| Pages:
1
2 |
watson.fawkes
International Hazard
Posts: 2793
Registered: 16-8-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The folly of extracting zero-point energy
After a recent flare up here involving zero point energy, I came up with an explanatory analogy here that I hope will speak to the sensibilities of
folks here. I waited for the moment to pass, so here we go.
Trying to extract useful work from the vacuum state (the 'zero point') is a futile as trying to extract useful work from carbon dioxide. It's not that
there's not energy there; there clearly is. The vacuum energy is expressed as "the sea of virtual particles"; for CO2, it's the bond energy. Work,
while measured in units of energy, is an expression of differences in energy states. You can only extract work out of an energy state if there's a
lower energy state to get to. For chemistry, thinking about lower energy states gets complicated at this point, but for the physical issues, it's
clear as day. The vacuum state is, by construction, the lowest state possible. There's nowhere down to go.
|
|
|
MrHomeScientist
International Hazard
Posts: 1806
Registered: 24-10-2010
Location: Flerovium
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Not saying that I agree with the zero point energy concept, but I think the idea is that we live in a "false vacuum." There would be a potential
energy graph that looks like a 'W' with one end lower than the other, with the current vacuum state lieing in one of the dips in the curve. Then if
you apply enough energy to get over one the middle hump, you can fall down to an even lower energy state and extract some extra energy. "False Vacuum"
on Wikipedia has a better graphical representation.
I haven't looked into it much myself so I don't know how valid any of this is. It seems dubious, however, and your example is a good one.
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
It sounds like you would need a perpetual motion machine of the second kind which is impossible based on the laws of thermodynamics.
|
|
|
franklyn
International Hazard
Posts: 3026
Registered: 30-5-2006
Location: Da Big Apple
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Vacuum quantum fluctuation is entirely analogous to Brownian motion. At an earlier time
Maxwell proposed a " Demon " and Szilard similarly conceived of an engine which would
sort more energetic particles from the rest , conventionally in violation of the 2 nd law of
thermodynamics. A double slit interference pattern similarly sorts incident light into light
and dark regions. We are aware that a curved mirror will concentrate incident light to a
greater intensity yet this does not violate the 2 nd law. It is known that Hawking radiation
results when virtual particle pairs at the event horizon of a gravitational black hole become
separated so one is assimilated into the gravitational well leaving the other to become real
in the space just outside. The gravitational hole will in time entirely evaporate away in this
manner , creating new matter from the potential energy of a dead star.
www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=6240#pid71203
www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=1978#pid16761...
.
|
|
|
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The second law of thermodynamics is only a generalization, NOT an absolute law.
Several biological processes have been observed which seem to accomplish work in violation of entropy laws.
There is no theoretical reason why ambient heat, or vacuum energy for that matter, cannot be harnessed and put to work. Such devices, however, are not
currently within the realm of present technology.
Consider that a ThermoPhotoVoltaic cell inside a (very) hot room can generate electricity from the heat, without there needing to be a heat
differential. http://www.jxcrystals.com/ThermoPV.htm
[Edited on 19-8-2011 by AndersHoveland]
I'm not saying let's go kill all the stupid people...I'm just saying lets remove all the warning labels and let the problem sort itself out.
|
|
|
IrC
International Hazard
Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline
Mood: Discovering
|
|
A supermassive black hole eats suns for breakfast. Is the total gravity the sum of all the eaten stars. Or in effect it is infinite since light cannot
escape. Where is the matter the stars are made of. Are these stars still radiating their fusion energy. If so where is it. What laws are in effect
inside the black hole. Or, where are you if you were inside one. No I do not believe it is all frozen at the event horizon if so a 4 billion sun black
hole would in my mind need to be larger than they are, if we assume everything is on the surface (the event horizon). Describe the answers with the
same precise science you would use to explain the internal workings of a star. In other words where is the science. We do not have it. Therefore how
can one prove "The vacuum state is, by construction, the lowest state possible. There's nowhere down to go.". Or the 2nd law as being inviolate. What
I am saying here is in effect no matter how well you think you have proven a thing no one yet knows what they do not know. Science is frozen and will
remain so until enough realize the folly of believing they know much at all. We still burn dead plants and animals suffocating slowly while not one
new energy source which is a major leap has yet to be discovered. So no, I am not foolish enough to state without reservation energy from the vacuum
is not possible. We have not yet discovered what vacuum at the quantum level really is.
It takes energy to think thus increasing entropy by 'using up this energy'. Logic dictates a lower state has been reached for this energy. Yet these
thoughts are energy violating the law by increasing in order.
I for one do not know how to get energy from the vacuum yet I will stand my ground that not only does the possibility exist, possibly someone out
there in the universe has already figured it out.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" Richard Feynman
|
|
|
not_important
International Hazard
Posts: 3873
Registered: 21-7-2006
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland  | The second law of thermodynamics is only a generalization, NOT an absolute law.
Several biological processes have been observed which seem to accomplish work in violation of entropy laws. |
As always, got references?
| Quote: | | There is no theoretical reason why ambient heat, or vacuum energy for that matter, cannot be harnessed and put to work.... |
Umm, see the aformentioned Laws of Thermodynamics for theoretical reasons.
| Quote: | | Consider that a ThermoPhotoVoltaic cell inside a (very) hot room can generate electricity from the heat, without there needing to be a heat
differential. http://www.jxcrystals.com/ThermoPV.htm |
Blargelsnorp. Those are GaSb cells, which have a band gap of around 0,7 V and will respond to longer wave IR than Si cells; and for which "Current
efficiencies are estimated to be ~20% using a 1000°C blackbody spectrum". The devices you linked to burn butane to heat a
radiator well above ambient temperature, and sink the waste energy into the surrounding room and/or in heating water. Fits well within the laws of
thermodynamics.
[Edited on 19-8-2011 by not_important]
|
|
|
watson.fawkes
International Hazard
Posts: 2793
Registered: 16-8-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I am bemused with all the yammering about the second law of thermodynamics, which is fallacious on two counts. The first fallacy is that, per my
example, energy state differences are the substance of the first law, so before you even need to bother appealing to the second law, you have to
explain how the first law applies. The second fallacy is that thermodynamics is inadequately general to encompass the argument, which is about
conservation of energy and energy states and their transitions. I didn't make any claim at the energy involved was heat energy; the argument applies
to any form of energy, structured or not.
Although it's not often acknowledged, there's a hierarchy of relative certainty in physical theory. When an expert makes a claim in order assert
authority, everything is just equally true. And yet we on Earth really don't understand everything that well, not enough that we have achieved
incorruptible truth, not at all. So when challenging assumptions, I find it useful to keep in mind which forms of truth are more certain and which are
less so. Conservation of mass and energy is right up at the top of that hierarchy for me.
|
|
|
starman
Hazard to Others
Posts: 318
Registered: 5-7-2008
Location: Western Australia
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland | The second law of thermodynamics is only a generalization, NOT an absolute law.
Several biological processes have been observed which seem to accomplish work in violation of entropy laws.
[Edited on 19-8-2011 by AndersHoveland] |
I find it somewhat amazing misunderstandings like this still find traction.Regardless of apparent increase in complexity of local biologiical
systems,entropy overall (the solar system in this case) always increases.No exceptions.
Chemistry- The journey from the end of physics to the beginning of life.(starman)
|
|
|
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
In my opinion, the widely spread conception that "entropy always increases" will one day become relegated along with such other historic nonsense as
the flat world hypothesis or the "vital force" theory about organic compounds.
The whole concept of "entropy" is just a concept, an expression of a physical tendency. All of the fundamental theoretical laws of
physics are all time-reversible.
While it may certainly seem to an observer that entropy always tends to increase, humans only have a very limited frame of reference in comparison to
cosmic time and space proportions. The real question is what will be the "end" fate of all the electromagnetic radiation that is being sent out in all
directions in the universe?
Is it really so far-fetched that all the emmitted photons will eventually become red-shifted back due to the gradual force of gravity? As they become
red-shifted, their wavelengths will increase to huge proportions.
The real key to the reversibility of entropy probably has much to do with the phenomena of interference. Interference overcomes the statistical
randomness which is the foundation for the second law of thermodynamics. Remember the phenomena of interference is NOT constrained within the concept
of time. All quantum fluctuations in the present may seem random, but they must correspond to quantum coherence outcomes for future events.
This has very important implications.
So getting back to what the end fate of all those thermal photons will be. The greater the entropy in the universe, the longer the wavelengths of the
photons. Which means more interference coupling between photons, until eventually all the photons in the universe will become coherent. It is at this
point that the uncertainty principle can take over.
It only seems to scientists that entropy is increasing because they cannot see what is/what will be happening to all that "waste" heat. what do you
think the quantum vacuum is composed off? It is just ordinary energy, which is fluctuating between different forms. More specifically, the equilibrium
is in the form of coherent photons of extremely long wavelengths. This quantum vacuum does not follow the second law of thermodynamics, because the
energy which pervades vast areas of space is in the same quantum state.
Departing from the phenomena of quantum coherence (such as wave interference) would require temporarily breaking the law of the conservation of
energy. Two particles are forbiden from overlapping in any way which would reduce their energy. This is the direct reason why it is impossible for two
photons to ever annihilate eachother (at least not without producing other particles, typically a pair of neutrinos).
Trying to interrpret the second "law" of thermodynamics as an absolute law indirectly requires the violation other laws, such as the conservation of
energy and quantum states.
Or put another way, the statistical chaos of expanding entropy is countered by the statistical order from the phenomena of quantum interference and
coherence.
I'm not saying let's go kill all the stupid people...I'm just saying lets remove all the warning labels and let the problem sort itself out.
|
|
|
watson.fawkes
International Hazard
Posts: 2793
Registered: 16-8-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland | | In my opinion, the widely spread conception that "entropy always increases" will one day become relegated along with such other historic nonsense as
the flat world hypothesis or the "vital force" theory about organic compounds. |
Megalomania does not become
you. My recommendation is to stick to chemistry, where at your rampant speculations have at least a shred of relevance to reality. It seems you've
read too much of that slobbery genre of popular physics writing without knowing much anything about the mathematics behind it. Here's the most
egregious example: | Quote: | | [...] the longer the wavelengths of the photons. Which means more interference coupling between photons, until eventually all the photons in the
universe will become coherent. |
No. It's quite clear to me you don't know the first thing about how
interference actually works.
Coherence in light is a phase phenomenon. The concept here is phase statistics, which is a probability density describing how much light intensity at
a particular phase is present. When you add up a bunch of these, you don't get coherence, you get a random variable. (What's actually interesting
about this is that you don't get zero either, which is a rather more interesting phenomenon. It's because you're dealing with imperfectly
monochromatic light.) Perfect coherence in phase statistics looks like a Dirac delta, and that distribution is the lowest entropy state possible,
exactly the opposite of what you get when you start adding up random photons.
There no non-linear effect here, since you're talking about a low energy regime by assumption. It's all linear.
|
|
|
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The behaviour of a high-density collection of very long wavelength photons will take on many of the properties of coherence, because the energy will
be able to couple with intermediate transient vacuum particles. The delta distribution is only the "lowest" energy state possible within the confines
of uncertainty, which is itself due to vacuum fluctuations! It would be completely meaningless to describe the vacuum energy (at least the coherent
equilibrium)itself in terms of uncertainty.
Another thing to think about :
"Non-existent" particles are referred to as "vacuum energy", which can more accurately be described as fluxuations in extremely long wavelength
electromagnetic energy existing in equilibrium with particle- antiparticle pairs.
Since the vacuum energy is, on average, in a zero-value energy state, time and space could be inevitably biased toward normal matter. In the absence
of "vacuum" energy, any particle would theoretically move with infinite speed, existing as a linear vector rather than a point-like particle.
It is for this reason that, in the absence of vacuum energy, concepts of space and time do not have any meaning. The vacuum energy slows down
particles by coupling its large reservoir of energy to that of the particle, effectively lending the particle rest mass.
If there is too much mass in the universe than the potential energy that exists in the form of gravitational attraction will outweigh the sum of all
the particles rest mass! This would obviously be impossible, because any form of energy, even gravitational potential, adds mass to a particle.
One would rather suspect that the potential gravitational energy which can be derived if all mass in the universe were to collapse on itself is
exactly equal to the total rest mass. In other words, an objects rest mass might actually derive not from "Higgs bosons", but rather from the fact
that it has the potential to release energy as it feels the force of gravity. From this, it would not be impossible to calculate how much mass can
exist in the universe. Have a feeling this is part of a wider universal constant which ties several other constants together.
For example, it is estimated that 90% of a particle's rest mass is transformed into kinetic energy if it falls into a black hole.
[Edited on 20-8-2011 by AndersHoveland]
I'm not saying let's go kill all the stupid people...I'm just saying lets remove all the warning labels and let the problem sort itself out.
|
|
|
Endimion17
International Hazard
Posts: 1468
Registered: 17-7-2011
Location: shores of a solar sea
Member Is Offline
Mood: speeding through time at the rate of 1 second per second
|
|
You understand that this statement classifies you as a near-crackpot?
No biological process is in violation with thermodynamic laws. Every process observed in this universe increases the total entropy, even if it
decreases a local one.
Here's a hint for you - try studying refrigerators. You might get surprised.
|
|
|
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
There was an article, which cannot now be found, which described a cell accomplishing work without expending energy, which was supposedly remarkable
since this was not previously thought possible. It is this to which the previous post referred. But yes, in the strict sense, this would still not be
a true violation of the second law.
The second law of thermodynamics is not considered a fundamental universal law of nature.
[Edited on 21-8-2011 by AndersHoveland]
I'm not saying let's go kill all the stupid people...I'm just saying lets remove all the warning labels and let the problem sort itself out.
|
|
|
hissingnoise
International Hazard
Posts: 3940
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline
Mood: Pulverulescent!
|
|
But of course, the Earth is flat, the theory of perpetual motion machines is sound and Sweden is a violent Muslim country . . .
Brilliant reasoning on all counts!
|
|
|
Endimion17
International Hazard
Posts: 1468
Registered: 17-7-2011
Location: shores of a solar sea
Member Is Offline
Mood: speeding through time at the rate of 1 second per second
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland | There was an article, which cannot now be found, which described a cell accomplishing work without expending energy, which was supposedly remarkable
since this was not previously thought possible. It is this to which the previous post referred. But yes, in the strict sense, this would still not be
a true violation of the second law.
The second law of thermodynamics is not considered a fundamental universal law of nature.
[Edited on 21-8-2011 by AndersHoveland] |
Where have you read about it? Timecube.com? 
[Edited on 21-8-2011 by Endimion17]
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Zero Point Energy.
http://books.google.com/books?id=5RHTCiRgnB0C&pg=PA298&a...
|
|
|
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
No doubt virtually all the "zero-point" energy literature which exists are 'crackpot' in nature. And, as far as I am aware, there is so far no
experimental evidence for using zero-point energy as an energy source.
First, creating energy from "nothing" does not necessarily violate fundamental laws, if the nature of all mass-energy vectors are circular.
That is to say that if the universe, and time, does actually eventually circle back on itself, rather than being infinite. There is a fundamental, but
still not well understood, connection between mass-energy and space. It is unlikely that the quantity of mass or energy could be limited while the
space is infinite. There is also the logical argument that if the universe is infinite, most of it is must be dark, unlike the observable region of
the universe around us. read about Olbers paradox
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olbers'_paradox
If time/space circles back on itself, the "creation" or "destruction" of energy may be a relative phenomena, depending on the time/space scale of
reference. There are good reasons why small existence-loops of matter are unlikely to exist in small intervals, but it does suggest interesting
possibilities. Especially if "string theory" has any validity, small loop vectors could very well exist. Their creation/destruction would not
necessarily require any energy, since they would "create themselves", but in a much more localized way then the rest of the matter in the universe.
Second, "zero-point" energy does not necessarily imply creating energy from nothing, when the "nothing" is filled with high energy vacuum particles,
or a significant quantity of ambient thermal energy (room temperature heat). "Zero-point" energy certainly would 'violate' entropy laws, but as has
been stated before, entropy 'laws' are not actually fundamental laws, they are statistical generalizations. I would actually go so far as to argue, in
a similar way, that much of quantum mechanics, so far as it is currently understood, might also be composed of statistical generalizations, rather
than fundamental law, and that such generalizations likely would not hold true under some circumstances, even on a macroscopic level. But of course,
this has never been experimentally demonstrated.
Let me provide another example, Planck's law of blackbody radiation is not a fundamental law, a violation of it can clearly be demonstrated by certain
types of photonic crystals. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login.jsp?url=http%3A%2F%2...
It is commonly stated that a "cold" fusion generator has never been created, but this is not entirely true. Tabletop fusion generators, which generate
more energy than they require for operation, have found applications as a neutron source, but unfortunately the energy is in the form of heat and
radiation, and the conversion of this into electrical energy is too inefficient to make this method of fusion a viable source of electric power, (it
is still unable to put out more electric current than it requires for operation). Such generators are quite simple actually, they require a 300kV
power supply, and bombard dueturium at a lithium target in a vacuum.
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:k8pgtUU5EEgJ:h...
[Edited on 14-9-2011 by AndersHoveland]
|
|
|
IrC
International Hazard
Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline
Mood: Discovering
|
|
"try studying refrigerators"
I did but the longer I study them the greater my mass.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" Richard Feynman
|
|
|
smaerd
International Hazard
Posts: 1262
Registered: 23-1-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: hmm...
|
|
I understand I am likely preaching to the choir here.
Now I understand the topic is based solely on the concept of ''free-energy'' paraphrased to mean getting energy from nowhere. I am exceptionally
ignorant when it comes to physics, especially thermodynamics(recently bought a book though  ).
The point of my post is this: Of course we all ideally want something from nothing(the topic of this thread). Although, from a commercial and
economical stand-point it doesn't matter so much if the energy is coming from ''nowhere'', it matters how much it costs($). Say we somehow could
harness 1 calorie from some quantum biological phenomenon but it costs 3,000$ to do, is it even relevant? Now I hope not to de-rail the thread and am
probably looking like a bit of a fool(nothing new there), but what if instead of focusing on harnessing energy of theoretical black-holes(hyperbole),
we as scientific minds instead kept a focus on free($) energy?
Guess the same debate remains that everything costs money, almost parallel to the law of thermodynamics  , but maybe instead of working on making things absolutely "free", we focused realistically instead on a low cost, high
efficiency(for the given system), and lowest possible environmental impact.(many scientists are already working on this of course).
In my unimportant opinion I believe keeping goals like this in mind instead, would help to resolve the energy crisis while we could focus on the big
picture stuff later.
|
|
|
Endimion17
International Hazard
Posts: 1468
Registered: 17-7-2011
Location: shores of a solar sea
Member Is Offline
Mood: speeding through time at the rate of 1 second per second
|
|
There's no free juice, and there's no clean juice. The very nature of the universe forbids such concepts. Ever increasing enthropy.
Once you understand that crucial and fatal "flaw", you'll be able to recognize every fraudulent energy claim.
The closest to "free" we're getting is the solar radiation that dumps huge amounts of energy on the planet, which uses plants to capture it in
chemical bonds of organic matter (sugars, etc.). That, and heat. If Sun would dissapear, we'd cool down to 3 K. No more sugars, too. People tend to
forget that, and think we're not using our star.
|
|
|
smaerd
International Hazard
Posts: 1262
Registered: 23-1-2010
Member Is Offline
Mood: hmm...
|
|
Everybody forget's tidal energy and geothermal energy . I even read of a town
which uses trash as a fuel source and releases relatively 'clean' emissions. Can't find an article on that right now, but here's a garbage truck that
runs on garbage http://www.physorg.com/news152812939.html
I guess the next leg up, is improving design, and finding more efficient renewable alternate fuel sources. I've heard good things about algae-culture
and biodiesel. Now I'm getting off topic sorry.
[Edited on 19-9-2011 by smaerd]
|
|
|
niertap
Hazard to Self
Posts: 76
Registered: 5-8-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: hyper-conjucated
|
|
I was under the impression it had to do with this....
Casimir effect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Casimir forces on parallel plates
Casimir forces on parallel plates
In quantum field theory, the Casimir effect and the Casimir–Polder force are physical forces arising from a quantized field. The typical example is
of two uncharged metallic plates in a vacuum, placed a few micrometers apart, without any external electromagnetic field. In a classical description,
the lack of an external field also means that there is no field between the plates, and no force would be measured between them.[1] When this field is
instead studied using quantum electrodynamics, it is seen that the plates do affect the virtual photons which constitute the field, and generate a net
force[2]—either an attraction or a repulsion depending on the specific arrangement of the two plates. Although the Casimir effect can be expressed
in terms of virtual particles interacting with the objects, it is best described and more easily calculated in terms of the zero-point energy of a
quantized field in the intervening space between the objects. This force has been measured, and is a striking example of an effect purely due to
second quantization.[3][4] However, the treatment of boundary conditions in these calculations has led to some controversy. In fact "Casimir's
original goal was to compute the van der Waals force between polarizable molecules" of the metallic plates. Thus it can be interpreted without any
reference to the zero-point energy (vacuum energy) or virtual particles of quantum fields.[5]
Dutch physicists Hendrik B. G. Casimir and Dirk Polder proposed the existence of the force and formulated an experiment to detect it in 1948 while
participating in research at Philips Research Labs. The classic form of the experiment, described above, successfully demonstrated the force to within
15% of the value predicted by the theory.[6]
Because the strength of the force falls off rapidly with distance, it is only measurable when the distance between the objects is extremely small. On
a submicron scale, this force becomes so strong that it becomes the dominant force between uncharged conductors. In fact, at separations of 10
nm—about 100 times the typical size of an atom—the Casimir effect produces the equivalent of 1 atmosphere of pressure (101.325 kPa), the precise
value depending on surface geometry and other factors.[7]
In modern theoretical physics, the Casimir effect plays an important role in the chiral bag model of the nucleon; and in applied physics, it is
significant in some aspects of emerging microtechnologies and nanotechnologies.[8]
Ignorance is bliss
Outliers in life are modeled by chemical kinetics
|
|
|
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by Endimion17 | There's no free juice...The very nature of the universe forbids such concepts. Ever increasing enthropy.
Once you understand that crucial and fatal "flaw", you'll be able to recognize every fraudulent energy claim.
|
The vacuum energy, the properties of which are little understood, might not necessarily be in a low state of entropy, in which case it may be
theoretically possible to harness this form of energy.
The Casimir effect clearly demonstates that the vacuum contains a large quantity of energy, but it is still a question of difference of
energy states. It is very difficult, in most cases impossible, to harness energy without there being a way to dump the energy into another place with
a lesser quantity of energy. It would be like trying to extract the energy from normal air pressure. There certainly is plenty of energy in the air,
with all those molecules flying around, but without a pressure differential it is not possible to drive a mechanical generator, at least not on a
macroscopic level.
There have been some proposals to manipulate the Casmir effect using semiconductors, to switch on and off the reflectivity of the parallel plates to
be able to modulate the force. But this has never been feasibly demonstrated, and it may be possible that the Casmir force itself would impose a
resistance on any flux in semiconductor states, in which case it would take as much power to switch the semiconductor as the theoretic power that
could be derived from the plates pulling together in the first place.
Perhaps researchers should be trying to harness the thermal energy contained in ambient air pressure before they try to harness energy from something
as exotic and ill-understood as the quantum vacuum. Nanotechnology could theoretically enable tiny generators to utilize molecular movements to
harness power, but even if this can eventually be demonstrated it may likely not be a practical source of power.
There have also been strategies to harness the osmotic pressure differential between two solutions. As the water level in the column with a higher ion
concentration increases, it flows into a horizontal gravity filter, where the pure water can drip back into the column with the lower water level,
which contains pure water. Supposedly, the energy to drip the water derives from ambient thermal energy. Despite a potentially similar osmotic
pressure differential in the vertical gravity filter, pure water still difuses out, and drips down faster than it collects on the underside,
precluding any osmotic pressure differential that would keep the water from falling back. This is the closest device to a perpetual motion machine, as
the dripped water could theoretically power a generator. Of course, in practice, this is not a feasible source of commercial power.
The heat differences between night and day are especially pronounced in desert regions, and prototypes using this phenomena have generated electic
power, but the technology is not considered an economical means of generation.
| Quote: Originally posted by starman |
Regardless of apparent increase in complexity of local systems, entropy overall always increases. No exceptions. |
Of course, this seems to be the case within our frame of reference. But consider what the eventual fate of all this energy in the "lowest
possible entropy state" will be. Do you really think it will just go on expanding out forever? If time/space are circular in the universe this will
not be possible. Or perhaps it will all be swallowed up by a black hole...
If all the mass-energy in the universe gets concentrated into a single point, it is quite possible that space-time will bend and shrink to the same
small level. This could potentially be a mechanism whereby the final black hole could initiate another "big bang".
[Edited on 19-9-2011 by AndersHoveland]
|
|
|
IrC
International Hazard
Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline
Mood: Discovering
|
|
Speed of light 'broken' by scientists
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8783011/Spee...
I notice in discussions of this type there are always those who claim their point is absolute because science 'knows all things'. I wonder...
Speed-of-light experiments give baffling result at Cern
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484
[Edited on 9-23-2011 by IrC]
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" Richard Feynman
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
