The ToE Is The Logical Science of All Thought Possible…

[Graybeard]

Boltzmann and Gibbs...

This is the only one that counts in this argument. Stop trying to broaden the scope. And I have already provided new evidence for this in a previous post ... today, that you never read.

'The question of how reversible microscopic equations of motion can lead to irreversible macroscopic behaviour has been one of the central issues in statistical mechanics for more than a century. The basic issues were known to Gibbs. Boltzmann conducted a very public debate with Loschmidt and others without a satisfactory resolution.'

Unlike the Boltzmann equation, the theorem is completely consistent with Loschmidt’s observation that for time reversible dynamics, every dynamical phase space trajectory and its conjugate time reversed `anti-trajectory’, are both solutions of the underlying equations of motion.

In other words, Boltzmann was wrong according to new experiments conducted.

Look dude ... I'm over it .... This is just endless uphill work for no profit, unless a wry amusement is profit. Gunna develop a concept my pet can understand and when he's got the second law down pat ... I'll have a new concept ... I'll be back then.

Please do post the precis .....

See ya .... greg

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Well .... I'm glad we cleared all that up so amicably and efficiently .... no hard feelings dude ....

So now, can I have a copy or precis of the Decay Theory so that I can read it in the light of the Second Law ?

I will make no predictions (lol) until I have read it

cool bananas ... greg

I only have it in rough draft on my old computer...

It'll take a few weeks to put it in order...

Come to think of it, some of it's in that Einstein Dialogue that'll be coming up on East Meets West, later this month...

I'll see what I can cull from that ditty...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

This is the only one that counts in this argument. Stop trying to broaden the scope. And I have already provided new evidence for this in a previous post ... today, that you never read.

Greg, read the thread's title. It's my thread, and I'll say and add what I wish. And I don't need to read your posts' ideas, that I already know... If you need to work narrow-mindedly, that's your problem__not mine...

In other words, Boltzmann was wrong according to new experiments conducted.

Greg, study the literature on criticism of Boltzmann's ergodic axiom and his continuum hypothesis. Just use Google, as I did last year, when I posted those findings... I'd get them for you off my thread, but I ain't a hunting the whole thread for them... Boltzmann was shown to be wrong by Jevons, Peirce, Veblen, Keynes, and hundreds of others since the 1800's, but people only listen to the academic parade of entrepreneureal professors, who have the power, at any one time... Seems like they always got the power to add destructive intellect, instead of constructive...

[labelwench]

Provided that the religious fundamentalists have been following this thread, I am relatively confident that they will have negated any contract put out on the one who was impersonating the highest.

Equanimity demonstrably stressed.

A case of mistaken identity......

No action required.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Numerical Hydrodynamics and Magnetohydrodynamics

In General Relativity… LINK…

Jos´e A. Font

Departamento de Astronom´ıa y Astrof´ısica

Edificio de Investigaci´on “Jeroni Mu˜noz”

Universidad de Valencia

Dr. Moliner 50

E-46100 Burjassot (Valencia), Spain

email: j.antonio.font@uv.es

http://www.uv.es/jofontro/

Living Reviews in Relativity

ISSN 1433-8351

Accepted on 21 July 2008

Published on 19 September 2008

Abstract

This article presents a comprehensive overview of numerical hydrodynamics and magnetohydrodynamics(MHD) in general relativity. Some significant additions have been incorporated with respect to the previous two versions of this review (2000, 2003), most notably the coverage of general-relativistic MHD, a field in which remarkable activity and progress has occurred in the last few years. Correspondingly, the discussion of astrophysical simulations in generalrelativistic hydrodynamics is enlarged to account for recent relevant advances, while those dealing with general-relativistic MHD are amply covered in this review for the first time. The

basic outline of this article is nevertheless similar to its earlier versions, save for the addition of MHD-related issues throughout. Hence, different formulations of both the hydrodynamics

and MHD equations are presented, with special mention of conservative and hyperbolic formulations well adapted to advanced numerical methods. A large sample of numerical approaches

for solving such hyperbolic systems of equations is discussed, paying particular attention to solution procedures based on schemes exploiting the characteristic structure of the equations

through linearized Riemann solvers. As previously stated, a comprehensive summary of astrophysical simulations in strong gravitational fields is also presented. These are detailed in three

basic sections, namely gravitational collapse, black-hole accretion, and neutron-star evolutions; despite the boundaries, these sections may (and in fact do) overlap throughout the discussion. The material contained in these sections highlights the numerical challenges of various representative simulations. It also follows, to some extent, the chronological development of the field, concerning advances in the formulation of the gravitational field, hydrodynamics and

MHD equations and the numerical methodology designed to solve them. To keep the length of this article reasonable, an effort has been made to focus on multidimensional studies, directing

the interested reader to earlier versions of the review for discussions on one-dimensional works.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Microcanonical Thermostatistics, the basis for a New

Thermodynamics, “heat can flow from cold to hot”, and

nuclear multifragmentation. The correct treatment of

Phase Separation after 150 years of statistical mechanics

D.H.E.Gross LINK…

Hahn Meitner Institut,

14109 Berlin, Germany

Received 20 October 2005

Abstract. Equilibrium statistics of finite Hamiltonian systems is fundamen-

tally described by the microcanonical ensemble (ME) [1]. Canonical, or grand-

canonical partition functions are deduced from this by Laplace transform. Only

in the thermodynamic limit are they equivalent to ME for homogeneous sys-

tems. Therefore ME is the only ensemble for non-extensive/inhomogeneous

systems like nuclei or stars where the limN!1,_=N/V =const does not exist. Con-

ventional canonical thermo-statistic is inapplicable for non-extensive systems.

This has far reaching fundamental and quite counter-intuitive consequences for

thermo-statistics in general: Phase transitions of first order are signaled by

convexities of S(E,N,Z, · · ·) [1]. Here the heat capacity is negative. In these

cases heat can flow from cold to hot! The original task of thermodynamics, the

description of boiling water in heat engines can be treated. Consequences of

this basic peculiarity for nuclear statistics as well for the fundamental under-

standing of Statistical Mechanics in general are discussed. Experiments on hot

nuclei show all these novel phenomena in a rich variety. The close similarity to

inhomogeneous astro physical systems will be pointed out.

1. Introduction

Boiling water drives steam engines. Steam engines were the original motive for

proposing Thermodynamics some 170 years ago. About 150 years ago Boltzmann

and Gibbs developed Statistical Mechanics to explain (irreversible) Thermodynam-

ics within reversible Mechanics. Since then canonical Boltzmann-Gibbs (BG) statis-

tics is considered to answer this task. However, BG works in the thermodynamic

limit of homogeneous systems. Boiling water is inhomogeneous. Phase transitions

of first order are signaled by Yang-Lee singularities in BG. Consequently, BG is

inappropriate for boiling water. The best way to understand the difference between the canonical and the mi-crocanonical representation of first order phase transition is perhaps by studying figure (1), which shows the typical convex intruder of S(E) between e _ 0.35 and 1.25 eV/atom. This region gets completely jumped over by the canonical ensem-ble. Between e _ 0.35 and _ 1. eV the temperature (inverse slope of S(E)) is approximately constant. There is a single cluster that evaporates up to 2500 atoms.

This is the region of the “compound nucleus for ever” which is emphasized so much

by Moretto [2]. However, its temperature is higher than the canonical transition

temperature Ttr and these events are inaccessible to the canonical ensemble.

At _ 1.1 eV the single cluster explodes suddenly into on average 2726 monomers,

80 dimers, about 20 quadrimers and a few heavier fragments. This corresponds to

nuclear multi-fragmentation. However, as the total charge of the system is only 1+

there is no Coulomb force, and fission is missing. One can also clearly see that the

total surface of the fragments / N 2/3 eff rises steep in the fragmentation region. This

leads to the steep drop of the temperature (backbending).

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Just moving this from Nobody's thread to here...

The Incompatible Thermo-Hydro-Dynamic Mechanics of Atomic Wave-Particle Hydrodynamics & EM-Wave-Hydrodynamics…

Originally Posted by Nobody Nowhere
Lloyd, I understand your position, but I said "if we focus" on what you said we can then realize that the one is vacant of all possible motion[thermodynamics]. Similar to when smacking your hand against water, it stops due to the immense pressure.[hydrodynamics] The pressure is proportional to mass/energy density[hydrodynamics], so "chocked full" is equal to fully choked - the cessation of all possible motion[thermodynamics nor hydrodynamics never ceases__they oppose each's cessation = gravity].

You can't put anything into a room that is absolutely full[a room chocked full of waves without pressure__thermodynamics__has plenty of room for more wave pressure__hydrodynamics], just like you can't put anything into a room that isn't there.[There exists no isn't there...]

Nobody, let's look at this as a theoretical model in the making, as it's the same problem I've always had with Dave's Wave Mechanics Model, and Greg's Thermodynamic and NS Models... To me it seems more a problem with how the mind itself processes Time/Distance Occurrences and Time/Distance Progressions than anything else. The Universe works fine, and we see this from all our evidence__But, the mind doesn't process complex Time/Distance Occurrence Events well, with the more longer term Progression of Time/Distance Events. It's like the Uncertainty Principle is always present and interferring with our mind's properly uniting these two opposite ended velocity mechanics of reality, into a one perception/view of the actual mechanics. It seems we do not recognize this mechanical short-coming in our mind's processing mechanics__But, it is the major controller blocking us from properly processing all the laws, logics, occurences, and progressions of the Time/Distance events of science__We are so hard trying to do so. What I'm talking about, is the fact the mind is required to process these two major mechanics by two separate velocities of light processing, at the same time__and the mind seems only capable of clear processing one velocity at a time__So, we are always blind-sided to our own Logic's Perception of doing exactly what we need to do, to see this complex and general mechanics at the same Time/Distance of its happenings...

I don't know if that makes sense or not, but if you're willing to wade through this process, I think we may be able to make sense of it__or at the least, get a bit of a glimse of the mind's short-comings of processing two different Velocity of Light's Time/Distance Events/Progressions__At the same exact perception view's moments. To me, perception can only process Short High Velocities of Occurences in one concentrated mode, and perception can only process the Long Slowed Look at High Long Distance Velocities of Progression in its second mode of concentrated use__It seems most impossible to do both at once, but the brain tricks itself into thinking it is... Just guessing, but I'd say its a short-coming of perception's brain muscle's contraction and expansion mechanics, required to do this unified processing, and only able to be in one state or the other__Contracted or Expanded, as any other muscle of the body__Thus limiting the Unified Processing required to see the exact mechanics of two disparate Time/Distance Processes...

Nobody, you can't look at a progressional process as an event/occurence... You can't look at an occurence/event as a progressional processs, when in fact these two__event and progression processes__are entirely separate mechanics of the Universe, and it seems the mind.... I think we always mistake our perception's views of thinking it's seeing the whole picture of the mechanics involved, when in fact, we are only seeing one or the other of these two Mechanics at once. The more we concentrate on the small, the more we lose track of the large, and vice versa. Of course, this is that same old 'One and The Many' problem__But, it may be able to be solved by looking into my Decay Model, as this model is a slower progression view of all Universal Mechanics__at the large progression of Time/Distance, slowed down, or at least able to seem more slowed, so's the mind can get a handle on its total, and The Incompatible Thermo-Hydro-Dynamic Mechanics of Atomic Wave-Particle Hydrodynamics & EM-Wave-Hydrodynamics…

I think if we just keep paddling around in the existing models and ideas, we'll always be confronted by perception's short-comings...


Nobody, you know I always do see where you're trying to come from, but the fact is, the Universe is behaving with its motion, waves and particle structures, just as I've described. It's just the mind is a bit shy of a whole dollar's processing abilities__and that's mine as well as yours' and everybody elses... We just need to figure how to word the mechanics, and to me it's the Mechanics of the Bolded above__But, very complex to wrap one's mind around all the progressions and occurrences, of complex state changes__At Once...

If one looks back in history to the intellectual battles between Germany, France, the rest of Europe and England, verses, American intellectualism, one may just find the root of all these problems of interpretations. They in Europe, etc., processed from a mind built by history from a far more subjective base of transcendental abstract existentialism and nominalism, and America processed from a mind built by it's history, from a far more hustler's objective base of realism__and these two major differences created two disparate meaning systems within all the world's interpretation systems__so's different schools have different systems of interpreting even how to use the basic mathematical, logic and science systems... Tiny Tree's recent posts and links address this very issue, especially at his web site... Link... Link... Link... Link... Link... Link...

One must think about this, to get to the bottom of what one reads, and how one processes what one reads and hears...

[Lloyd Gillespie]

After All The Stars Go To Sleep__The Universe Awakes__A Final Theory...

After all the stars burn our, and all the black-holes, planets and moons, etc., radiate away to the fundamental substance em-field__Thermodynamics is necessarily required by all the laws of physics, logic and math__to change wave phase-state aether space Hydrodynamic__Through the cyclic mechanics of the Universal nearest absolute zero k cold__Shrinking the fs-em-aether back to re-structured matter...

The Cosmological Complexity Logic of The Prime Mover__Solved...!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_decade...

QTHD__Quantum Thermo-Hydro-Dynamics' Necessity...

The proof is: Any simple ideal gas, such as liquid natural gas, shrinks when the heat is removed__and the aether being such a hyper-fine-structured ideal non-viscous fluidic gas__is also necessarily required to shrink, when all the heat goes out of the Universe__Thus turning the expansion to contraction... But, it's a trillions of trillions of years out to the re-cycle mechanics era and back, and the sheer velocities and magnitudes of time/distance volume involved__Should be enough hydrodynamic force, to produce the four fundamental forces to construct another Big-Bang__as Newton's laws come into play on the return trip__Expecially Inertia__Then of course, all the Quantum and Relative Mechanics Laws...

Btw, if a LNG tanker's gas were at room temperature, a ship to carry it, would be 600 thousand feet long__as it's a 600 to 1 gas shrinkage, just by removing the heat from the gas... The largest LNG tankers are 1000 feet long, appx...

[austintorn@aol.com]

Seems like a good recycle theory.

I guess sentient life is only around for about 1 jillionths of the whole time.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

(Moved here from Tim's Thread...)

Hi Tim, and glad to see your interest is still alive and well. I think you've done a sufficient job of showing a possible mechanics of the necessary motions of the FS. The first thing I'd like to point out as to our understandings is that we must always view these fundamental ideas as 'abstract models of motion', and make very clear distinctions as to the necessarily eternally existing 'field realities'. Yes, tis true that in order to understand the fundamental volume of 'initial model motions', we must reduce the Universal constituencies to a minimal number, but we must always realize our model exists within a larger whole of the 'true fundamental volume', which science can not distinguish, as to whether it's a finite or infinite volume__Therefore, and due to combinatoric math's true and absolute unboundedness__I choose to model the Universe as an unbounded infinity__This is pure choice, as I have no proof, just the fact that there is no 'largest cardinal number'. In other words, were we to do numbers of just pure matter decayed into pure photons, we have no way of determining whether such photons exist as and to a finite volume, or as an infinite volume__due to the fact, science does not yet know whether the possible Higgs Field, if ever found, will be a finite field, or that it's actually infinite and eternal. We can model the Universe in either finite or infinite volumes__It's just in my opinion, much easier to model the Universe as an infinite model, due to the known 'Decay Model Mechanics' of being so large if we just simply use Hawking's decay numbers, from the `70's and `80's, of 10^137 years__and if one truly realizes the size of such a decay light/dark-light cone, one must realize the model is already approaching such a large finite size, we can almost call it an infinite volume, though it's truly not, we still have no way to scientifically know if the total universal FS is finite or infinite in volume. Hope I haven't confused the issue here, it's just I'd like to leave the FS Model open to what we do not and can not prove...

As far as to deterministic, yes the FS Model and Reality would be absolutely deterministic at its most fundamental modeling state/phase changes, but I must also warn that at the 'Bio-Evolutionary Phase State Changes', it must become non-deterministic or at least partially so, to accomodate free-will, choice and chance. Also, I can see no way for even the most fundamental FS Model not to have included more than one degree of freedom, as I've attempted to dis-assemble the FS every way under the sun of my logic, and have failed to be able to reduce it below the three basic degrees of freedom__Va, Vr and Vu__Due to the fact, the FS becomes less than what a scientific logical description of such a FS would require to have true definition. By this I mean, if we take away any one of the three degrees of freedom, we can't logically describe a real entity known as any form of FS. As an example; Take away motion, it has no em-structure to hold FS Matter together__Take away energy, it has no em-forces to define positions beyond a non-existing point__Take away matter, it has nothing of anything at all for logic to define. So to me, the least we can reduce the FS Model down to, even abstractly, and stay within our own scientifically established logical bounds, is a 'Triadic FS Model of Matter/Energy/Motion...' Charles Sanders Peirce, America's premiere 19th century government scientist/mathematician/physicist/chemist, and sound experimenter of em-fields interferrence on pendulums' gravity experiments, plus the first to suggest light be used at the U.S. Gov. office of Weights and Measures Standards__long ago stated the Universe could be mathematically reduced no lower than such a similar Triad in his extensive cosmological studies and writings... The maths all exist in the U.S. Coast Geodesic Survey archives, and in Peirce's private papers... So, in my opinion, though we can imagine a single degree of freedom FS Model, I have to ask the question; 'Is it logically viable to think such an abstract FS Model...???' Imo, it must be a FS Model of the three fundamental forces(Va/Vr/Vu) plus time, as its direction of travel. I have no problem discussing a single degree of deterministic freedom, directed forward in time model__but, I see no way for my logic to grab hold of any physical FS Reality, in doing so, as such a model is missing the necessary ingredients of a truly functional FS Model, imo... I think we have to be very careful at this level of theory, to make sure our logic is logic, and not just imagination lacking the necessary entities of the FS to create a Real Model, even abstractly...

I guess what I'm trying to say/ask is; 'What does a single degree of freedom really mean, outside the context of a 3D fundamental em-field?' I don't see as it has any meaning, as I see the Universe as Einstein stated, at its most fundamental level; 'Field is everywhere...' And, I see no way to escape this FS Model reality, and still have logically valid meaning, in describing any form of abstract or real models... And I should also mention that I see the FS Field as the absolute FS... Now, we can reduce it down as far as abstractly possible, but even Dave once mentioned to me to see the entire Universe as a 'Single Atom', and that's how I saw through what he was fundamentally saying__and from there I reduced out all the fields and particles of our knowable Universe... He and I saw differently as to his colliding spheres, as I didn't and couldn't accept that as fundamental enough to describe where and how these spheres were formed, and what the initial force/cause of fundamental motion was__that single degree of motion you may be referring to__where I suggested thermo-hydro-dynamic cause, he rejected as unknowable, but I've since converted such to his terminology of wave symmetry at limit, which causes hydrodynamic motion of the entire em-field of FS, by the future decay of hot stars, galaxies and black-holes into its, 'far into the future', state of super-cold(near zero k) wave symmetries__which would be forced into the known hydrodynamics we witness in all our low temperature zero k physics of Bose-Einstein Condensates, etc.__Here in our Earth-bound experiments, such as Lene Hau's, etc.__But there are thousands of low temperature physicists and chemists working in these experimental areas__with amazing results, I might mention...

Now, if you can think of a way for 'A Single Degree of Freedom Model' to have enough FS entity parts, motions and energies to represent an even 'Real Abstract FS Model', after what I've written__I'm all ears__But to me, there just aren't enough entities, forces and directions to represent a true logical and scientific model, containing no more than one degree of freedom__It's just pure absolute linear motion__but motion of what...??? It must represent, even abstractly, a Va/Vr and possibly even a Vu entity to be, even in this one degree of motion__which really would be more than the 'one degree'__or we're not talking a real model, imo__We're just talking pure imagination__and imagination and logic are close cousins, but even our 'Abstract FS Models' must have real entity basis, imo__No...???

Hope I haven't thrown you off too much,
Lloyd

P.s.
At limit of the FS phase state changes of near absolute zero, after all finite heat decay, we may be looking at a non-viscous super-fluid, as both Dave and I agree, which has been shown for helium, at both low and high temperature physics experiments, here on Earth__the high in the lasered accelerator experiments, with protons. We also know that both hydrogen and helium exist in space in phase state changed entities of 2H, 3H and possibly 4H as isotopes and plasmas, the same for Helium, as 2He, 3He and a possible 4He or more. The helium experiments to 3He have been performed by nearest absolute zero, here on Earth showing the changed phase state changes to a super-fluid, yet hydrogen freezes solid at higher temps above near absolute zero, yet star mechanics produces the phase state changes at high temps, to create the plasmas of H states to exist in space. They may also turn to super-fluids nearer to absolute zero, future decay time, as the Universe cools, below its present 2.7 degrees... Possible super-fluid H phase state plasmas, also...??? Unknown so far...