ma' in the figure refers to classical physics, electromagnetics, relativity, and quantum mechanics
- Thermodynamics and statistical physics are the results of "f = ma",
- "f = ma" supports the second type of perpetual motion machine.
- The opposition of thermodynamics to the second type of perpetual motion machine is not in line with logic.
- For details, please refer to the picture.
The second law of thermodynamics, including Carnot's law, is self-contradictory. For details, please refer to the picture. France is inviting scientists from all over the world to commemorate this self-contradictory theory. Isn't it funny and ironic?
One more Carnot's celebration: https://carnot-legacy.sciencesconf.org/
The colloquim, focusing on modern thermodynamics, will take place on the week following Carnot Lille 2024, which follows a more historical focus on Sadi Carnot and his publication.
The blackbody cavity contains CO2, and the blackbody radiation contains the characteristic spectrum of CO2, which does not satisfy the Planck formula.
- There is CO2 inside the blackbody cavity, and radiation enters from point A with an absorption rate of 1,meets the definition of blackbody.
- The energy density of the characteristic spectrum of CO2 inside the cavity will increase, and the outward radiation density will no longer be Smooth Planck's formula: a characteristic spectrum containing CO2.
- The emissivity is no longer equal to 1, and varies with different filling gases.
- Blackbodies with different emissivities emit heat from each other, resulting in temperature differences and the failure of the second law of thermodynamics.
- See image for details
Radiation perpetual motion machine: uses radiation pressure to do work and consume heat energy. ---Radiation is remote energy transfer. See image for details
- Two identical small buckets are arranged symmetrically, with openings facing each other. The radiation rate at the bottom of the bucket is ε=1, and the rest is ε=0.
- The two bottoms radiate energy and absorb radiation:q=εσT^4*S.
- The force acting on the small bucket is: F=2εσT^4*S/C.
- The speed of the small bucket increases, the kinetic energy increases, and the temperature decreases.
- There is no limitation of the second law of thermodynamics for thermal conversion, and the second law of thermodynamics is invalid.
- As shown in the figure: Use a transparent solid to separate 3mol/L and 1mol/L of CO2, allowing the gases to radiate each other.
- Radiation energy is transferred from container A (3mol/L) to container B (1mol/L).
- Temperature: Tb>Ta
- Scientists love to use thermal diffusion and heat transfer to explain the second law of thermodynamics, which is the result of short-range interactions. Radiation is a long-range interaction that reaches the macroscopic scale, making it easy for people to control the direction of energy transfer.
- Solid or liquid (doping) can also be used to artificially create asymmetric radiation and control the direction of energy transfer.
Scientists have abandoned experimental proof of η=1-T1/T2 and instead used experimental data to piece together η=1-T1/T2. Shameful! Please refer to the attached diagram for details:
1) Method A in the figure is a method for verifying Carnot efficiency, which scientists rarely use because the experiment deviates significantly from theoretical predictions.
2) Scientists extensively use method B in the figure, which does not involve theoretical predictions, but instead uses experiments to gather theory. This is shameful, it's data fraud. The enthalpy entropy charts we use are all pieced together using method B.
3) Scientists explain why method A is not necessary. It's because the experiment is not good, which is deceiving. Science has developed for hundreds of years, and even more rare experiments can be conducted.
4) The core is that scientists are unwilling to admit that the second law of thermodynamics is inconsistent with experiments, but this violates scientific discipline and morality.
The picture is a screenshot of the literature: 1. It illustrates the Crabelon equation derived from the second law of thermodynamics: the calculated heat of vaporization does not match the experiment.
The more precise the experiment, the more obvious the inconsistency between the second law of thermodynamics and the experiment.
3. Why would this happen? The second law of thermodynamics violates symmetry and conservation (which is the mainstream of natural science).
4，Some scientists are packaging the experimental deviations of these theories, and the data in the enthalpy entropy chart that everyone sees is completely consistent with the second law of thermodynamics, which is a deceptive illusion.
1，The image comes from the scientific classic "the propeties of Gases and Liquids"
The picture is a screenshot of the literature: 1. It illustrates the Crabelon equation derived from the second law of thermodynamics: the calculated heat of vaporization does not match the experiment.
2，The more precise the experiment, the more obvious the inconsistency between the second law of thermodynamics and the experiment.
3，Even in the face of such facts, scientists still confidently persist.
4，The second law of thermodynamics does not conform to experiments, and scientists use it to make money is a scam.
The actual decomposition voltage is less than the reversible decomposition voltage, which violates the second law of thermodynamics.
1）Experiments show that there exists an actual decomposition voltage which is less than the reversible decomposition voltage. ==》
2）The change of Gibbs free energy is related to the path.==》
3）The cyclic integral of entropy is not zero.==》
4）The second law of thermodynamics becomes invalid.
5） Scientists can only pretend to be deaf and dumb to such a fact.
Please see the picture for details.
The second law of thermodynamics contradicts itself. Scientists are also addicted to the surface of experience.
Galileo's introduction of Aristotle's theory of falling is contradictory, and Aristotle's theory of falling is ineffective.
Consider a regular tetrahedron with the correlation functions for empty, point, pair, triplet and tetrahedron being u0, u1, u2, u3 and u4. Let the corresponding cluster interactions being e0, e1, e2, e3 and e4. Take the multiplicities of the clusters be m0, m1, m2, m3 and m4. Using cluster expansion, the energy of the system can be expressed as
H1= e0 m0 u0+ e1 m1 u1 + e2 m2 u2+ e3 m3 u3 + e4 m4 u4.
For the same system, the internal energy can be expressed in terms of cluster energies as:
H2= EAAAA yAAAA + 4 EAAAB yAAAB + 6 EAABB yAABB + 4 EABBB yABBB + EBBBB yBBBB.
In the above expression Eijkl and yijkl represent the cluster energies and the cluster variables respectively.
Based on the relation between the correlations ui and the clyster variables yi, both the expressions can be made equal and the relation between the ei and Eijkl can be obtained.
Based on whether the multiplicity of the tetrahedron cluster is considered or not in H2, the relation between the ei and Eijkl gets altered and thereby the related thermodynamic properties and its derived properties.
Should the multiplicity be considered in H2 or not?
The Maxwell demon utilizes temperature fluctuations to achieve a perpetual motion machine, independent of information theory.
Please refer to the attached diagram and the following text for details.
1，The Maxwell demon measures the instantaneous temperature fluctuations of a and b on both sides of the switch.
2，When Ta>Tb, the switch is turned on. Heat is transferred from a to b
When Ta<Tb, the switch is turned off. a&b Insulation.
3，Finally, the temperature difference in the container: TA<TB
4，The Maxwell demon is unrelated to information theory and satisfies Newton's laws and energy conservation.
5，Fluctuations themselves violate the second law of thermodynamics. Maxwell's demon utilizes the defect of the second law of thermodynamics.
Abstract: There are gases in the container: N0, NO2, CO, CO2, O2. Since O2 can participate in two chemical reactions at the same time, five related equations can be generated. After simplification, a one variable nine degree equation will be obtained, which will have multiple equilibrium solutions. The second law of thermodynamics requires that the equilibrium state is unique, and the system will be in a non-equilibrium chemical state.
See image for details
Gas radiation intensity is a function of space: I=I (r). This is recognized in the textbook of heat transfer. Pushing forward two more steps will result in a temperature difference (this is the second type of perpetual motion machine). Please refer to the picture for details.
The second type of perpetual motion machine for gas radiation is the simplest, easy to implement, and commercialized. The wealth generated by the second type of perpetual motion machine can satisfy everyone's desires.
The current war of Russian aggression against Ukraine is trending towards a third world war. If scientists accept the second type of perpetual motion machine, they will find that the things being fought for in the war are no longer scarce, and the war will come to an end. I hope scientists can play their role.
Gas diffuses into vacuum, dQ=0, thermodynamic entropy dS=dQ/T=0. The second law of thermodynamics cannot be calculated.Please refer to the attached diagram for details。
"Ds=dQ/T" is defined as a reversible process that can be used, but an irreversible process that cannot be used. This violates the universality and consistency of natural science.
Heat transfer (gas radiation) does not support the second law of thermodynamics.
Please refer to the following text and pictures for details
Gas radiation and absorption occur throughout space, and gases at different locations absorb energy differently from remote radiation. The different amount of radiation absorbed by gases at different positions can lead to temperature differences. The second law of thermodynamics is invalid.
Do scientists have to wait until nuclear war breaks out to believe in the existence of perpetual motion machines?
Gas radiation has no thermal equilibrium, and the second law of thermodynamics is invalid. The following pictures are all from the content of heat transfer and university physics, combined together, it is found that the second law of thermodynamics is invalid.
Please refer to the picture for details.
Three formulas can explain that gas radiation cannot reach thermal equilibrium, and the second law of thermodynamics is incorrect.
The second law of thermodynamics states that the number of equations is greater than the number of variables. They mutually constrain each other.
See image for details
Photon non conservation leads to the transfer of heat from low temperature to high temperature without consuming external energy.
- Non conservation of particles leads to the failure of the second law of thermodynamics.
- Does non conservation of particles require an energy cost? No need.
- These particles are photons.
- Photon non conservation is a content of quantum mechanics, can the second law of thermodynamics outperform quantum mechanics?
- Please refer to the pictures and the following text for details。
************************
pictures
************************
Container A contains 2mol/L of CO2, while container B contains 1mol/L of CO2.
The photon density at point A is greater than that at point B.
Radiation energy ranges from A to B.
Photons are generated at point A and annihilated at point B.
B to A can also reflux energy through thermal conduction.
This forms an energy cycle, with a temperature difference and no need for external energy consumption.
The second law of thermodynamics should not apply the experience of pig farming to cattle farming.
- Animal Legend: The experience of pig farming mutated and transplanted to cattle farming, achieving success.Scientists interview breeders. “Pigs and cows are both domestic animal and mammals, so they can.” "Human beings are also mammals, can they?" "No, it's against dignity."
- The Legend of the Second Law of Thermodynamics: The transfer of empirical variations in dynamics to Carnot engines (thermodynamics) resulted in self contradiction, but gained widespread recognition.See image for details
- This analogy tells scientists not to misuse experience.
Scientists have abandoned testing the correctness of Carnot efficiency (1-T1/T2) (Method A), instead of using theory to aggregate experimental data and achieve a compromise between theory and experiment (Method B).
If scientists rigorously tested the Carnot efficiency, the second law of thermodynamics would have been over long ago.
The second law of thermodynamics contradicts itself, and scientists are still foolishly worshipping entropy. Please refer to the pictures and the following text for details.
1. The second law of thermodynamics states that Carnot efficiency is independent of the thermal properties of the working fluid.
2. Later, it can be inferred that the Carnot efficiency is related to the thermophysical properties of the working fluid.
3, 1, and 2 contradict each other.
4. Thermophysical properties of working fluid: E=E (V, T), P=P (V, T).
5. Aristotle proposed the theory of falling bodies, Galileo pointed out its contradiction, and Aristotle's theory was overturned.
6.The second law of thermodynamics contradicts itself, and scientists are still foolishly worshipping entropy
The second law of thermodynamics contradicts itself
The second law of thermodynamics recognized by scientists now contradicts itself, as shown in the picture:
1. The second law of thermodynamics states that Carnot efficiency is independent of the thermal properties of the working fluid.
2. Later, it can be inferred that the Carnot efficiency is related to the thermophysical properties of the working fluid.
3, 1, and 2 contradict each other.
4. Thermophysical properties of working fluid: E=E (V, T), P=P (V, T).
5. Aristotle proposed the theory of falling bodies, Galileo pointed out its contradiction, and Aristotle's theory was overturned.
Scientists are spreading and researching contradictory theories every day, and their mood is still very happy.
In one sentence, the second type of perpetual motion machine in science popularization radiation:
The radiation intensity of low-density gases is directly proportional to their density. Radiating gases with different densities can create a temperature difference: high density leads to low temperature. Low density, high temperature. The second law of thermodynamics is invalid.
Below are further text, simulation images, and literature links.
1. This setting includes radiation experience: when the gas density is low, the radiation intensity is proportional to the density, and the absorption coefficient is inversely proportional to the density (the smaller the absorption coefficient, the stronger the absorption capacity)----- Domain 1 gas density=1, Domain 2 gas density=2.
2. Radiation generates a temperature difference of 2.1 ℃, rendering the second law of thermodynamics invalid.
3. This transposition can be connected in series to generate stronger heating and cooling capabilities, with low cost, and can be industrialized and commercialized.
More detailed literature links.
A black body composed of small holes, with glass inside the holes to separate gases with different radiation differences (such as CO2 of different concentrations or gases of different types). Allowing two gases to radiate each other can result in a temperature difference of 0.93K: gases with strong radiation have lower temperatures, which contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. Please refer to the simulation image for details.
It is easy to think of conducting experiments to verify this simulation, leaving the specifics for readers to consider.
Radiation cooling or heating does not consume any work. We welcome guidance from thermal scientists and engineers.
This is a radiation simulation case using COMSOL, which satisfies empirical laws and energy conservation. See image for details
1. This setting includes radiation experience: when the gas density is small, the radiation intensity is proportional to the density, and the absorption coefficient is inversely proportional to the density (the smaller the absorption coefficient, the stronger the absorption capacity)----- Domain 1 gas density=1, Domain 2 gas density=2.,
2. Radiation generates a temperature difference of 2.1 ℃, rendering the second law of thermodynamics invalid.
3. This transposition can be connected in series to generate stronger heating and cooling capabilities, with low cost, and can be industrialized and commercialized.
4. This article also includes an analysis of the imbalance in calculating radiation. Welcome to read.
- The thermal radiation balance between CO2 with different concentrations can be tested using the experimental setup shown in the figure, or using gases with stronger radiation capabilities (artificially set concentration differences).
- The radiation intensity of CO2 with a concentration of 1mol is lower than that of 2mol, and the direction of radiation energy transfer is from right to left.
- Observe the differences between T1 and T2 in the experiment, as well as the differences.,
- This experiment can verify whether the second law of thermodynamics is effective for radiation, with low cost and significant significance.
Radiation is joking with the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and scientists have been tricked. Below is a comparative description.
A--Output of the second law of thermodynamics
B--The experimental performance of radiation.
1A, Second Law of Thermodynamics: Heat cannot spontaneously transfer from low to high temperatures.
1B, thermal radiation: Low temperatures can radiate to high temperatures, while high temperatures can radiate to low temperatures.
2A, scientists bet on the heat transferred by radiation: q (T1_to_T2)>q (T2_to_T1), where T1>T2
2B, actual intensity of thermal radiation:
q (T1_to_T2)=q (T1, n1); Q (T2_to_T1)=q (T2, n2)
n1, n2- Number of internal radiation structures of heat sources 1,2. Specific examples: 1 is helium, 2 is CO2, and n1 will be less than n2 In this case,
q(T1_to T2)<q (T2_to T1) where T1>T2
3A,Scientists from the 17th to 18th centuries believed that knowledge like 2A could be forgiven.
3B, scientists in the 21st century still believe in knowledge like 2A, which would be a bit foolish.
4B, see simulation case (image) for details
Radiation cooling or heating does not consume any work. We welcome guidance from thermal scientists and engineers.
This is a radiation simulation case using COMSOL, which satisfies empirical laws and energy conservation. See image for details
1. This setting includes radiation experience: when the gas density is small, the radiation intensity is proportional to the density, and the absorption coefficient is inversely proportional to the density (the smaller the absorption coefficient, the stronger the absorption capacity)----- Domain 1 gas density=1, Domain 2 gas density=2.,
2. Radiation generates a temperature difference of 2.1 ℃, rendering the second law of thermodynamics invalid.
3. This transposition can be connected in series to generate stronger heating and cooling capabilities, with low cost, and can be industrialized and commercialized.
4。This article also includes an analysis of the imbalance in calculating radiation. Welcome to read.
Calculating the specific heat of a simple liquid by the number of elastic oscillators.
Calculate the specific heat of a simple liquid using the number of elastic oscillators
Each liquid molecule has an average of 8 elastic oscillators around it, and the specific heat contributed by the elastic energy is 4R。Therefore, near the three phase points, the specific heat at constant pressure of a single atomic liquid is 5.5R, and the specific heat at constant pressure of a diatomic liquid is 6.5R. Low temperature liquids such as Ar, Kr, Xe, O2, N2, F2, etc. conform to this conclusion.
Please read the following link for details
It is easier for scientists engaged in nuclear fusion to switch careers to permanent motion, so it is recommended to switch careers.
- The three formulas in the figure are the dynamic basis of this perpetual motion machine.
- The only difficulty is charge binding: the diffusion process of charges from A to B requires a constrained electric or magnetic field. The difficulty of this constraint is relatively small compared to nuclear fusion, and it is easy for them to switch to making perpetual motion machines. Suggest transitioning to nuclear fusion and engaging in perpetual motion machines.
- Although some progress has been made in nuclear fusion, there are still many technical challenges and high costs.
- There are various ways to implement perpetual motion machines, not limited to this model.
- The correctness of scientific laws depends on quantitative prediction and experimental compliance, rather than relying on life experience and engineering experience.
- The two major expressions of the second law of thermodynamics are life experience and engineering experience. The core quantitative prediction is η= 1-T1/T2. The verification method is Method A in the figure (with quantitative prediction), but scientists extensively use Method B (without law prediction), indicating that seeking equilibrium in theory and experiment is actually cheating: concealing the inconsistency between the second law of thermodynamics and experiment. This violates scientific discipline and morality.
- Scientists possess a large amount of data, and if they used Method A (which is in line with scientific discipline and ethics), the Second Law of Thermodynamics would have been shattered long ago.
Comparison:
1）The first law of thermodynamics calculates the Carnot efficiency；
2）the second law of thermodynamics predicts: η= 1-T1/T2.
Method:
1）The first law: P=P (V, T), E=E (V, T) DE=Q-W==>η，Efficiency needs to be calculated and determined.
2）Second Law: Anti perpetual motion machine, guessing==>1-T1/T2.
Effect:
1）The first law: E, P, W, Q ，η of the cyclic process can be obtained,
2）Second Law: Only efficiency can be obtained：η= 1-T1/T2.
- The uniqueness of natural science requires scientists to make choices.
- The second law of thermodynamics can only yield a single conclusion: η= 1-T1/T2（Meaningless--- lacking support from E, P, W, Q results.）Like an island in the ocean.
- In the figure, one gas is an ideal gas (dE1/dV1=0) and the other is a real gas (dE2/dV2 is not equal to 0), which can achieve heat transfer from low temperature to high temperature without consuming external energy. This is the second type of perpetual motion machine.
- Real gas (dE/dV not equal to 0). This is the simplest middle school physics knowledge.Middle school physics knowledge can defeat the second law of thermodynamics. Isn't this very funny?
- This field will produce Nobel Prizes, welcome to join.
Quantum computers have not led to an increase in information entropy. The information theory of the second law of thermodynamics is deceptive.
Quantum computers have not led to an increase in information entropy. The information theory of the second law of thermodynamics is deceptive.
- A perpetual motion machine is a concept of engineering and outcome. It plays a small role in the first law of thermodynamics, but in the second law of thermodynamics, perpetual motion machines have become the starting point of theory, greatly improving their status. When comparing the two, it can be found that the logic of the second law of thermodynamics is filled with experiential themes, lacking rational logic, and is a loss of the rational spirit of scientists.
- In practice, scientists extensively use method B in the figure to try to find a balance between theory and experiment. This kind of thing was originally invisible, but scientists treated it as a treasure. It's quite ironic.
- Originally a trial of the second law of thermodynamics, it has become a trial of scientists. I believe there will be a response from scientists.
- η=η (T) =1-T1/T2 (excluding volume). E (V, T), P (V, T) contains volume, using η (T) Calculating E (V, T), P (V, T) does not match the experiment. This is in line with mathematical logic. The specific scientific calculations have changed their flavor. Please refer to the following figure for details
- η=η (T) =1-T1/T2 is about the ideal gas formula.
Discontinuity (artificially) of The Thermophysical Properties of NIST affects the second law of thermodynamics：
1) Scientists create Type 2 perpetual motion machines;
2) Scientists have discovered new laws of phase transition.
3) Scientists don't need to create a bunch of fake things for the second law of thermodynamics.
Heat is transferred from low Temp. to high Temp. without consuming external energy. Compared to nuclear fusion, it is simple and easier to gain energy.
Combining the pictures to see the logical flaws and deviations from the experiment of the second law of thermodynamics.
1，Please take a look at the picture: Compared to the first law of thermodynamics, the second law of thermodynamics is a pseudoscience: Perpetual motion machine is a result and engineering concept, which cannot be used as the starting point of theory (the second law)
2，In the second picture, the second law of thermodynamics was misused by scientists, indicating that this theory does not match the experiment.
3，The above two explanations indicate that the second type of perpetual motion machine exists. If you're not satisfied, you can read my other discussions or articles.
4，With the second type of perpetual motion machine, the energy and environmental crisis has been lifted. By using the electricity generated by perpetual motion machines to desalinate seawater, the Sahara desert will become fertile land, and there will be no food crisis. War and Poverty Will Move Away from Humanity
You should ask scientists why they are not generous enough to use method a and instead use fraudulent method b
These operations are catching up with the Korean superconductivity incident. The problem is very serious, and scientists are completely unaware.
Discontinuity (artificially) of The Thermophysical Properties of NIST affects the second law of thermodynamics：
1) Scientists create Type 2 perpetual motion machines;
2) Scientists have discovered new laws of phase transition.
3) Scientists don't need to create a bunch of fake things for the second law of thermodynamics.
See picture for details
The second law of thermodynamics, no matter how powerful, must follow the laws of logic.
Discontinuity (artificially) of The Thermophysical Properties of NIST affects the second law of thermodynamics：
1) Scientists create Type 2 perpetual motion machines;
2) Scientists have discovered new laws of phase transition.
3) Scientists don't need to create a bunch of fake things for the second law of thermodynamics.
This discussion addresses an important issue related to gases, which are known to be one of the fourth states of matter (gases, liquids, solids, and plasmas).
We learn from high school the ideal gas of equation of state, where particles are considered point particles, non-interacting, and massless (sometimes).
Even though using that simple model, many nontrivial questions that help to understand more complicated models can be answered for all Statistics, from the classical Gibbs and Maxwell Boltzmann distributions that obey Gaussian curves, where even degeneracy can be taken to be part of the exercise; to the more complicated Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics; where quantum effects are unavoidable, even if the gas is considered a free gas of electrons, or bosons non-interacting quasiparticles.
But what happens when the expansion terms are higher than for a simple gas and interactions are taken into account?
"What classical and/or effects survive from the ideal gas model and what has to be modified?" arises.
The question can be addressed for statistical equilibrium thermodynamics but also can be part of non-equilibrium statistical thermodynamics.
This science popularization thread will discuss some issues, as well as, some historical points in the development of this interesting subject, which belongs to exact and applied sciences as is the real gases issue.
Some new and old references cover some applied and theoretical aspects that will be addressed here. They are:
- "Statistical Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach" by John W. Daily. Cambridge University Press, 2019.
- "Thermodynamics Statistical Physics and Kinetics" by Yuri Rumer, and M.S. Ryvkin. Central Books LTD, 1981.
These two papers opposing the second law of thermodynamics received "recommendations" from 10 scholars. Welcome to read.
If you think it's good, give me a "recommendation" as well.
The original manuscript of this article is to answer some questions asked by Zhihu users, here added the second half of the content into the original manuscript, one for sharing, and the other to keep some views written casually, so as not to be lost, it may be useful in the future.
To talk about this problem under the topic of physics is because thermodynamics describes collective behavior and involves all levels. As far as the current situation of thermodynamics is concerned, classical thermodynamics + chemical thermodynamics seems more systematic, but it is not complete.
In comparison, thermodynamics is not as exquisite and rigorous as other theoretical systems of physics, the physical images of many concepts such as entropy, enthalpy and other thermodynamic potentials now are still unclear, and the mathematical transformations, from the perspective of physical meaning, cannot plainly shown what physical contents are transformed, the physical images of many derivatives, differentials, and equations are unclear, for instance, those derivatives, differentials cannot even distinguish between energy transfer and energy conversion.
The way classical thermodynamics is thought is also different from other systems of physics, the "subdivision" of the internal energy is not in place. We all know that the internal energy is the sum of different forms of energy within a given system, since there have different forms, then it should be classified, no, that's a pile. The description method is to see how much comes out through the heat transfer path, how much can come out through the work path, and calculate a total changes, the unique definitions are the parts that can be released in the form of work, called the thermodynamic potentials, when the path changed, one don't know whether they still are.
There is no even a basic classification of the internal energy, how to discuss the conversion between different forms of energy?
For example, a spontaneous chemical reaction, G decreases, S increases, but from the perspective of energy conversion, the answer by a professor of chemistry may not be as good as a liberal arts student who have studied a little in high school and forget most of it, the latter will most likely say that it is chemical energy converted into heat energy, although the terms are not professional, but the meaning of energy conversion is clear. The professors of chemistry know that G decreased, but they don't know what this decreased G turns into, there is no a complete narrative about energy conversion.
In the entire thermodynamic theoretical system, you can hardly find such a sensation, such as delicate, rigorous, physical image clarity, similar to that in the other theoretical systems of physics, and the appeasement philosophy is all over the place.
Statistical physics cannot independently establish equations for the relationships between thermodynamic state functions, relies on thermodynamics in the theoretical system, which also inherited the problems from thermodynamic theory. Statistical physics itself also brings more problems, for instance, statistical physics cannot explain such a process, an ideal gas does work to compress a spring, the internal energy of the ideal gas is converted into the elastic potential energy of the spring. If such simple, realistic problem cannot be explained, what are the use your statistical ensemble, phase spaces, the Poincaré recurrence theorem, mathematical transformations?
The thermodynamic direction maybe currently the last big chance in theoretical physics that can be verified or falsified, because it doesn't face the difficulties in other directions: you can write some dizzying mathematical equations, but maybe a century from now you don't know whether it's right or wrong.
Thermodynamics is the most grand theoretical system in the entire scientific system, a scientific system on natural evolution, although it is not yet complete, and has not yet risen to the level of fundamental theory, which provides a grand narrative of natural evolution, running through all levels.
Newton laws, Maxwell equations, Schrödinger equation, Hamiltonian dynamics, etc., for thermodynamics, that is only one law: the first law of thermodynamics, the law reveals the conservation of energy and conversion relationships of collective behavior at all levels and in all processes, the direction of change that the second law of thermodynamics described now has not been found in the dynamics of physics, will there be? there are some clues but not certain, because there is no corresponding theoretical framework.
The popular view of physicists on the conflict between time inversion symmetry of the fundamental process of dynamics and the second law is all wrong, the errors are: 1, confused the relationship between the fundamental laws, the theme that those dynamical equations discussed is the relation of conservation of energy, which correspond to the first law of thermodynamics, and the time inversion for the first law of thermodynamics is also symmetrical. 2, The symmetry of an equation and the symmetry of a phenomenon are two different concepts, the time inversion symmetry of the energy conservation equation only shows that energy conserve in past, present, and future, it does not explain whether the phenomenon itself is symmetrical in time inversion, the problem that the fundamental dynamic processes themselves are reversible or irreversible cannot be discussed by the equation of conservation of energy.
Have you noticed? in department of chemistry, one have to face the problem of time inversion asymmetry every day, and they also have dynamics, the chemical dynamics of time inversion asymmetry.
On the problem of irreversibility, those seemingly delicate, rigorous, time-inverse symmetrical physical systems are completely powerless, statistical physics is somewhat useful, such as explaining the diffusion phenomenon, calculating the number of collisions, its effective range has been limited by its theoretical postulates, the postulate of an equal probability determines that it is only valid for describing the processes tending to an equal probability distributions. In the framework of statistical physics, there is only one driving force of "change", tending to an equal probability distributions, the question is, the driving forces of "changes" in the real world around us are not only this one.
The second law of thermodynamics indicates that there are two different "dynamics": the physics of time inversion symmetry shows people a world without evolution, and the chemical dynamics of time inversion asymmetry shows us the different situations, whether the latter has universal sense at other levels is still unknown. From astrophysics to macroscopic, at least to the elementary particles level, all observed and confirmed results without exception strongly support the existence for the dynamics which are time inversion asymmetry, will it point to a final ending?
Let's take a look at the different thermodynamics?
The articles linked below show a new theoretical framework for thermodynamics that is different from what you can see in textbooks and other articles, and it also provides a new starting point for the study of a series of major problems.
Type 2 perpetual motion machines help humans achieve stellar civilization and eliminate it
Humans can only approach planetary level civilizations now. The following image shows the existence of type 2 perpetual motion machines, making travel and life within the solar system easier and safer.
The design of this perpetual motion machine has been recommended by two PhDs. If you support it, please provide a 'recommendation'.
What is the significance of the perpetual motion machine, the Russo Ukrainian War, and possibly the Third World War? Scientists should take on their own mission, and the key is that perpetual motion machines are indeed analyzable.
Dear all,
I have a technical question regarding the self-diffusion coefficient of water in an equilibrium state using Einstein relation in molecular dynamics simulation. If we consider an equilibrated medium of water/polymer, water molecules have Brownian motion as a result of thermal fluctuations. So their self-diffusion movements, related to the Einstein relation between diffusion coefficient and mobility are fully accounted for. But in addition to thermal fluctuations, an equilibrium fluid system has pressure fluctuations. At any instant, the pressure on one side of a volume element is not the same as the pressure on the opposite surface of the volume element, and the volume element will move as a whole in the direction of lower pressure. These pressure fluctuations are not included in the simulations. In macroscopic (but linear, i.e., small forces and flows) flow conditions, they would give rise to a flow described by the linearized Navier-Stokes equation. Isn't this correct? how does Einstein relation consider it? is it logical to use Einstein relation in this situation? Can you discuss it briefly?
Thanks a lot
Dear All,
Coagulating (aggregating, coalescing) systems surround us. Gravitational accretion of matter, blood coagualtion, traffic jams, food processing, cloud formation - these are all examples of coagulation and we use the effects of these processes every day.
From a statistical physics point of view, to have full information on aggregating system, we shall have information on its cluster size distribution (number of clusters of given size) for any moment in time. However, surprisingly, having such information for most of the (real) aggregating systems is very hard.
An example of the aggregating system for which observing (counting) cluster size distribution is feasible is the so-called electrorheological fluid (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybyeMw1b0L4 ). Here, we can simply observe clusters under the microscope and count the statistics for subsequent points in time.
However, simple observing and counting fails for other real systems, for instance:
- Milk curdling into cream - system is dense and not transparent, maybe infra-red observation could be effective?
- Blood coagulation - the same problem, moreover, difficulties with accessing living tissue, maybe X-ray could be used but I suppose that resolution could be low; also observation shall be (at least semi-) continuous;
- Water vapor condensation and formation of clouds - this looks like an easy laboratory problem but I suppose is not really the case. Spectroscopic methods allow to observe particles (and so estimate their number) of given size but I do not know the spectroscopic system that could observe particles of different (namely, very different: 1, 10, 10^2, ..., 10^5, ...) sizes at the same time (?);
- There are other difficulties for giant systems like cars aggregating into jams on a motorway (maybe data from google maps or other navigation system but not all of the drivers use it) or matter aggregating to form discs or planets (can we observe such matter with so high resolution to really observe clustering?).
I am curious what do you think of the above issues.
Do you know any other systems where cluster size distributions are easily observed?
Best regards,
Michal
Once I obtain the Ricatti equations to solve the moments equation I can't find the value of the constants. How can I obtain the value of these constants? Have these values already been reported for the titanium dioxide?
Imagine there is a surface, with points randomly spread all over it. We know the surface area S, and the number of points N, therefore we also know the point density "p".
If I blindly draw a square/rectangle (area A) over such surface, what is the probability it'll encompass at least one of those points?
P.s.: I need to solve this "puzzle" as part of a random-walk problem, where a "searcher" looks for targets in a 2D space. I'll use it to calculate the probability the searcher has of finding a target at each one of his steps.
Thank you!
Hello Dear colleagues:
it seems to me this could be an interesting thread for discussion:
I would like to center the discussion around the concept of Entropy. But I would like to address it on the explanation-description-ejemplification part of the concept.
i.e. What do you think is a good, helpul explanation for the concept of Entropy (in a technical level of course) ?
A manner (or manners) of explain it trying to settle down the concept as clear as possible. Maybe first, in a more general scenario, and next (if is required so) in a more specific one ....
Kind regards !
I'm writing my dissertation about economic dynamics of inequality and i'm going to use econophysics as a emprical method.
Tragically, in 1906, Boltzmann committed suicide and many believe that the statistical mechanics was the cause. He provided the current definition of entropy, interpreted as a measure of statistical disorder of a system His student, Paul Ehrenfest, carrying on Boltzmann's work, died similarly in 1933. William James, in 1909, found dead in his room probably due to suicide. Bridgman, the statistical physics pioneer, committed suicide in 1961. Gilbert Lewis, took cyanide in 1987after not getting a Nobel prize.
The occupation number of bosons can be any number from zero to infinity, guiding us to the Bose-Einstein statistics. On the other hand, for example, a classical wave can be considered a superposition of any number of sine or cosine waves. Isn't it similar to say the occupation number of a classical wave can be any number from zero to infinity and utilizing Bose-Einstein statistics for classical waves in particular and classical fields in general?
In information theory, the entropy of a variable is the amount of information contained in the variable. One way to understand the concept of the amount of information is to tie it to how difficult or easy it is to guess the value. The easier it is to guess the value of the variable, the less “surprise” in the variable and so the less information the variable has.
Rényi entropy of order q is defined for q ≥ 1 by the equation,
S = (1/1-q) log (Σ p^q)
As order q increases, the entropy weakens.
Why we are concerned about higher orders? What is the physical significance of order when calculating the entropy?
Please don't answer because U(T,V) don't have S entropy as argument!!!!!!
May I ask a question on thermodynamic? We know that U(V,T) (caloric eq. of state) and S(P,V) (thermodynamic eq of state) can both be derived from thermodynamic potentials (U F G H) and the fundamental relations. However, U(V,T) doesn't hold full thermodynamic info of the system as U(S,V) does, yet S(P,V) also holds full thermodynamic info of the system.
In which step in derivation to get U(T,V) from U(S,V) lost the thermodynamic info? (the derivation is briefly：1. derive U=TdS+ PdV on V, 2. replace the derivative using Maxwell eq. and 3. finally substitute ideal gas eq or van der waal eq)
Why the similar derivation to get S(P,V) retain full thermodynamic info?
Even if we only have U(T,V), can't we get P using ideal gas eq, then calculate the S by designing reversible processes from (P0,V0,T0) to (P',V',T')? If we can still get S, why U(T,V) doesn't have full thermodynamic info?
Maxwell Boltzman distribution is ni/gi =e-(εi−µ)/kT. In quantum mechanical case, +/-1 is added at the end of kT. (+) sign is for Fermi-Dirac distribution and (-) is for Bose-Einstein distribution. I want to know what is the physical significance of these signs and how can we relate this to classical (Boltzman) distribution.
Dear all:
I hope this question seems interesting to many. I believe I'm not the only one who is confused with many aspects of the so called physical property 'Entropy'.
This time I want to speak about Thermodynamic Entropy, hopefully a few of us can get more understanding trying to think a little more deeply in questions like these.
The Thermodynamic Entropy is defined as: Delta(S) >= Delta(Q)/(T2-T1) . This property is only properly defined for (macroscopic)systems which are in Thermodynamic Equilibrium (i.e. Thermal eq. + Chemical Eq. + Mechanical Eq.).
So my question is:
In terms of numerical values of S (or perhaps better said, values of Delta(S). Since we know that only changes in Entropy can be computable, but not an absolute Entropy of a system, with the exception of one being at the Absolute Zero (0K) point of temperature):
Is easy, and straightforward to compute the changes in Entropy of, lets say; a chair, or a table, our your car, etc. since all these objects can be considered macroscopic systems which are in Thermodynamic Equilibrium. So, just use the Classical definition of Entropy (the formula above) and the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and that's it.
But, what about Macroscopic objects (or systems), which are not in Thermal Equilibrium ? Maybe, we often are tempted to think about the Entropy of these Macroscopic systems (which from a macroscopic point of view they seem to be in Thermodynamic Equilibrium, but in reality, they have still ongoing physical processes which make them not to be in complete thermal equilibrium) as the definition of the classical thermodynamic Entropy.
what I want to say is: What would be the limits of the classical Thermodynamic definition of Entropy, to be used in calculations for systems that seem to be in Thermodynamic Equilibrium but they aren't really? perhaps this question can also be extended to the so called regime of Near Equilibrium Thermodynamics.
Kind Regards all !
I had my BSc in Physics, MSc and PhD in Energy System Engineering. I worked as a assistant lecturer and a lecturer for three years teaching different maths courses, statistics and Physics. I had to move from where I was lecturing before because of my family and now I am in search of a Lecturing or Post-Doc opportunity. Most of the job adverts I see are more specific on a particular field. I am beginning to wonder if my diversification is a disadvantage.
Also, if there is a post-doc or lecturing opportunity at your university, I won't mind applying.
Considering that mean field theory approaches have been used for neuronal dynamics, and that renormalization group theory has been used in other networks to describe their properties, I wanted to know whether it is useful or interesting to describe the behavior of a neuronal system based on its critical exponents. Thank you in advance.
Let's just say we're looking at the classical continuous canonical ensemble of a harmonic oscillator, where:
H = p^2 / 2m + 1/2 * m * omega^2 * x^2
and the partition function (omitting the integrals over phase space here) is defined as
Z = Exp[-H / (kb * T)]
and the average energy can be calculated as proportional to the derivative of ln[Z].
Equipartion theorem says that each independent coordinate must contribute R/2 to the systems energy, so in a 3D system, we should get 3R. My question is does equipartion break down if the frequency is temperature dependent?
Let's say omega = omega[T], then when you take the derivative of Z to calculate the average energy. If omega'[T] is not zero, then it will either add or detract from the average kinetic energy and therefore will disagree with equipartition. Is this correct?
These 'entropies' depend upon a parameter, which can be varied between two limits. In those limits they reduce to the Shannon-Gibbs and Hartley-Boltzmann entropies. If such entropies did exist they could be derived from the maximum-entropy formalism where the Lagrange multiplier would be identified as the parameter. Then, like all the other Lagrange multipliers, the parameter would have to be given a thermodynamic interpretation as an intensive variable which would be uniform and common to all systems, like the temperature and chemical potential. The Renyi and Havdra-Charvat entropies cannot be derived from the maximum-entropy formalism. Thus, there can be no entropy that can be parameter dependent, and whose parameter would be different for different systems.
Statistical physics uses thermostat idea to describe small energy variations in a big system. Can thermostat be a set or real oscillators with linear interaction with statistical system?
One of the central themes in Dynamical Systems and Ergodic Theory is that of recurrence, which is a circle of results concerning how points in measurable dynamical systems return close to themselves under iteration. There are several types of recurrent behavior (exact recurrence, Poincaré recurrence, coherent recurrence , ...) for some classes of measurability-preserving discrete time dynamical systems. P. Johnson and A. Sklar in [Recurrence and dispersion under iteration of Čebyšev polynomials. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 54 (1976), no. 3, 752-771] regard the third type („ coherent recurrence” for measurability-preserving transformations) as being of at least equal physical significance, and this type of recurrence fails for Čebyšev polynomials. They also found that there is considerable evidence to support a conjecture that no (strongly) mixing transformation can exhibit coherent recurrence. (This conjecture has been proved by R. E. Rice in [On mixing transformations. Aequationes Math. 17 (1978), no. 1, 104-108].)
Suggest the model and methodology to estimate the diffusion coefficient of Fission Products in nuclear fuel in scenario like breach of clad etc.
I see lots of papers dealing with application of statistical physics to financial systems. But what are the basic models? There is little point in defining a model, solving it, and finding a answer. Can anybody give me a good starting point?
We know the ergodic definition and know the ergodic mappings. But what is the ergodic process?
There are similar resummations in statistical physics: see
Hi all,
To calculate residence time from potential of mean force (PMF), we use stable state picture. Here a reaction state, product state are defined. This is done from radial distribution function. The time taken to move from reaction state to product state is designated as t and residence time is given by,
1-P(t) = e^{-t/tau}, tau is the residence time,
P(t) is the probability that it moves from reaction state to product state,
t= time taken to move from reaction state to product state. How to calculate P(t)?
Dear Research-Gaters,
It might be a very trivial question to you : 'What does the term 'wrong dynamics ' actually mean ?'. I have heard that term often times, when somebody presented his/her, her/his results. As it seems to me, the term 'wrong dynamics' is an argument, which is often applicable to bring up arguments that a simulation result might be not very useful. But what does that argument mean in physical quantities ? It that argument related to measures such as correlation functions, e.g. velocity autocorrelation, H-bond autocorrelation or radial distribution functions ? Can 'wrong dynamics' be visualized in terms of a too fast decay in any of those correlation functions in comparison with other equilibrium simulations, or can it simply be measured by deviations of the potential energies, kinetic energies and/or the root-mean square deviation from the starting structure ? At the same time, thermodynamical quantities such as free-energies might not be affected by the term 'wrong dynamics'. Finally, I would like to ask what the term 'wrong dynamics' means, if I used non-equilibrium simulations which are actually completely non-Markovian, i.e. history-independent and out-of equilibrium (Metadynamics, Hyperdynamics). Thank you for your answers. Emanuel
How can I find open source model of landslides related disasters. I want learn something about the process of developing such kind of model including statistical or physical based models.
Dear All
What is the best/simplest sampling method in Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS)? Do different sampling methods significantly differ in computational time of MCS?What is the best stopping criterion for MCS?
Kind Regards
Ahmad
For magnetic systems, Rushbrooke inequality is a direct consequence of the thermodynamic relation between CH, CV and isothermal susceptibility, their positivity, and the definition of the critical exponent alpha as [controlling the behavior of CH as function of the reduced distance from the critical temperature..
In the case of fluid system, the usual definition of alpha refers to the constant volume specific heat (CV).
However, the role played by CV in the thermodynamic relation between CP, CV and isothermal compressibility is not the same as CH. Some additional hypothesis has to be made in order to derive the R. inequality for fluid systems or am I missing something trivial ?
Brain research utilizes diverse measurement techniques which probe diverse spatial scales of neural activity. The majority of human brain research occurs at macroscopic scales, using techniques like functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electroencephalography (EEG), while microscopic electrophysiology and imaging studies in animals probe scales down to single neurons. A major challenge in brain research is to reconcile observations at these different scales of measurement. Can we identify principles of neural network dynamics that are consistent across different observational length scales?
In recent experimental studies at different scales of observations, power-law distributed observables and other evidence suggest that the cerebral cortex operates in a dynamical regime near a critical point. Scale-invariance - a fundamental feature of critical phenomena - implies that dynamical properties of the system are independent of the scale of observation (with appropriate scaling). Thus, if the cortex operates at criticality, then we expect self-similar dynamical structure across a wide-range of spatial scales. Renormalization group is a mathematical tool that is used to study the scale invariance in equilibrium systems and recently, in dynamical systems with non-equilibrium critical steady-state. In the context of neural dynamics, renormalization group ideas suggest that the dynamical rules governing the large-scale cortical dynamics may be the same as dynamics at smaller spatial scales (with appropriate coarse graining procedures).
I came up this question because I see a difference when simulating the same A+B<-> C type reaction using Copasi and a particle-based stochastic simulator. Copasi is for well-mixed system, doesn't considering diffusion rate of reactants and solves ODEs to get steady state. I used reaction kinetics rate constant from literature, and noticed a difference in steady state in these outputs of two simulators. I wonder theoretically, whether such a discrepancy should exist, in other words, whether a well-mixed system steady state would be affected by reactants diffusion speed? Thanks.
I am looking to combine Monte Carlo and Molecular dynamics in a simulation. How they can be combined? In general, how to keep the time evolution of the system correctly
Santo
It is interesting by the determination of the atomic pressure in solids.
I read some paper about the viral stress which was introduced by Lutsko (J. Appl. Phys. 64 (3), 1988) using the local momentum flux:
dp(r)/dt = - div s(r)
where p(r) is the momentum and s(r) the stress
Following the calculus, it is not clear for me if Lutsko uses the Lagrange of Euler description but I supposed a Lagrangien description. But in this case, I am not sure of the physical meaning of s(r). This point has been discussed by Zhou (Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A (2003) 459, 2347–2392) and in this website :
In the absence of volumic forces, in continuum mechanics, the Newton's law is:
\rho d2u(r)/dt2 = - div s(r)
with u(r) and s(r) the displacement and the Cauchy stress. This equation is valid in the Euler description.
I am confused about the right way to get the atomic stress.
Does someone know about that point ? How can I determine the atomic stress properly ?
Thank you for your answers.
