It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by moebius
reply to post by mzungu
Must have overlooked it, can you point me to the passage where you introduce your new model of the atom?
Have you considered to introduce/discuss your hypotheses and their implications/predictions separately one at a time?
Btw a lot theories in physics are quite compact. Think of newtonian dynamics, electrodynamics, hell even quantum mechanics(despite being hard to grasp/work with).
Originally posted by moebius
reply to post by galactix
I don't think that you can say that phonons cause energy fluctuations. Phonon energy follows a distribution explains thermal fluctuations/noise akin to thermal noise in conductors. The fluctuations are there whether you ignore phonons or not.
Heat is not energy in motion but the energy transfered from one system to another. It is a quantity. Heat transfer and heat capacity are separate terms.
As you say yourself you can cause a heat flow -> transfer heat.
The transfer happens by thermal interactions usually microscopic interactions of the system particles but also thermal radiation.
It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed..
The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum..
Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness.
It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo.
Originally posted by mzungu
Increases in spin will cause expansion as magnetic fields rearrange and generally expand imparting new vectors of force (pattern). Could it be a simple as energy conduction and energy absorption?
Cooling has a number of tricks but the mainstay; Expansion and contraction of gases.
Solids and liquids don’t compress that well, so what we use is a gas that compresses to a liquid. By forcing the gas into its liquid state it only takes up a fraction of its original volume. By releasing the liquid gas through a small valve into a bigger chamber of only slightly lower pressure; the smaller volume of liquid becomes a bigger volume of gas. The compressor re-compresses the gas to a liquid requiring relatively little energy. The purpose is to move heat or energy from one place to another. [uphill]
When the gas takes on the bigger volume, the volume starts to suck energy from surrounding space. Surfaces in contact become cold or frosty. The same applies, when the gas is compressed in volume, excess energy is given off. I suggest that when energy differential levels are low, conductance through transfer of energy from one pattern to another is the main form of energy transfer. But when the differential [rate of change] is greater, the electromagnetic spectrum starts to play a bigger part. We can feel it radiating onto our bodies as heat, (infra red), and ‘at higher rates of change’, see it as radiated light.
also: it would be more accurate to state that liquids and solids don't *change volume* under compression the way gasses do, but in fact liquids "compress" (increase pressure) with far less 'work' than do gases: just sayin'
So larger molecules with more and larger 'atoms' will have larger specific heats, and further, depending on the actual molecular arrangement, have a number of non-linear vibrational 'modes' that 'activate' at higher 'temperatures'. These modes are quantum in nature in that they exhibit clear energy boundaries and levels. -reminds me of pattern changes in acoustically excited sand sheets- As far as i know there is no theory that predicts the specific values or energy 'modes' except for the general observations stated above. All our data is purely experimental and tabulated.
Radiant heat transfer requires a greater heat potential to be 'drawn' to the 'cold' reservoir almost in the same way as electric arcs require greater electric potential to leap across gaps.
The question here is ; what is 'contact' (given that our current model of matter is mostly empty space)? Could the heat rate difference between conduction and radiation be a product of the local magnetic field density?
on entropy (my personal conundrum): Mainly: what is it? and why? Without getting into definitions that speak of order vs. disorder, and stepping away from statistical thermodynamics, and finally, speaking only about energy transfer in the form of heat: we observe that the amount of 'useful' energy transferred from a hot body to a cold body depends on the rate at which it is transferred. Can you speak to this?