'A History and Monologue on Matter and Natural Systems
in Materials Science of/for Energy Systems within
any Macroscopic Scale'.
by GP duBerger
Let's begin with our important basics. The Thermometer and
Barometer, among other things that don't need to be
plugged-in or fueled to function.
This is about Matter, not Energy
Side-note: These remarkable people in the Himalayas, in this video clip, think naturally, via the step method, in curved three dimensions (Euclidean geometry) and none of them are "Einsteins" either, where the actual names of towns and villages correspond to elevation, altitude, height and circumference (which are captioned in the video) and is not the two dimensional method we use. Human thinking and unique forms of intelligence (which is of interest to art) is formed by his environment in a rational manner and not by any general Evolution or faith in anything, or is necessarily formed/created in any university system.
See related article: National Geographic, 'Does Geography Influence How a Language Sounds?' by Ker Than of the National Geographic Published June 14, 2013 for another fascinating angle on this involving language.
Regarding the PBS video 'Absolute Zero' mentioned at the beginning: there are many more errors in this video besides those that involve Celsius, but in Thermodynamics including many related principles on heat they discuss that are incorrect that makes one's jaw drop and others, which are important that are not even mentioned that raises eyebrows. Once again, it is society replacing Nature as evidenced by the things they don't say, or ever talk about.
It does point to one inconsistency in the philosophy of modern science; Where it is assumed or suggested that it is possible that matter can demonstrate no changes in its properties (absolute zero) without some system supporting this because of the absence of systems! It is also treated as a reality or a goal when in actuality the presence of matter is itself always dynamic and always changing because there will always be systems affecting it.
There is another video, entitled: What is One Degree? Horizon, 2010-2011 Episode 8 of 15, and this one is about physicists discussing Thermodynamics who say: "Heat does not actually exist", so be careful!
This is basically what theoretical physicists do today, while making things that are convenient for them exist, that don't exist.
If heat and cold don't exist, I would like them to explain (as one example) the heat and cold treatment of things like aluminum alloys or steel to strengthen them. Metal grains and their crystals don't lie and demonstrate effects and produce remarkable mechanical properties which only heat and cold and pressure can accomplish, separately, and this has nothing to do with energy as the following video will explain, as has previously been demonstrated in another way in the making of a Samurai sword.
As already related on the last page, it is actually energy that is mostly fictitious in the way any form of energy manifests itself, which is no different than people believing in invisible divine entities because these things whether from science or religion are treated as reality. It's time to concentrate on real things and not fantasies.
It's important to say this now because this kind of nonsense is all over the place with all kinds of things in "science" and in 'science history', at least according to artistic philosophy which deals with all meta-truths, so this is here just to get you ready for my consistent amount of mastiff-like criticism against modern physicists, cosmologists, popularizes, celebrity scientists, intellectuals and theorists in these monologues.
If you have been reading and following the educational video clips: The idea is, with less energy we can create the same amount of work or produce the same situation or effect. It may take longer to boil an egg at higher altitudes, but eggs there don't react the same way to heat either at different altitudes or surrounding pressures, nor are fire/combustion the same and one must not compare an electric stove and a fire as the same thing at different altitudes. Fahrenheit 451 is only true at sea level involving combustion.
Chickens usually produce eggs at sea level and not at high altitudes where the egg's own pressure is equivalent to sea level and then by bringing it up to higher altitudes, this breaks up its molecules while equalizing to those higher altitudes. The more gradually this is done the more time then is required to cook the egg, but not if this were done suddenly and "cooking" is mostly about breaking up molecules.
For instance; it would take a lot less energy/electricity to distill anything with an electric stove at higher altitudes and our moonshine would also taste different as well. Distillation is not just the separation of a product, but simultaneously is also the break-up of molecules to release their flavors and aromas. So Joseph Black's equations for Scottish whiskey distillers only applied originally to the general local atmospheric pressure and environment of Scotland because he did not know about pressure and elevation yet. It is no coincidence that the best Whiskey in the world and then the interest in how to make it with less waste can only be true for Scotland.
The Scottish being an ancient people who know their land are like the Aboriginals in the Americas (or other ancient people/cultures) who know how to make and distill their own potions that take into account elevation and a particular climate in a specific location because they have been here longer than us white, black and brown people in the Americas and have made the land part of, or merged, with their methodology. One does learn things over a period of 10 thousand years, which invaders could never possibly understand and still don't, as we see today with white, black and brown physicists and chemists accross North and South America.
We will find that only certain medicinal potions and hallucinogenics (for spiritual quests) are only made at certain altitudes because of the differences in atmospheric pressure that break-up molecules and rearrange them in very different ways at different altitudes and they cannot be made to exist otherwise.
We must also consider the errors in/by the thermometer that was used by Mr. Haran were also relative errors so Prof. Poliakoff, here, is going a bit overboard, too, in his comments since the original data only needs to be adjusted relative to an actual true thermometer of which none exist by the way; which will also be explained later.
Besides, this experiment should be viewed qualitatively and not quantitatively.
Both, Poliakoff and Haran are missing the point where Thermodynamics implies its own meaning where, we are only interested in things that change and how/why they change and not focus on absolute values where concerning science that, here, it is mostly heat and pressure and how they manifest themselves, as being the prime cause of those changes.
The only way to find any absolute values concerning any heat or energy dynamic is through the ternary and syllogistic Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics, where if A=B and B=C then A=C, which simply means that a minimum of three systems must agree to create Work, to create truth or an "ephemeral absolute" (and there are never any paradoxes), not two things as physicists and chemists among others (including the religious minded) say are only necessary. What many mathematicians call a "proof" is not a proof after all and can be demolished by introducing a third system if the "proof" is treated as a dynamic, if not already part of one. Otherwise the "proof" is just a closed system.
Maths, science and religion are infected with paradoxes everywhere, like a computer can be infected with viruses. See 'Argument from free will'. Further, they must all include the supernatural at one point, the Big bang being one of those miracles, and one of my favorites to cite consistently.
There will be none of that nonsense with Thermodynamics and all its principles, which will all be examined in detail and discussed in this and other monologues.
There is never anything absolute with thermodynamics and we can only observe its open, closed and isolated systems doing their thing, which always seems to have one sole paradigm: Thermal Equilibrium.
There may be other systems, but they are unobservable. Only closed systems can be made absolute or have an absolute value (but they don't taste or smell the same everywhere which any real chef can tell you), but increasing entropy in that sort of system takes care of that and makes it and its elemental-systems dynamical again whose thermal equilibrium for entropy would be either a never-decreasing entropy dynamic for an isolated system, or a never-increasing entropy dynamic for an open system.
So, even entropy cannot escape Thermal Equilibrium which is something that is going on forever and cannot be stopped, —even by any amount of time and there is no point discussing any form of "Arrow of time" if infinity is involved anywhere (Third Law of Thermodynamic). The universe cannot equate with any human being's span of being where the human says: "This is a proof" or "that's the truth"| A linear "truth" (apocalyptic), where in a complete thermal equilibrium of an entire universe is one-day achieved; this universe would have to deal with the outside temperature of "nothing" (which also cannot be created or destroyed) and this starts the whole cycle all over again, with a brand new background-radiation temperature. And, regardless of which universe we are discussing, if one could compressed the entire thing into one point that would make a lot of heat, but it would still be unusable heat.
If one could leave the universe, the further we go, the more the universe becomes a point, and indistinguishable from any quantum singularity at any point of time whether we are talking about 13 billion years ago or 13 billion years ahead.
This is the remarkable thing about Thermodynamics as opposed to physics because there is such a thing as "unusable heat", but there is no such thing as "unusable energy" and it describes a universe that primarily cannot be created or destroyed and always moves and or changes, or is always being created and destroyed and created again, where physics and applied chemistry does the opposite and is not representative of any reality existing in the universe except for small minorities who preside over human societies. To them, there are only beginnings and endings.
Thermodynamics indicates that the entire universe is its own solitary cycle, manifested into intelligence where we as thinkers are a tiny part and type of that intelligence. There are forms of thought and emotional feeling that exist, that we, in our neck of the woods, could never understand or feel because we don't have the necessary matrix. We are only an infinitesimal part of it.
There may be some cataclysm going on right now which we are not aware of because we are so small and tiny and the explosion is so vast. So, we may say that when someone self-immolates him/herself or a suicide bomber detonates an explosive, these are finely tuned occurrences that we can actually see and feel, but would be meaningless to any god or involvement of time to the point that it's not enough to even consider as enough relativity to make reality. With enough time, we all, eventually, become shadows and illusions, no matter how great or famous we are/were. Enjoy the moment; that's the gift of life. There is nothing else because time, relentlessly, marches or dances along with or without you.
Time is an excellent example of G-D, which we can appreciate by the way we "look" at, or study events that occurred thousands or millions of years ago is not the same as events we see or read about in the news, where G-D being so vast and being in all places at once in both space and time cannot be present with you while watching some horror you see in the news that you "think" is important and you can do something about it. Go outside and you will hear the birds singing and the trees waving their leaves in the wind among other things. That's the news too.
Then, idiots expect to go to heaven (or hell, and as if G-D is only capable of creating two things/places for all things to go), where if they actually did get there, they would never be able to comprehend it as evidenced by their actions, here on Earth.
All organized religions actually take one away from G-D as humanly possible and don't bring one closer and that can be proved in a multitude of ways.
Small people, or people made to be small, do small things and one could never be brainwashed or indoctrinated if one knew, even, basic Thermodynamics. If A = B and B =C then A = C and there are no if, and or buts. Heaven, if such a place exists, is not the closed system that we find in monotheist religious literature and teachings; At least according to Thermodynamics, which is capable of dealing with anything, whether they exist or not.
Just follow the Heat and where it goes. It, like Time will move by itself, we just have to watch, learn and tap into it.
What they call "Dark matter/energy" may be some leftover transitive dynamic from a preceding or upcoming Universe, which has an equivalence there to what we call here: Electromagnetic fields, waves and radiation. The atom itself, and its purpose can only be the architecture of an entropy temperature of a particular universe that supports it in the way we "know" (or would know) at one time cycle.
For "Dark Matter/energy" to actually exist or have a purpose in the way they describe, we would know them already by experiment by creating them with quarks and then measuring their effect.
There are just so many types of quarks, and no combination of any kind can produce "dark matter" in the present conditions the universe allows and matter, whatever it is, in any form, must be made of quarks, otherwise it is not matter.
Matter and energy, the way we "know" them now, are merely the dynamic of our present universe's entropy-temperature, and matter has existed and will exist in different forms and they had and will be part of life in different forms in a future we cannot imagine, measure or calculate.
We, ourselves, are part of the present embodiment of X universe in a long-line of different universes in succession, including those that will succeed us. We are our own Zero on a scale called: "Creation, Apocalypse, Creation", yet always continuing is expansion and acceleration. Why? Thermodynamics says so, and matter/energy has/will take on different forms and do different and wondrous things in those universes from the functions and forms they do here and now.
And all these different universes, when put on a scale tells another story itself that might be part of and even bigger scale with its own story and purpose that surpasses the meaning of life and existence, and so on...
The beauty of this is: The smaller and more insignificant one is, the more wondrous the universe becomes and the more variety there is.
To recapitulate: A properly manufactured mercury or alcohol thermometer should only be clipped on tightly and not glued to a scale so that one can slide the tube to properly calibrate it if necessary or have the scales marked directly on the tube itself, exactly because of the problems that we see in the two preceding video clips, while avoiding useless discussions and arguments, but the problem here is that both the tube and its support, regardless of where the scale is attached, differently, expand and contract.
In one case, one needs the support for the tube so as not to handle the tube directly and affect readings or in the other where we put our scale on the tube itself, we don't want the clip and the support to affect readings because of the specific and latent heats of the support and clips including their own expansion and contraction which will allow the tube to move.
As you see; Nothing's perfect and much of science and mathematics is still art, but no one will admit that today.
If Mr. Haran only used one thermometer, and was only concerned with temperatures between two phase changes, and it was not defective in other ways besides it's entire scale being off, which is merely a transposition, then his readings at different altitudes are perfectly sound because we already know, independently from other sources, what is the real boiling point of water, at sea level, and at other elevations and we simply adjust their values because the attributes, or principles or some of the properties (if a different kind of thermometer is used in the lab) of both thermometers are the same. The history of catalysts in the manufacture of ammonia shows that properties of substances, regardless of whatever different alloys or elements used are more important.
Since it is impossible to create such a device or system (either because of our mental capacity for awareness or because of the physical universe itself, which is the only thing allowed to do that, and that's the way Nature "sees" things and couldn't care less about what goes on in-between), we can see why scales are so important and then we can appreciate where mathematics becomes important if we include these three phase changes (ternary) like in Fahrenheit's scale, where Celsius' scale only has two phase changes and so it is mathematically worthless in any universal application outside of society and its artifices.
A scale is a system since it's impossible to create our surreal thermometer just described and only exists for Nature. One could call Nature surreal and god supernatural.
The scale replaces or represents an approximation to some reality. To create a scale or any other system, one needs a minimum of three steps/elements otherwise they are only two step, rungs or units and neither are better than the other since in a relativistic sense, going from A to B is the same as B going to A, but it is quite different if relativistically, A and B are going to C or C and B going to A, among other combinations.
Just follow the heat.
With scales we create a big difference by altering the field or background of numbers, units, rungs or steps and finally the elements contained for its purpose which is done by difference or with one new thing added and there can only be one new thing at a time so this forces the field of numbers around it to be different, in ways we can see or realize immediately.
This is also an excellent approach to the meaning of life and purpose because it takes the individual to be thoughtful enough to include any ternary element or statement.
There are already precedents of this in Nature, reality and in metaphysics (often seen and/or applied to/in humor) that all around us, yet nowhere does this exist, anywhere, in maths (and obviously in physics) in any application and where it did exist, it got deprecated. Any mathematical formula also changes the field of existence around it before it is even implemented. This is why physicists and mathematicians, like those believers in supernatural deities, prefer closed systems because those environments can be controlled in one way or another, but occasionally even closed systems bite back.
So, we require a minimum of three steps to create a basic scale because surrealism does not allow the possibility for true reality to exist, but can only be represented or discussed in mathematics or art. So we need three elements for the system it will represent, so we need three phases changes to be represented on a thermometer and there we have a system that, like the Rosetta stone (which is a trilingual document) can be deciphered (with itself) as to its meaning, representation or purpose.
Fahrenheit's scale also reminds us of the importance of brine, where its powers give water extended properties that make it practically miraculous compared to other molecules, where without these two forms of water (fresh and salt-water) working together, there would be no life the way we know it, which exceeds it practical use and philosophy against the way people know brine by making ice-cream with it.
Today, our most illustrious scientists and philosophers know more about the Moon or Mars, or stercus tauri than they/we do about Water, —forget our oceans or God particles or Higgs fields, which we now know cannot exist because it is in a field within a scale called the Standard Model and not a field or system by itself that can create a scale or does it have a need for one since this is supposed to represent god in its scientific meaning, but this is overly redundant on a divine scale.
Celsius's scale doesn't help either as to make salt-water non-existent or a nuisance in people's consciousness, attitudes and perceptions. Science makes our limited closed systems even smaller, while packing more people like sardines into their small and limited environments that they call the "universe".
If Nazi and Soviet era scientists could sell bullshit to their respective governments and societies and make them spend billions, believe they are doing that here too.
Anyway it surprises me that a chemist (Poliakoff) would discuss thermodynamics in relation to chemistry and physics at the same time where in this small example, all three (chemistry, physics and thermodynamics) happen to be completely apart from each other, the way this thing and situation is explained here because this is very basic stuff everybody should know and not have to be presided overwith.
This is made quite plain with the different ways the First Law of Thermodynamics is interpreted by chemists and with physicists. Chemistry texts write the first law as ΔU=Q+W instead of in physics, they say: ΔU=Q-W which is generally the thermodynamic expression also which, firstly, depends on the dynamical system which in physics is always a closed system they describe and so we have Q-W.
According to Theological Thermodynamics, heaven is hotter than hell.
This is probably due to god imposing economy measures and applying it to hell, where with the money saved he can increase security; making extra sure that bad souls don't get out.
Concerning heaven being much hotter than hell: It is theorized that souls enduring more pressure and heat in heaven go through some phase change where their "bodies" would now experience perpetual ecstasy and pleasure, instead of pain and suffering.
Thermodynamics is made to conform mostly to Physics, Chemistry and religion and not the other way around, like it's supposed to be, but then we would need to change physics altogether and consider it dynamic-like which is impossible for autistic savants to comprehend or appreciate and autistic savants with various pathologies run the show today in science.
These people think in terms of absolutes and look for patterns in everything and then project these ideas upon everything forgetting or never considering what happened before and what's going to happen afterwards. What they do may be very impressive, like watching acrobats at the Cirque de Soleil, but is certainly not genius.
A circus acrobat, at least, works hard with total discipline and dedication to achieve his goals and is not some freak or genetic mutation created and supported by a demented society. A lot of people have kids that should not have kids.
So, we need the expertise of someone who has the equivalence of a French diplomat from the time of Napoleon, who can also read Latin and Greek to sort things out all the time, not to mention dumfounded students who learn to hate Thermodynamics because it has to be learned over and over again, where thermodynamics should be taught first as a prerequisite to chemistry or physics.
So, Delta U: Is a change in internal energy, Q: Is the heat added to the system. Minus W: Is the Work done by the system where Plus W: Is the Work done on the system. To reiterate: In chemical reactions and processes, Work is done on the system rather than by it. In the context of physics, adding heat to a volume of gas and using the expansion of that gas to do Work as seen, for example, Work done by a piston. See: ΔU
Nevertheless, this clip at left above with Martyn Poliakoff, is important to this discussion because I elaborate much on the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics, which is way beyond any chemistry and physics, and I will demonstrate that a lot of Work-producing machines based on the Second Law of Thermodynamics are not necessary since there are many different ways, through different thermodynamic systems, to produce work, torque, heat and cold using Open-System based technology that also can manipulate pressure and heat even better, that produce none of their own heat or entropy and all function automatically too.
Later, I will include foolproof nuclear reactors that produce nothing toxic and shut down by themselves if not cooled in the first place, so they can never meltdown because the water itself is the moderator, regardless of its core critical mass (because it's core is quite different), which are not adopted because these systems cannot be patented which means, "profit before life" and scientifically, that's the kind of society we live in, which is produced and patented by scientists.
Water, with Nature's superior invention, does a ternary function: It cools, it moderates and it extracts heat energy.
Nature shows us everywhere technology that can do the same jobs that are better, safer and easier to operate and attack intellectual "economic theories" and cocktail/celebrity scientists at their core, where we can make a distinction between private enterprise that masquerades as "opportunities" from free enterprises, of which Nature is also a participant there and runs its own "businesses" everywhere.
Nature is a capitalist! (A free-enterprise capitalist)
Of course, all these depleted natural-historical reactors, have been completely obliterated and wiped off the map like Apple Computer does with apps like 'Apple iOS 6 Maps' (they were mined at enormous costs even though they were depleted naturally) among other things by different companies, so we see how active private enterprise is to make sure you pay for things they themselves don't own, and or are no good at all, and make sure you don't know how to create or do anything yourself, anywhere, especially in things they never can own, except through enforced artifices society creates, and this also shows just how far they will go to do this by/like removing the freezing point of brine off any scale, mining depleted uranium or flaring of Natural Gas instead of bottling it, but bottling something particle physicists call "god" created by men from accelerators is OK, where the sky's the limit in the expense involved to do that. See: Self-sustaining Natural Nuclear Fission Reactor for an introduction, as I will discuss this later too.
This article from, 'Scientific American Magazine' (link in last paragraph) says that such a reactor would not produce enough energy for our needs, but then that opens the door to other questions and opportunities that should be looked at, - Not close the discussion, and their ideas of what they call "Efficiency" involving fission, as to what that is supposed to be in their imaginations should also be questioned and not be the basis to practically create some committee.
After all: We are not discussing a system like an old internal
It is the system that this process is put into that should be questioned (which is where we would find our precious efficiency or inefficiency). Fission is fission is fission, —that's it! Otherwise, there would be tables for the conversion of mass into energy and not one formula/equation and one does not need to come from a think tank to understand that.
These natural nuclear reactors, nevertheless, produced steam and if we just look at this system from the perspective of phase change and pressure we find that this statement is just pure propaganda that serves to further the interests of a mercenary minority. The system described in the clip at left-above shows how electricity is produced only with hot water from geothermal sources. Steam is also a relative thing that depends entirely on the surrounding pressure of the water heated, or that is already "hot" (the creation of steam/vapor is always relative to the system's surrounding air/gas pressure).
It is surprising that scientists see steam only by atmospheric pressure standards and the same scientists discuss black holes, dark energy/matter "entropy", god particles, etc., etc. If it wasn't so funny it would be pathetic.
If the article, too, has been obliterated, like the uranium mines of Gabon, I have a Fair Use copy, at 'Nature's Nuclear Reactors'.
As for wholesome middle-class family-viewing on PBS: For a public broadcasting group, they are not that innocent (I'm not saying they are guilty either) in the way they market their being and programming; they are, almost, totally corporately sponsored (like all the other networks) and are so bad, considering how they present themselves to the public, even engineering firms will not sponsor any of their "science" shows because of the ideas they introduce or include in their media platform that promote only certain ways of understanding things that are not necessarily good things and this includes presenting science via "documentaries" by/with notorious liars and manipulators with Ph.D's (yes, they have them in science too) where their audience is not properly prepared before any science presentation, like people would be watching a science documentary on FOX.
Corporate sponsors and ultimately the big banks and the trust fund set, with their "Foundations", bogus "think tanks" and Consortiums, control all production and programming through their vast influence by only showing people on their television sets and computer media, smartphones, and through PBS and the other networks, a Universe that is only run with/by a 'consumer-level Second Law of Thermodynamic' and nothing much else exists or the other Laws of Thermodynamics are treated as some curiosity or redundant part of Nature.
This makes excellent economic sense if you are running a place like hell and you don't want your resident souls, held captive there in your princely domain, to know there are other universes to emigrate to, that are much better than, even, heaven. People who don't know or understand Thermodynamics call this "The philosophy of the hole" which is an interesting perspective and remarkably cynical too.
In everything, through the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics, there is always that third option somewhere and you just have to go look for it to find it. The idea here is that society and civilization, by themselves, are not the be all and end all of all things and when they do make themselves out to be that, then things seriously go wrong everywhere, but everything is normal according to Nature because Nature does not care what you think; but that should not be used against you either.
Or a multinational bank, or running a trust fund whose only purpose is to create the future consumer out of an improperly educated or misinformed middle class on Thermodynamics who will be buying new products in the future that don't exist yet, which undoubtedly will involve putting something into a hole and pay for that privilige too , or rehash old consumer products repeatedly with only minor improvements that are supposed to be "new".
Today, people have "Reality shows" which is an oxymoron; or those two words don't belong together and one has to go, which would be a personal choice (add "entertainment" to those two words and we have a system). There is no going back and the only recourse is being aware and knowing systems and the Laws of Thermodynamics are their prime example. Its dynamical systems and how they work/interact if used as a template for existence and not the laws/philosophies of/in society or organized religion of which the most ridiculous conventions we must only comply with and work for their eventual deprecation.
Am I digressing, or do I digress too often? Absolutely not, because the study of matter means the absolute study of all things and their systems; their design, function and ultimate demise. Matter's sole "syntax" is thermodynamics and its systems and everything follows suit, no matter how well disguised or decorated is the system to make this not so.
Money in a closed system created by/for another system suffers from increasing entropy (inflation) like everything else in any type of closed system, but the rich and powerful created this closed system of/for "society" themselves, so it is not the people who should have to pay, otherwise the lives of the controlling rich is just a farce since they are only maintaining their own closed systems of increasing entropy which none of them can escape from and permeates everywhere. The question for the future now is "survival", not "progress" during this coming period of chain-reaction-like increasing entropy created by the petroleum industry and a fiat economy (which is only supposed to exist to pay war reparations and not used as an economic standard/model) who should know better who will drag everyone down with them if they can.
Unlike energy, people, like matter, are free to be whatever system they want to be in/with by transforming themselves into states that only allow certain systems to affect you where like "efficiency" or "inefficiency" would be increased for some matter system, it would increase your "freedom" or "slavery" in life. Authority already creates fake universes for the consumer to value so why not create one's own fake universe that must be superior at one point to anything society have to offer no matter how mediocre one's creativity is.
It's amazing to me, that the rich and powerful and the trust fund set, don't learn from the very systems they created that must ultimately rust themselves from within. The finest and most revealing revolution to an anarchist is to do absolutely nothing and watch things fail and fall apart by themselves from inside and while that happens, work on the side to
A modern Anarchist would think in terms of Thermodynamic concepts and use examples like, "Gibbs Free Energy" which is: "The free energy of a system, which is the sum of its enthalpy that can do Work", which is already the darling of polluting manufactures, energy conglomerates and politicians. This "free energy" would work by itself to demolish our very civilization which cannot be prevented or stopped anyway.
The other, would be some form of Thermal Equilibrium, which will probably be explosive-like and not like ice melting in a glass so this would be something to avoid, and the kind of which can be predicted in advance which is the advantage.
The aftermath is where one establishes a new Dynamic entropy which should always be "Never increasing" (but never is) and integrated into all machines, beliefs, business models, etc., etc. Computers themselves would require a "Never decreasing Entropy" systems for Data/Information, but scientists since the 19th century have been turning never-decreasing/increasing Entropy systems into always-increasing entropy systems.
One thing I do know concerning today, is that when physicists and chemists start monkeying around with theories on heat and create alien ideas about it today, distorting facts and change history; they (the scientific community), as can be seen historically, (this has been done before) that they, and those that sponsor them, are up to something or they have actually made some remarkable discovery elsewhere and the best way to exploit and profit from this is to make everybody as confused or as stupid as possible by preparing them to be so, so that ordinary people cannot connect the dots themselves and understand the new discovery's hidden potential or realize too late some dystopian agenda, after it has been implemented.
Our problem today is not to secure energy resources for our nation's future at the point of a gun and maintain a perishable standard of living and this being controlled remotely by people you will never meet, but for every individual or community to secure direct-energy methods that work for themselves that rely on Thermal Equilibrium and related processes to function and can be modified to work in any environment since we know now that Zeroth Law Thermodynamic heat systems are reversible (and are a minimum of 40% efficient) and very versatile where Second Law of Thermodynamics systems are not.
Our entire societies and economic systems, themselves, must be retrofitted to serve people and the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamic and not society and the Second Law of Thermodynamic. People build communities; Societies do not build communities. Company towns don't count.
The Thermoscope invented by Philo a quarter of a deca-millennium ago is still around everywhere and now, in an Equivalent fashion and in a very practical way, it has become a meta-truth regarding heat and cold and shows how intellectuals monkey around with heat and pressure in various systems and it produces the same effect, that reveals a bloated or vacuous science and philosophy (wait for when I explain how the thermoscope actually works).
Now, all we have to do is attach scales to this new thermoscope's function (limescale will do) so we can measure and capture the amount of garbage, stercus tauri and steaming horse manure that they now produce in prodigious amounts. We can add more rungs later, to this scale in the future to make it more precise than garbage, stercus tauri and steaming horse manure as, for now, these three rungs are sufficient to begin any new scale for development, as I have already explained elsewhere.
They do this by using or employing intellectuals, whose primary purpose is to remove any philosophy from society out of anything that's desired by committees to remove, who will apply a completely arbitrary deprecation to an element or object that itself can be used as a philosophical tool to preserve humanity or be used as a method to defend it.
This of course does not apply if one lives his mind, where all this is taken quite seriously regardless if one thinks it's not obsolete, or the old stuff is still art and the values that they expressed are actually still valid. This is like valuing Galileo's Special Relativity over Einstein's Special Relativity. It is a system that makes these these things happen and work with art or science (even organized religion) and it is the people that think about these systems when/while they are inside them that make them even more absurd.
Transitive humor: As we heard stated in the clip from 'Helvetica' on the preceding page: "It is not the notes that make music, but the empty spaces between the notes that make music'.
They are most probably looking for some kind of new weapon like what has been done by physicists (in one form or another) since the last 6,000 years when they should be building
Don't believe or take seriously for one second that the modern physicist (or religious leader or politician) is more evolved than those of the past, especially where not one single scientist anywhere sees a problem with closed systems in technology and making it inclusive to society exclusively, where/when the Second Law of Thermodynamics is involved and the way they handle the First Law is just as deplorable where these laws of thermodynamics which were developed by natural philosophers and then "created" by scientists and are, now, incompatible, by the way, they were intended, in what they expressed against any "modern" scientific philosophy.
All this closed system technology is/was built for the military and still is because that is what war needs is portable technology to kill and plunder elsewhere because the military have to travel through those "empty spaces" between missions and targets where there are none of their toys and energy available to kill, conquer and plunder other targets. What consumers get are the trickled down versions of things originally meant for war and espionage including the internet and a real conqueror, invader or defender assimilates the spaces between points like any guerrilla fighter, the Romans or a Mongul horde would. An army that can rearm and replenish itself while on the move is invincible. A military that depends on factories and systems that can be targeted is not an army, but some pretend army and when active, is only doing pretend war or defending or spreading fiat.
The middling physicist that one sees on television and other media can get away with his nonsense, (my favourite is Brian Green, only because I can't look at or listen to Brian Cox because of nausea) and earn a living because a university or research institute needs physicists. So, this is fine with geniuses like Albert Einstein, Arthur Eddington, Paul Dirac, Richard Feynman and many more to patent their research and write books while they even have tenure, but for the regular mediocre physicist, who would be barely capable of operating a hospital nuclear accelerator that would, normally, only bombard cancer tumors with gamma rays, - and can only understand medicine through things like "pain management" (which is an intellectual oxymoron) instead of 'Healing Management' (which, oddly does not exist), and who would only be in a learning institution to tinker, or interfere with things in laboratories, or steal and/or ingratiate themselves in other scientist's and professor's work to have their name published in a paper as some contributor, seeking government grants for their 'research', talk to film producers, or write books.
Check this out yourself: CERN is recycling their failing paradigm and already building a new business by retrofitting their technology which is to bombard cancer cells with hadrons instead of gamma rays which will be called, "The Virtual-particle therapy centre", which is fitting that they are turning into doctors and is a typical thing to see in any area of physics in history that begins to fail; we start seeing more quacks, more doctors, or medical researchers instead, in that particular area, like we have already seen with phlogiston and later with Static electricity therapy, both of which were supposed to be good at curing cancer too among other things.
It never fails. The wake of an as-yet unseen thing states: The Standard Model is dead and now is part of history; right beside things like ESP, Phrenology, The Philosopher's Stone, hydrogen-filled Zeppelins, etc. If this stuff was so good they would of used hadrons a long time ago against cancer. I hear cash registers ringing and this is all tinkering and salvaging.
Rule of Thumb:
Science that fails, or becomes useless always creates new, "cutting-edge medical treatments" and "medical researchers", and science that succeeds (Flight engineering for example) always become computer programs or machines which, ultimately, also get miniaturized. The human/creative/learning aspect is removed one way or another (becoming unnecessary) and become systems, which thermodynamics and its philosophy shows us how to navigate these systems carefully and in an artistic manner which can, in some cases restore some creativity and/or more development/applications, like is done with Newton's Relativity.
Science that succeeds produces brain machines for environments that are impossible for us to exist in, like the air for example because we don't have wings and one day we will probable have brain machines for space travel and then maybe intergalactic travel, but they will always be extensions of ourselves.
Anyway, concerning physicists themselves, it is not acceptable to allow them to dictate any terms or assume the same privileges that great masters in physics and theoretical physics have earned for themselves, who worked for peace and not for discord (like they do today). Neil deGrasse Tyson is an excellent example of this discordant and divisive activity in his "thinking' and talk.
There are too many universities today that need to fill their classrooms with professors, but there are only a certain number of good scientists and physicists because Nature doesn't make more than we have and physicists like artists and athletes cannot be manufactured, but are born and can emerge from any type of family of any economic background, status, culture or nation. You could have a hundred billion people on this planet and the same amount of Scientific, Artistic and Physical geniuses will come out each generation. This is why we now have an abundance of autistic savants in maths and physics, and in think tanks spewing their garbage (let's see one time machine), and a population of athletes trained on steroids and other "performance enhancing" substances (there are athletes today with monstrous bodies that never existed in all recorded history), all provided courtesy of university research to fill a "void" of artificially created increasing consumption where at one point everything must become fake to fill this "demand" that should not exist in the first place, nor are people supposed to like this abnormal/unnatural stuff.
As in Art, there are many who "play artist" and are not actually artists and never will be although they believe or think they are and it is the same with science where there are too many who "play scientist" throughout their lives who make science documentaries, write books and create monsters, instead of writing papers, and they seek cohorts and committees to collaborate with, and find fools who actually believe them.
It is all like the consumer-grade Second Law of Thermodynamics except it is life itself that is being consumed and chemically altered like combustion to create profit instead of heat and we are the fuel to a system, rather than a machine, through the payment of our lives by way of stress, disease, wars/conflicts, unfulfillment and unhappiness.
What I do care about (as an artist) is when information is being deliberately distorted which, believe it or not, is a great concern to art and artists, hence how I find myself here writing these multiple monologues and articles on Thermodynamics with emphasis placed on matter while being critical about energy being treated as substance and systems are treated as real things, and ironically, in many creative ways, this is the way scientists demonstrate a lot of "artistic aptitude", the medium and way provided for them by their sponsors.
At best, one will have something to laugh about, but watch out! Something, somewhere might make sense to you and this is only the beginning of this monologue of many different monologues that attack organized science and religion from many angles from the perspective of matter and Thermodynamic systems.
If you think Thermodynamics is hard and difficult, wait till you see what it affects and touches, that is conveniently brushed under the carpet or distorted by today's scientists and mathematicians. That, I think, is a more interesting approach.
We begin with the definition of "thermodynamics" (θερμοδυναμική):
'Dynamic' = Adjective, "(a process or system) characterized by constant change, activity, or progress.
'Thermo' = from the Greek "therme" meaning: "Heat".
We see Natural philosophy being there at the beginning coining this new compound word before science was science with that magic word/ingredient, "Dynamic".
Artistic philosophy also has its own ideas on the 'Conservation of information' and 'Information Theory' and, surprisingly, we also manage a thermodynamic concept for "Work' and how this is produced by Matter which I find are far more interesting and "realistic" as represented in surrealist art, than the present-day surreal musings of science.
there is not even Space because, for one, there is no need for it without matter and to be able to move in emptiness, even as pure energy, is "something" because the true meaning of nothing is not being able to move either or even consider it in any way or function, so why stuff humanity into closed energy systems everywhere if there was not some form of committee-like idealism going on somewhere that has nothing to do with science, but more to do with politics, organized religion and economics and who's going to get it to the point that they monkey around with creativity. Any field of any kind of energy is composed of particles of matter of some sort or another.
In the metaphysical sense; the first things to ever exist were 'matter' and 'nothing' and they still, both, always come first concerning anything that's going on in the Universe, anywhere. The wave can only exist because of the 'substance' of particles that make a wave of energy or the matter/energy field it can create itself at one point and never the other way around, and is entirely part on the existence and presence of matter and space.
Maybe if/when we evolve into pure energy in a couple of million years from now (which will not be advantageous, but will be the only reality we would know), then the demise of black holes will be important (Hawking) and we will be able to experience them, but we will certainly not be human anymore and any links we have now to the future will be impossible to assemble or disassemble, but there will be an equivalency as there is one now already existing between the unknown and the future in any reference you can imagine which they created, themselves, out from their own stupidity.
It is incredibly naïve to assume what humankind and the Universe will be like in a couple of eons and imposing its philosophy upon us now, just as previously stated with people who existentialize the past by transforming people before the industrial revolution, as experiencing life like today's young middle-class Westerners and call that "history".
The conservation of information and information theory are all around us and does not require an esoteric object of many Absolute magnitudes of distance whose, own luminosity is negative like a sun's would be positive (light is always part of some system), or some intellectual to master who sees the universe, as they do incorrectly, as some kind of closed system, which to any six year old's brain development would be revolutionary, in its perfect order and promise because infants and young children need that sort of thing/system and cannot grasp the moving and ever-changing universe.
Ultimately one is supposed to grow out of these closed systems and experience life and the Universe as an open system and become part of this process one's self, but this natural ability and logical realization is severely suppressed everywhere in a multitude of ways.
There is no reason to assume that black holes and the quantum are the ultimate thing and there will not inevitably be found even grander gravitational and quantum artifacts and architecture in the universe that contradicts present theories derived, like every other magnitude changes everything and/or they never even discuss the possibility that such things could exist, so what are they talking about and aren't they afraid that their ideas will be turned upside down in some other order of magnitude? Where if this was so, then, this would indicate they were inherently correct for some closed system of their own invention, but intrinsically wrong; which is not science, or even art. There is very little difference between the concepts of modern-day theoretical/particle physicists and those of Rudolf Diesel where Thermodynamics is involved.
Theoretical/particle physicists and cosmologists jump immediately onto metaphysical things like time, dark matter/energy, strings, super gravity, etc. and discuss them as if they were physical things when they are not, but are actually systems where a master criminal, a comedian or a specialist in logistics could give a better lecture or dissertation on the meaning of time and timing amongst the other things just mentioned. See this in action how important time is in motion (not motion in time) in the masterpiece, 'The Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973)', where we see in a transitive way how anything that goes wrong is when schedules are not respected and point to hidden but absolute truths, which no one sees because all the characters live and think existentially in their own universes.
Any time, anything in the universe that arrives late or too early, regardless of what it is in any magnitude, is because of an unknown other occurrence (or new zero) and this is regulated by Thermal Equilibrium. So it is ridiculous for theoretical physicists to discuss anything regarding Time if they do not use an open math system like The Step Method which is amenable to any transitive system or syllogism.
One day, researchers will discover photons that are not supposed to be detected in "real" time, but should appear only later.
So when Michio Kaku says, like in the video clip on the preceding page about "infinity", "that Nature is a lot smarter than we are". We have to ask ourselves, who is he addressing when he says that and from what position is this "infinitely" grandiose statement coming from when spoken by a theoretical physicist and intellectual, where poetry is not the normal way of expressing ideas and problems, but nevertheless decides through unknown things what Nature, God, Man and humanity is already where it is given to realize then that something that's been around longer than us is obviously more intelligent, but in the end these presiding statements serve to separate man from Nature or the Universe and makes it very clearly fatalistic. This is like, discord creating discord because it is no longer happy offending wellness. There are more converts to religion because of celebrity science then all the work done by all the evangelists and proselytizers.
This is the most perfect form of insanity and megalomania because it is invisible and these people write books and make documentaries where they should be silenced and the only way to do this is to not listen to them and not read their books, otherwise you are just playing into their game, which is probably fixed in advance because a person with Ph.D credentials would/should know better, so this is all political planning and these people are its popularizers and spokespersons and they all work for authority with their hierarchical-based philosophy.
This is like when portrayed in science fiction where the authorities would discover sentient tripod extraterrestrials or impending doom from an asteroid and not tell the people because of fear of total chaos. Why? Do they expect to be men and woman of authority, after the fact, in both instances where in the first case life and the Universe is a whole lot bigger or in the other case, the Universe will no longer exist for anyone to enjoy because we could never survive such a catastrophe.
In another scenario where, hypothetically, aliens actually did make contact with us, it would be a certainty that authority would fake some coup or conflict; making it appear that it was the aliens fault where we must be brave and "defend" ourselves against this new "enemy" for no reason except to stay in what they think is political power. It would be necessary to keep Humanity inside Plato's cave and tell them their own interpretation of what's going on outside à la Plato with a dash of heavily-interpreted St. Augutine and not invite them out. Same old, same old.
Besides if there was chaos or not, we'd see the true flower of humankind, in only all these wonderful closed systems they've created, where not a single one of any kind can help them, so this would appear as a prison riot anyway before everything changes since anyone can die peacefully when one knows the truth, good or bad, while they are in their own created agony or ecstasy.
Chaos or an explosion can only come from a closed or isolated system or closed environment. Its detonator is another system. If people on this planet were in truly free societies there would never be war or poverty of any kind and an extraterrestrial invasion would prove this. They (extraterrestrials), good or bad, would be dealt, with some sort of Thermal Equilibrium model instead, and everybody would understand this too all over the planet and know what to do when it was needed without needing any coordination from authority.
Ultimately, concerning anything whatsoever; it is better to believe nothing you hear or see and only know what you have felt in and out of yourselves and personally experienced in Nature and; Better to trust your own instincts than any authority, and anyone's business with authority is simply to comply with them, not to love them.
Even the Bible, very specifically, says: "Honor thy mother and father" and does not say you have to love them. This goes for any kind of "bad" situation in a closed system, as all you need to do is comply, which is sufficient reaction, with any unpleasant situation and wait for it to pass and not get emotional or personal about anything negative.
Besides, any trouble's source from outside or that affects can be traced back to the consumer-grade Second Law of Thermodynamic of which people like Stephen Hawking are its chief proponent today regarding theoretical physics by the models he produces on a cosmic scale.
In effect, theoretical physics and cosmology makes the Thermodynamic Universe a small place and authority turns the Earth into a prison, and where if any authority or branding oversteps its bounds and wants to be loved too, then there we know something is horribly wrong somewhere. Politeness is the only thing that is necessary to maintain civility; not love, trust or loyalty and this makes things a lot simpler too. Any product one buys in our consumer economy already has a vast amount of always-increasing entropy in it before using even any product and this will continue until failure unless it is allowed to change and incorporate itself into another system.
Returning briefly to the work of Arthur C. Clarke:
The only reality the HAL 9000 computer had as a true reference in dealing with lies that it was programmed to carry out was to put in motion a situation where the Second Law of Thermodynamic was a supposed culprit. With this created situation, all the pieces fell into place in a Third Law of Thermodynamic way that corresponded to its type of entropy (explained later) which allowed it to make the right decisions for the mission, which was its top priority beyond all other considerations.
The day Cyclops-like GE, Newport News or any other behemoths that make Monsanto look like a lily pad on a frog's pond without a frog that work for the modern versions of the god Vulcan and want to be "loved" (just like the crippled and hobbling god, Vulcan wanted to be loved by his beautiful and adulterous wife, Venus in mythology) through a display of advertising and promotions and designing cute consumer products and "reaching out" like they did with the Slow Mo Guys on You Tube (enormously popular too), then "we" know that something very likely has gone, or will go, horribly wrong somewhere because these companies have no reason to be "cute" and lovable and want to go retail too instead of staying with government/multinational contracts, or wholesale.
Just like when banks will loan you money or give you a credit card, even though with bad credit because it is the yearly or monthly fee they really want which provides them the liquidity to operate. This is like giving a pedophile candy to give to kids.
From GALILEO'S SENSORY AND EMPIRICAL CONCEPTS OF RELATIVITY
All these wonderful theories simply do their jobs with the things they describe on paper like an artist who paints pictures on canvas, and the artist knows not to paint pictures in Indochina with oil paint or water colors (they won't dry), but uses pastels and crayons.
So carrying around Einstein's General Relativity at every opportunity and extending it to areas it does not describe, is not a good idea especially when these theories are not fluid, but very specific in their purpose because Einstein's General Relativity is not meant to predict what goes on inside black holes, but only confirms they exist (not predict; because these things have been theorized since Newton and Cavendish by geologists of the time), but predict more the motions of stars and anomalous planets. They would probably have more luck with Newton's or Galileo's Relativities because there they're starting from the beginning again, which is quite suitable for black holes and modern-day cosmologists.
There is nothing that they don't try to do when it comes to discrediting Albert Einstein's General relativity and they use the mathematics that is used for Planck's quantum mechanics to do this where qualitative questions, ideas or solutions are just a tool, but are treated as absolute, —forget dynamic.
Movement, which would prevail somehow and somewhere has nothing to do with any relativity since it is not part of physics, - so far, only Motion is, but fortunately the Laws of Thermodynamics deals with both, and maybe Aristotle's idea of an "Earth" Centered Static Universe might be true to a hypothetical overview on a black hole instead and this would include you as being very large there and everything, everywhere, you would look at would be tiny and miniscule, — if one could somehow maintain his matter's properties on, or near it's surface/event horizon.
See excellent short video: 'Transistors & The End of Moore's Law', from 2veritasium on You Tube.
To an artist considering problems involving black holes and Relativity, this only indicates another dimension we can't see that can handle an infinity of infinities better than the dimensions we know now, to bring the numbers back to where they belong (which I discuss elsewhere in another story). They explain former mysteries and create new ones in exchange, - not new problems. What's wrong with that?
It took billions of years for Nature to develop things the way they are and we now have people who think they can explain, god, Nature, life, the Universe, etc. in one lifetime using closed-system mathematics and further, we now have the pleasure of youth barely out of puberty, without any credentials, whose permanent tenure is explaining theoretical physics in places like You Tube or Facebook and seek followers/subscribers; not to continue "their work", but to become more popular!
These people are selling you things, not explaining things and Thermodynamics is the only cure for/to that nonsense. You will find that the heat cycle of their idea is non sequitur, therefore it cannot, or must not be made exist.
Humankind cannot be lead by gods or leaders were/when something superior exists that is completely impartial and is omnipresent and tells us what is right and what is wrong that even animals/insects understand.
Another option for young people who have a true appreciation for Nature and want to appear on You Tube is to work on a choice of abandoned science that is now only used as demonstrations, turned into toys, etc., yet is still fascinating and is far from obsolete, but in no way seeks to explain the meaning of life, god, etc., among other nonsense.
These kids examine philosophy, history, their reason, and their possible application in commercial markets today to solve certain modern problems that did not exist in their time when these devices were around. Most important, they never preside or are condescending either, like the other's who tell you what is dark matter, etc.
Myself, I feel 99% of this cast-off science, has been prematurely abandoned and there is much more to develop. Here, we see that they gain practical experience and practice their imaginations and intuitiveness like an athlete working and training his muscles and reflexes. What these kids and young men build from their own hands matches what comes out of their mouths when they talk, not to forget their infectious enthusiasm. This video clip embedded here from the "MrTeslonian" channel on You Tube, I've selected as an excellent example.
Of course, they occasionally and over-confidently, express weird ideas/expectations and a lot can be attributed to the jumble of pseudo-science, religious people, rationalists and conspiracy theorists they have to deal with, who are all over the place, which takes experience to properly sort out in their respective areas, but they as well, very importantly show their genuine disappointment in their failed experiments or when things turn out not as expected, but more importantly; they never give up and they always blame themselves when something went wrong.
These young people would make excellent scientists if they found a patron at some university or research institute to protect and mentor them.
In the mean time, it is obvious they love what they are doing and there's no price tag anyone can attach to that. Science, like art is its own reward. We say, "Art for the sake of art". We can also say, "Science for the sake of science".
Let us not forget that there is still a lot of controversy in all sorts of wave/vortex/vibration/field theories that rival anything they come out with in quantum mechanics, and new plausible arguments, theories and proposals are coming out all the time and it is always a race as to who will get a bigger slice of the research-grant pie. These are valuable lessons that have to be learned by one's self and can't be acquired in the classroom. See: Konstantin Meyl for a quick look on this vortex/wave controversy, and "Scalar Waves" where (imagine this) one will find "rationalists" describing Heinrich Hertz, for one, as a fool! SC I guess no one can make everybody happy.
This shows me that genius and inventiveness emanates from the person himself by what he truly intends to find out in life, regardless of where he comes from and what age he is, but must be demonstrated as much as the experiment with his work, which magically blend together when presented on places like You Tube, —especially from young people where they can truly shine.
A=C as usual, and this is very apparent with living beings.
To recapitulate: It also serves no purpose in only seeing black holes as deteriorating, evaporating and
It is no coincidence that the first to come out with this depressing theory were Soviet-era "scientists" in Russia at the time, which was stolen by Hawking and given a media circus, which is a bad sign to begin with.
Theft and plagiarism is so common in science now, that after five years of writing this monologue, I don't bat an eyelash anymore where nothing is immune, including bad theories.
What can I say? Not counting unpleasant humans, I think the Universe is beautiful and a wonderful place to visit and think about, and it serves no purpose to give some depressing conclusion about it. Only people with latent religion or lived through marshal Stalin can be so incredibly boring and predictable.
I can state, as an equivalence, that black holes grow all by themselves and don't evaporate at all where, as stated by Feynman, that hitting a proton with a high energy electron will produce an infinite number and assortment of particles and not just three quarks and "that's why they would grow". Further, who has the authority to say what subatomic particles do and what their ultimate purpose or being may be, and all would produce only one outcome, especially if they discuss things like dark matter/energy.
Forget "Catholic guilt" or "Jewish guilt" as being bad; Protestants and sectarian Islamic cults among others are worse because their kind of guilt has to be spread everywhere and are most noted to commit suicide too; if we are to take a Stalinist overview of things, which his philosophy is equivalent to this task.
Hawking radiation (which in theory works fine with microscopic black holes like the ones they made at the Large Hadron Collider, but are not to be compared to actual black holes in the cosmos) is "virtually" impossible because evaporation and condensation (even the evaporation of his virtual particles) require energy and are not independent sources of energy that flow by themselves, but require Work so Hawking has completely, and very conveniently, overlooked Thermodynamics entirely, or puts it together upside down which is typical of any mathematician and theoretical physicist working with extremely tiny insignificant things; creating along with it a mathematical opera, complete with dancers and an orchestra.
The Entropy of the universe itself cannot be used for this type of work either, nor is entropy additive like ordinary heat (becoming more useful as opposed to any conditional entropy of whatever temperature would always be heat that cannot be put to Work because black holes would literately need to be "cooked via Work" from the outside to "evaporate" and condense virtual particles and further; Work is not affected by gravity, but it does have the power to change/affect gravity. Heat is the only thing that exists that bridges the gap between the verbs, To Have and To Be because it exists in both those forms and they do wondrous things together.
Work, by the way, cannot be sucked or pushed into a black hole and the Universe's conditional entropy cannot be changed. Black holes have their own inescapable metaphysical "black holes" which means gravity is not the ultimate force in the universe at one point, so what we see has some purpose that has nothing to do with armageddon.
Stephen Hawking simply does not see big enough or small enough, which in some systems are not different, but may be equivalent or complimentary.
Hawking may be a great mathematician, but he knows absolutely nothing about even the basics of thermodynamics because he does not apply it to his peculiar physical/mathematical theory and we will just forget about him, even, having some faint familiarity with the concept of open systems.
He is like the Galileo he loves so much; by publishing a garbage best seller, "History of Time", of which Galileo's best seller was entitled: 'Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi del mondo' (1632) which also did extreme damage to science at the time, which I will discuss later, but Galileo created and developed new things, we still use today. He also found a connection with heat in matter directly with relativity and the cosmos.
Hawking, on his part, has only written a sarcophagus describing Eternity itself, as a closed system, which is a contradiction because all closed systems have a beginning and an ending (the Devil makes more sense), as if he were one of the Fates which is emanated entirely by the power of his Id controlled Ego, which today provides the masses who believe him with the only "light" of knowledge of/in the universe. he also talks and seeks publicity too much (which Galileo was also guilty of).
The new relativistic ideas beyond Einstein, that will appear one day, may even appear spontaneously because someone just had to think about them, as easily as an apple suddenly falling on someone's head, but that relativity will also have a detailed history already based on the smaller ones before it, even though it may appear spontaneously now or the future because of the new ways we will discover to travel anywhere that are beyond the Second Law of Thermodynamic model of chemical/nuclear closed systems.
One thing is certain: A stable object such as a black hole has an equivalence to something, somewhere within the Universe, like everything else and is not some absolute object that makes its own decisions, which we do not know about yet, where new relationships are waiting to reveal themselves in this vast Universe for everybody with an enthusiasm and love for Nature and its own creativity, which has not ended, but has only begun, comparatively speaking.
Learning from professor "X" and learning from Nature are two entirely different things and the best thing a human professor can do is teach a student how things are done in society, and where to get grants and maybe inspire/encourage him/her a bit. Authoritative presiding is out; fraternal care is in.
These popularizes of "fabric of space" and the grids they construct to explain "space-time", which has nothing to do with Einstein's work, but is a true perversion.
Albert Einstein explained something called a "Space-Time continuum" where "fabrics" would be impossible anyway, unless "fabric" as opposed to "continuum" has some new meaning I don't know about yet.
When the planets are represented to kiddies as supposedly going around the sun like a perfect opera on a rubber mat, while everyone is eating ice cream, rely on closed system mathematics, where things can get stretched forever, instead of observing Nature.
For example: If one blows on a stick that makes soap bubbles and stretches it, one will see that it collapses and becomes an independent floating soap bubble and that is probably what happens to space in the creation of a black hole, where instead of matter we would be seeing space do this instead. James Dewar managed to keep a soap bubble "alive" for two years and was working ahead of his time on problems involving General relativity and black holes, but this fact no one will find anywhere and one has to piece together a lot of scientific literature and comments on his work from many peers, historians and scientists of his time to rediscover this.
James Dewar was not popular or followed because he lost all his friends, doctoral students and colleagues during the Great War and not because he was a bad guy as is exaggeratedly dramatized in the documentary, 'Absolute Zero'. The next generation, who didn't know him, just thought he was an old fuddy duddy. I discuss more on his work later when I go over hydrogen research.
That is why there are small black holes and big black holes and they can grow too just like soap bubbles. Here we are dealing with different forms of existence, but the same thermodynamic principles apply where mathematics can never predict, theorize or calculate to even exist. In the end, it is the human imagination that can probe these things delicately and consider the universe in new form of awareness and then we can explore and use maths to our heart's content, but first we use Thermodynamics as our essential tool, beginning by following the heat.
In my opinion, we should be thinking about how to assist Nature instead of destroy it with theories, closed-system mathematics and anthropomorphic divine entities and reconsider matter itself in how we treat it, where this may be the key to begin, finally, understanding it and ourselves.
The Universe is the oldest thing in the universe and looks better every second.
Theorist's quantitative description and prediction of demise and deterioration, set down in closed-systemed mathematics are strictly a Judeo-Christian philosophy (whether intentional or not), especially where they predict a unique singular destiny in their "calculations" or "predictions" (which is not a "prediction" if it leads to "nothing") which can only be brought upon by a god and not Nature by way of what we would expect from such things. To calculate or to predict anything beyond physics is a form of closure and it is the prisoner or thrall, in society, who accepts such things as valid when they are applied to metaphysics where they should only be qualitative ideas.
Their approach is decidedly unfriendly and hostile towards Nature which can only lead to our own doom especially where there is no natural mechanism in the universe, anywhere, - even theoretically to increase any of the Entropy of the Universe, so the Universe, as a system, is "absolutely" eternal whether you like it or not in any direction you want to go with it.
Once something is created, it is created otherwise there is no need for creating anything. As Mr Freeze in Batman and Robin says: "The only absolute in the universe is that everything freezes", does not mean that everything will freeze, but is only going in that direction in the way the Third Law of Thermodynamics says it will. It may change form and it's properties, but it will always exist in one form or another and is absolutely essential.
The day the Universe is missing anything down to the smallest particle that can be imagined, is the day things will go crazy everywhere and we will see and feel it too. Some think that this is possible and could be an agent for Armageddon, but Thermodynamics says it is not possible.
In Physics, a virtual particle can exist anywhere and is not the exclusive system for Black Holes to deal with and point the way the Universe will go away. These things are real and exist everywhere, including inside Black Holes.
Think of them, for now, as an interface between Matter and Nothing and demonstrate that besides matter and nothing, the ternary element that makes a universe is mass which because they appear and disappear, they exists beyond space-time, since when these things appear they display gravitational forces that can be measured. Susskind and Hawking seem to forget quantum entanglement and only apply that effect to the things they feel like, and are not inclusive to black holes. See: Casimir effect for virtual particles and their actual physical effects.
Artists themselves couldn't care less if the universe lasted just another thousand years or lasted forever because, I for instance, will be dead by then and we would only be guided by a change in Entropy towards some other system and scientists/philosophers should be asking instead from the example of Death, where it happens that something that belongs to a dynamical system can be so stable as to be and act like a "thing" which is only a privilege of/for Nature to possess that kind of power and creativity.
Apocalypses are a non-sequitur and appeal only to guilt-stricken groups who because they can't create anything, or out of sheer laziness and a taste for exploitation, need to prove things instead, where no proof is necessary in any case.
Why prove Death?
Here we may ask: What (in the deepest sense) is Stephen Hawking or a Bible literalist trying to prove? These people go out of their way to prove Death and Oblivion more than Life and existence like it was theirs to give or take away, or even have any authority.
Notice in this work that the baby and the grim reaper are, both, holding a reaper. The artist can understand the meta-truth of the baby who proposes its own dynamical situation that must go backwards in its reality provided that these entities are immortal and here we see both represented at zero by scale/step-method reckoning.
In the picture; any form of immortality cannot beget any of its traits or properties to/as a new generation yet the baby has a reaper, i.e. God cannot beget God (or god cannot create god) otherwise there would be two Gods, and identical ones too in a closed system so they would eventually interfere with each other since both cannot occupy the same space. Further on, since God cannot create Itself means there are impossible things for God to do, which means God exists and god does not exist at the same time, or god can only create inferior things to itself so a god is not something to be worshiped because that is no miracle. We ourselves and animals create things all the time and whether they are inferior or superior depends entirely on the system it is put to use for.
God created Lucifer and created Christ and it is his Son that suffered the most and made him by fate compete against Lucifer. Since no one can put god on trial; this shows that everything in the Bible is a dramatization and not a real story that promotes war, death, power and trials which is what all organized Judeo-Christian religions excelled in creating, including the infection of philosophy, science and thought. Lucifer himself is laughing.
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven -John Milton, Paradise Lost
To find G-D, all must overthrow all organized religions. Those that don't are simply not looking for G-D or seeking him/her and only exist in/for the forms, which can be illusions, but these types are certainly not loving or even complying with G-D or the Prophet or the Messiah, etc.
G-D demands compliance, not love or obedience which comes after what Nature creates as natural, but with nothing actually codified to follow and must be discovered, which means believers and non-believers are half right and totally wrong, and to be totally right they need both philosophies and treat them together transitively as a system just like hot and Cold is treated in the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics. Everything in the Universe is a Bible and is not some system with words that's written in one particular "Holy language".
So if you were in another Universe, where time goes backwards, you would probably see yourself as a child or in the equivalence of how many years you have left to live in this universe because one cannot travel anywhere one wants in time and appear there (fate takes on new properties as well which only point towards the/your future, as time only moves forward even for fate and destiny), but like in quantum mechanics only specific qualities or discreet quantities are allowed and in this continuum time unwinds and winds simultaneously.
This is one way how the step method deals with infinities and time paradoxes become non-existent and you cannot go back to a time where you never existed in your present form because you either already existed or have not existed yet and could only experience those times in the forms you were at the time because your system of atoms existed back then too, but were practically everywhere. The atoms in your body might be part of someone else by then and by removing them from that person (because you are using them) you'd be killing or making that person sick and change destiny.
One cannot visit time, but only exist in it. All these time paradoxes we see in science fiction are caused by the Hindu-Arabic system of counting and would never exist with the Step Method system for counting or with Roman Numerals in the way they were used where even the day of the week on the calendar was reckoned by "so many days to the Ides" or so many days to the Kalends or Nones, A.M. P.M. among other things.
Today, only welfare recipients or stock holders appreciate and use this maths where they are highly sensitive to how many days until their welfare cheque or boardroom meeting arrives and plan their lives accordingly.
The physicist sees infinity, an artist sees the eternal that you can see for yourself on Kaku's blackboard in the clip (on the last page) about infinities and to attempt to understand 'the eternal', well this takes an entirely different thought process, mathematics and approach to Nature and I don't see any of Heisenberg's or Gauss' equations anywhere in their work or described in their discussions, so this only makes a nice dramatic video to captivate the audience with a story like "The Princess and The Pea", but this is not science or even art, but death they are describing and emulating, or a sophisticated version of depression shrouded and hidden in "mathematics" or rather its abuse, stercus tauri and convoluted statements.
Another thing: If you want to physically go somewhere 500 years ago; well you have to be at least be 500 years old first, yourself, and hopefully have some enough wisdom by that time to not go there by then and interfere with things as shown in the video above with Buster Keaton in The Twilight Zone from 1961 (above) where the moral of the story is: "Stay in your own backyard; to which might be added, if possible, assist others to stay in theirs." -Rod Serling
The only thing that could go back in time is G-D since He was supposedly there at the beginning and He could theoretically go backwards to before His time, to as much as He is old today, but would He go there?... because before G-D there is Nothing! The god humans have created, must himself tread very carefully because with one thought and will he could destroy himself.
So apparently only humans can do time travel and G-D cannot, and now one is probably beginning to understand this insanity going on in science and mathematics that has its beginnings from far long ago.
There is nothing wrong with science. Like religion, it's the people that practice and talk about it that are wrong most of the time, but when one applies the principles and conjugate different systems the way Nature demonstrates Thermodynamics before any subject is to be described, one cannot go wrong or talk nonsense.
Just follow, first, where all the heat goes and ignore everything else, then we can go back and look at it's physics and/or chemistry and/or philosophy because no physics or chemistry can contradict any thermodynamics, but thermodynamics can easily and very quickly contradict physics and chemistry.
This is why I say these theoretical/particle physicists, cosmologists, intellectuals, communicators, creationists, proselytizers are actually talking about death in different ways or preparations and nothing else, and despise humanity and themselves as to compare with the types of infinities they discuss.
As for proselytizers and creationists of any organized religion; they are clearly not describing G-D in any form since G-D should be able to do anything and nothing is impossible, but in their model of the universe they create something that is antithetical or they kill G-D remotely, with their closed and unsustainable systems like their heavens, hells and nirvanas among other things and systems, where G-D should be something that has better things to do and better venues to be in.
Scientists, and their like, who either might be atheists or have beliefs, but they are only in name and not in substance. There is no other parallel in any other philosophy and so their ideas (and many other theorists and intellectuals) must be rejected out of principle, unless they come out with some antitheses themselves because situations like the "competition" between these two characters (Susskind and Hawking), which is much lauded everywhere in the modern view by the media and intellectuals, simply doesn't do enough, and ends up being a mockery of the Scientific Method (never mind theology) where competition and mutual loathing between scientists where, "to get there first" has replaced critical observation and plain old thinking and cooperation.
These people argue about ideas that were invented and abandoned in Soviet Union during the era of marshal Stalin.
People should remember that the first universities to appear were created to teach only esoteric things found and translated from Arabic libraries in Toledo when supposedly pious Christians (who were actually Arab mercenaries) retook Spain from the Arabs and Islam.
These libraries originally came from Gundeshapur. Their Iranian emperor Khosrau I (531-579 AD) gave refuge to Greeks and Syriac-speaking Assyrians fleeing religious persecution by the Byzantine empire. He also looked towards the East where he had Indian scholars translate their texts on astronomy, astrology, mathematics and medicine and the Chinese scholar's works on herbal medicine and religion and had them all translate everything into the Pahlavi writing system which was a sort of Greek/Latin for Persian scholars. Later with the Arabs, these works were translated into Arabic where they were copied while traveling towards the West, ending up in Spain to be discovered by Europeans and had them translated back into Greek, Latin, Italian, English, German, Russian, Spanish, French, ect.
The West owes more to Persian Emperors for its modern development than all the history of Rome and Greece combined because they saved all their work and redistributed it. We should have more respect for countries like Iran and Iraq and the surrounding regions because these are the same people that existed then. We can begin by boycotting western governments and multinationals that interfere with them. That's what I do, as I don't buy a single product from any company that interferes with cultures, and with governments that interfere, they deal with my written criticism and I don't visit those countries.
This incomprehensible knowledge to any European at the time was used to keep young aristocrats busy with esoteric things in the universities of the time. A minute percentage of university educated individuals developed this stuff for integration into European languages and their societies (mostly Jews who later got kicked out of Spain).
The other articles that continue after, on The Principles of The Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics, show you how to do this with stuff you haven't read or looked at before because, ultimately, everything and anything, including their systems can be broken down-to as if it were a Thermodynamic system, - even philosophy! This is because philosophy must inevitably deal with truth, matter, work, economics and energy in an Equivalent manner and there is no way around this, even for metaphysics, unless people are blinded to this and so cannot prevent disaster and must rely on peers, the state, corporations, television or religion, who programmed them when they were young, to assist them upon everything throughout their lives, like any helpless slave, or thrall, in history. The only difference between private enterprise and socialism is that money is not transitive and flows only in one direction of one or the other, where this is not the same with free enterprise and the money flows in a transitive manner in both directions along with communication and ideas.
For now, we will take what we can get, just like everyone else had too, back in the 17th century. For yourself, in the future, I hope that this small example will demonstrate to everybody, to try to make an effort to not believe what anyone says until you get it verified (and this includes me) because history and science, you will discover, here, in these articles and essays, is all too often a form of flattery, vanity and corruption and since the rise of scientific societies, modern science is more like a country club than anything else.
There are too many choirs of committees serenading and distorting the truth for a multitude of reasons, but most concern business and certain business practices that are implicated with science as if it were an integral thing where it is always the wrong people who profit from this. In the past it was war-monger kings and now it's war-monger multinationals.
Regardless, anything on the media, social media or social network is a form of entertainment, especially where science, or even religion is discussed or examined and must never be used as a reference to a source of facts except if you say something like: "On PBS Nova (or whatever documentary, News item, religious show, social network or You Tube-like social media, etc.) I heard, or saw, such and such". There is no serious scientific journal or publication anywhere that cite brand-name entities as reference material unless the writer of a particular article is submitting a paper on the media, itself, as a subject, nor would anyone be stupid enough to ask places like General Electric, Boeing or Westinghouse, etc. etc. their opinions about anything concerning philosophy.
The philosophers, scientists, video journalists and science historians out of class or don't give classes like David Attenborough, James Burke, Jacob Bronowski, Kenneth Clark, Richard Feynman, etc., should be seen as completely separate, as their reputations are their title and are more likely to discuss/demonstrate science, art, Nature and philosophy and civilization, and their relationships throughout history and not going around proving things or telling you how to think like our totalitarian media stars do now since Big Brother is now on the air. These people were/are true rhetoricians, artists, philosophers and scientists and not demagogues or pretenders.
Among other things that bug me; it is that nowhere is it mentioned by scientists, in this video (PBS 'Absolute Zero') or anything else that is supposed to contain information on Thermodynamics, is that all of it is based on, 'The Principle of Absolute Zero,' as a system and without it, there's no Thermodynamics, there's no Universe, no god, no religion, no philosophy, no systems, no physics, no chemistry of any kind, no atheism and no video, no music, no sex, no PBS, no BS, no ideas, no metaphysics, no love and hate, no good and evil, - Nothing, and forget 'fundamental particles' or the 'standard model' as they cannot exist themselves without Thermodynamics (later with Electrodynamics) in the first place.
It all reminds me of this vintage educational chemistry video, shown here just above, on Zinc Oxide that represents what I'm saying here quite clearly. See clip above.
In this, we find that people like the actor/bodybuilder/businessman/politician Arnold Schwarzenegger in his role as 'Mr. Freeze' in Batman and Robin (shown on the previous page and already mentioned on this page) has a better understanding in this with the statement: "Everything Freezes" (which will be demonstrated later where the laws of physics themselves are "frozen") than any physicist, and is one of the reasons why General
Absolute Zero is a system not a thing, nor can it exist in/as a "thing".
We must consider that "boiling" which is a very unscientific term for physics to use who are supposed to only discuss things quantitatively today because things that go to "nothing" would have to "boil" to there too being that "nothing" (and beyond that) is/are probably just another property of matter.
So, there must exist zero-entropy plasma of some construction of quarks somewhere where they are all frozen because it is the laws of physics (or just plain physics) that are frozen and not matter itself, so they appear frozen, and here we discover a real illusion which is better than what they call "optical illusions", which actually have physical validity, as already discussed.
This is a problem for both quantum and classical mechanics, as we know now of zero-entropy liquids which might appear or have the properties of solids and crystalline in much higher magnitudes where magnitude and heat are inseparable just like all the forces in physics have completely different characteristics depending on the magnitudes discussed, which is especially prevalent in gravity, which is meaningless at the atomic level, but ends up being the dominant force in the Universe that can crush atoms, notwithstanding that there may be other forces in the universe that only make an appearance at certain magnitudes that are greater than gravity.
Nature does not build fences for open systems, but controls these systems by making them contradict their laws at certain magnitudes and the Universe is preserved because their Thermodynamics remains the same.
We see "frozen-solid glaciers" where in larger magnitudes of time we "see" that glaciers flow just like rivers of liquid water or a stream with their unique physics and effects because physics unlike thermodynamics is primarily affected by space/time and thermal equilibrium, but thermodynamically the flowing river and the flowing glacier are identical in function and it is physics/chemistry that is changed, just like Newton's Third law only applied to a very narrow band of frequencies of energy applied to matter.
Timing is important too:
Like if you want to make kids yawn today; show the Magdeburg hemispheres in action, but this was exiting cutting-edge stuff back in the 17th century and one has to credit Otto von Guericke for his masterful P.T. Barnum-like showmanship in getting the crowds interested. This besides his political/diplomatic career is one thing they don't tell us about what a good entertainer/demonstrator/communicator he was.
It's always amusing for me to wonder why they make interesting showman-like scientists in the past boring, and boring, reclusive, misanthropic scientists interesting and exciting. It never fails, as I see this all over the place.
In this video clip, although an excellent short bio of Otto Von Guericke, I beg to differ with one item: 9:30: There is no "vacuum" in the Torricellian column of mercury, but mercury vapour instead, which created the "empty" space. This being that it (the mercury) was "boiled" by its own weight (creating a low pressure environment), in transitive equilibrium with the weight of atmospheric air pushing down on the open vessel filled with mercury.
The difference being the "empty space" created by the relationship between liquid mercury, air and gravity in an open or devised a closed system. The proof that there is mercury vapour is that we can apply a static-electric charge, or a neon sign transformer to the column and the "vacuum" will glow in the manner any mercury vapor lamp would glow which it wouldn't if there was air or a vacuum in the "empty space" of that column. A Torricellian "vacuum" is like a cold CRT.
A "vacuum", like "absolute zero", is a qualitative concept and cannot exist quantitatively.
So Aristotle's, "Horror vacui" postulate still applies and you decide whether he was discussing a system or something real or something that has become a system because this also involves the void between Democritus's indivisibles, which themselves (the concept of atoms) have changed since ancient times, while remembering that no physicist or theoretical physicist today is perfect either.
So, when they discuss trillionth of a degree above Absolute Zero they are actually discussing the properties of a specific form of matter in that magnitude, the heat itself can be considered irrelevant or an indication of that matter's particular property, while considering the surrounding pressure, which we would put on a scale, where our magnitude should not be taken chauvinistically or of any standard to base anything upon.
Like the ice found on Mount Etna near boiling lava that was prized my Roman gourmets, a black hole itself could be considered as one system for "Absolute Zero" because heat in all it's forms except entropy would react to it in every way predicted and known so far in thermodynamics. Whatever entropy is taken in with a black hole is immediately returned to space or matter or space/matter depending on the type of black hole, but that is another discussion for the future.
The first half of PBS's 'Absolute Zero Part 1: The Conquest of Cold', featuring Andrew Szydlo (who is just a chemistry historian and not a scientist) and unsurprisingly discusses thermodynamics as a closed system because magnitudes are not taken into account, makes the whole thing worthwhile (for entertainment purposes) and the second part with no
Anyhow, concerning this Principle on Absolute Zero and non-existence (see: Vacuum def: "Space that is devoid of matter."), I would think that this would be an important fact to mention somewhere, but don't listen to me because I am only a multimedia artist and surrealist, and part-time metaphysicist who's writing about Thermodynamics because he's just viewed a very disturbing video, among others and who is now saying "WTF" is going on here? Artists study Nature too, but this cannot compare to what science knows: or can it? The nice thing about the Universe is that some things never change like people or the properties of photons, so whatever nonsense they say occurred 6000 or 13 billion years ago, it makes no difference and one does not need to be a physicist, religious leader or a mathematician to understand or appreciate this either, regardless of what kind of system we are talking about.
Regardless, G-D is not something that can be quantified or given some property or specific purpose, whether one is a scientist or a theologian.
See: 300,000-Year-Old Caveman 'Campfire' Found in Israel. If obliterated, see: GD.
In my nasty manner, I posted these two following videos together, in sequence, so that you can see the difference between bad and good professors, where on one side we have a self-styled "experimentalist", a professor of physics and engineering who does not know any Thermodynamics, the difference between movement and motion or can conjugate different systems together, or knows the differences between demonstrating and describing; who argues a lot and these questions have been around since Guillaume Amontons in the 17th century who discovered Absolute Zero as a dynamical system, —not as a "thing" in the first place (which is now lost), plus this professor (Moriarty) had months to prepare for his video demonstration.
Where on the other hand, in the video clip immediately afterward, we have a calming electrical engineer and quantum physicist (Professor Andrea Morello) who can discuss classical and quantum physics, dynamical systems and Thermodynamics together in one breath al fresco when describing one experiment and speak for each of these things where they apply, in a manner that anybody could understand and this is cutting-edge/futuristic technology.
With these two extremes demonstrated. Now you can build your own scale! This is something to think about because you are as much about any science as the object or dynamic of study, as already proven by corrupt and evil scientists all over history. The missing third element to add (like Fahrenheit's Thermometer, which would be when brine freezes/melts) would be something metaphysical that has meaning for you (or absolutely no meaning, remembering Douglas Adams' probability-improbability theory), or is an extension of your own study/discipline, i.e. bad and good psychology professors, etc. Anyway this proves that one must research these university's professors first before going to any university to learn anything.
Thank god for the internet because this is just the tool everybody (not just the lucky rich) need to acquire a real education and a university degree in the future can/should be replaced with an examination by some kind of, as yet non-existent entity, that is answerable to the public in conjunction with some respected authority. Most universities, that are not worth their salt today, will make excellent condos in the future, its administrators can be recycled as janitors, committees, quorums, etc., for these new condos.
Interestingly, I find it amazing to see that researchers and experimenters of the 17 and 18th centuries, who knew nothing about Thermodynamics, had no equipment, had inferior ideas and all with religious interference, had a better theoretical understanding or idea of it than modern researchers who are supposed to know the Laws of Thermodynamics and not be preferential as they do with their over-popularizing of the Second Law of Thermodynamics over the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics, so we will forget objectivity since they have no philosophical tools, with this thermodynamics that can provide it to be objective about anything, anyway since the Second Law was developed out of Natural Philosophy and not science, where they end up having no practical understanding at all about its meaning (as seen in articles and videos like 'Absolute Zero') where hot is only described, in principle, as something that can burn or vaporize things and only as if that was important, where in fact heat combined with pressure/vacuum systems is capable of demonstrating an infinite assortment of effects that have completely different purposes; up to the point that what it does could be considered alien technology by today's understanding of things. This weird monologue that maybe 1% understand is a tribute this fact.
What they call Thermodynamics is not thermodynamics. What they call Physics is not physics. At least chemists have the decency to make distinctions like Nuclear chemistry, Organic chemistry, Inorganic chemistry, etc., and none claim to "know all" or overlap their authority over other subjects.
Thermodynamics is the mirror, or camera of truth and no part of it can be patented (click or tap on pic) or owned by anyone or anything, nor is anyone an expert of it, but just knowing its basics is enough to change everything for the better in any situation and sets everyone on the right path where an infinite assortment of new systems and networked elements are waiting and be combined in ways that would make anything we have today primitive and slow-paced, yet at the same time will always afford a quiet unassuming existence if one wants to live that way and these two extremes would understand each other perfectly, in perfect harmony.
This is extremely rare footage.
Here we can visually appreciate what Professor Andrea Morello has to say about, "Heisenberg Pulsations and Vibrations in Matter", that can be distinguished visually at near quantum levels (as per particle physics) with Raster STEM (scanning transmission electron microscope) photography where the only driving force, in this case, is a conditional Entropy, or, "the vibrations of heat" he describes as being necessary to remove for the Gravitational-wave experiment he describes.
Dr. Albert Crewe, who developed this technology you can see here at right, was the director of the Argonne National Laboratory (1961--1967) and later developed this 'Scanning transmission electron microscopy' which, here, demonstrates the actual movements of uranium atoms and their conditional Entropic activity (never decreasing), where at a smaller magnitude; Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, among other things, mathematically shares the same kind of motion as if matter were a kind of pulsating liquid, except here in this clip, the only driving force here, at the atomic level, is never-decreasing entropy, but if we were to discuss quantum movements in another subject, their movements would be exactly the same as you see here. This clip is so important, I show it again later on another "matter" in another monologue.
Everything "inanimate" thing you see, feel, hear and touch lives in way, or (if you prefer) has its own independent movement which cannot be interfered with as much as your own movements, which is a quality of matter we will need to appreciate more. It is not our place to be preferential and only appreciate biological forms of matter as breathing, pulsating and moving. Next time one does any meditation, yoga or weight lifting, etc., think about that because here you have a motion-picture to etch into your mind and imagination.
There is no such thing as kinetic movement at the subatomic level, but there is "vibration". This includes Quarks which are often described as a perfect liquid (liquid quark-gluon plasma). What we think of as a solid substance is actually composed of trillions of these vibrating flimsy things, in 99% void. Why this appears not so, is because we are made in the same way with trillions of "our own" flimsy things and void making us up.
Our shapes and forms that make what we are, is shaped/initiated by our DNA (which includes all other living things).
The Double-helix is the structure of a phase-conjugated wave and is proposed by some to be some sort of atomic radio that's tuned to receive and give messages/data, and that is also how and why one exists. Not good for businesses of organized religion and most science!
This double-helix is also affected by cosmic waves and certain forms of radiation from substances like, for instance, potassium that (which is radioactive), which collectively, have the effect of "turning the knobs" like one would change stations or adjust the volume on radio dials and like radio, one can fall into a good station or a bad station and call good stations and bad stations.
One can read about the double-helix being important by researching: Scalar Waves, but beware what you read since this is in the wild-frontiers of science, but is fascinating nevertheless and don't forget Thermodynamics, as everything is possible if Thermodynamics says it it's possible. Then, one can work on the systems, physics, chemistry and mechanics involved.
Regarding, (STEM) photography:
Quantitatively, ordinary light cannot penetrate this void because the wavelengths are so large and the shorter ones, like gamma waves are so short and energetic they mess things up and we still don't know how to control their incoherence like we can with visible waves. Only Nature can do that so far (blasars).
In the classical-mechanical universe, having the same density and structure; qualitatively, we are actually being stopped from passing through each other (besides already given the forms our body's have) by each other's subatomic electrons because we either do not move fast enough or we don't exist in sufficient enough high frequency (vibration) or awareness and existence to move faster than those barrier electrons around atoms to pass by them as some particles are capable of doing.
This is why Leonard Susskind would need to be made of light (X rays) to pass through his walls, regardless of what he thinks quantum mechanics says. I guess this is because he is a former plumber and passing through walls is very important for plumbing and plumbers.
This is the underlying problem with Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle is that it is entirely human-centric because if we existed as/in beings of high frequency matter/energy we would understand the quantum like we understand classical mechanics and the classical universe and all life there would appear inanimate like we see the inanimate!
The same is in relativity where everything stops at the speed of light, but then a new dimension of the dynamic universe unfolds too and we simply cannot exist at this frequency without changing our awareness entirely and so never be human ever again.
And remember when I described a interrelationship between relativity and heat that was investigated intuitively by Galileo that even Hawking (Galileo's biggest fan) knows nothing about?
If heat, as free energy is "organized" molecular kinetic movement then entropy, is the supposedly "disorganized" and "chaotic" movements within those molecules, just like watching the ocean. All these movements in "disorganization" that resembles the movement of water, are what gives things like solids, liquids, gases all their properties and attributes like elasticity and viscosity, etc. and even their life when applied to organic systems (electrons decide, among some other things, matter's affinities and whether the element is inert or not). We simply do not possess the mathematics yet to understand those numbers that we now call "chaos" and "disorder" but we do have the imagination to study and feel.
A physicist might be able to convince you that the ocean is "disorganized", but let him convince a fisherman first. An explosion of energy, might be more disorganized than it (the explosive) was before, but everyone loves fireworks and not thinking, "Oh! Those poor disorganized molecules." The same goes for that "disorganized" steam (formerly, the more "organized" water) that turns those turbines to generate that electricity, to power your house.
Now, whether we make steam by boiling it to 212° F at 14.64 psi or boiling it at 102 ° F at 1 psi, we will find that we can run our turbines just as effectively. So heat is not only just "relative", but also a matter of opinion, because these physicists of today always promote the most wasteful and polluting forms of "science" and included are the ideas and things they promote to use to make their devices run.
Scientific societies, institutes, universities and think tanks, themselves, act like legal persons which are immortal and do not evolve very well.
You, yourself, have the responsibility to not give yourself away to these things. Do what science, itself, loves as if it were a Muse: Be objective with it. Double and triple check everything.
Click or Tap for Part 4: 'From Merging With Matter To The Beginnings of T.E'
Go to top of page
A History and Monologue on Thermodynamics
- Extreme Cold Part 1: A History and Monologue on The Applications of Thermodynamics, Systems and Matter
- Extreme Cold Part 2: Matter and Its Different States, Systems and Heinrich Hertz
- Extreme Cold Part 3: The Barometer, Thermometer, Pressure and Temperature (among other things)
- Extreme Cold Part 4: From Merging With Matter To The Beginnings of T.E
- Extreme Cold Part 5: The Energy/Work Systems of Philo of Byzantium, Ctesibius and Heron of Alexandria
- Extreme Cold Part 6: Cycles and Systems That Move All By Themselves That Don't Involve Physics, But By Thermodynamics
- Extreme Cold Part 7: A History on Perpetual Motion
- Extreme Cold Part 8: Stirling Engines, Politics, Matter and a History of the Thermometer
- Extreme Cold Part 9: Thermal Equilibrium in all it's wonders
- Extreme Cold Part 10: The Caloric Theory, James Joules, The 1848 Revolution
- Extreme Cold Part 11: The Two Entropies, Death, Information Theory and The Mechanical Equivalence of Heat
- Extreme Cold Part 12: The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics As per Artistic Philosophy
- Extreme Cold Part 13: Cooling, Refrigeration and The Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics
- Extreme Cold Part 14: Beyond Absolute Zero