Prev: The Post Card Bandit STRIKES AGAIN!!
Next: Give me ONE digit position of any real that isn't computableup to that digit position!
From: Pentcho Valev on 7 Jun 2010 10:28 Crimestop is combined with doublethink, that is, although today's scientists stop short at the threshold of any thought that is REALLY dangerous for the second law of thermodynamics and Einstein's 1905 light postulate, they know both principles are false and are not afraid to hint at the falsehood and even extract career and money from the heresy as long as they see no REAL danger: http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/59896/title/Law_%2B_Disorder "It is widely considered unforgivable heresy to doubt the second law, thanks in part to a famous passage declaring its infallibility by the British astrophysicist Sir Arthur Eddington (who, incidentally, coined the phrase "the arrow of time"). Nevertheless, in recent years the second law has been challenged as vigorously as health care reform and Arizona's anti-immigration legislation. (...) "Over the last 10-15 years an unparalleled number of challenges has been proposed against the status of the Second Law of Thermodynamics," Italian physicist Germano D'Abramo notes in a recent issue of Physics Letters A. During that time, more than 50 such papers have appeared in the refereed literature, he writes." http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=5538 Paul Davies: "Was Einstein wrong? Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 is the only scientific formula known to just about everyone. The "c" here stands for the speed of light. It is one of the most fundamental of the basic constants of physics. Or is it? In recent years a few maverick scientists have claimed that the speed of light might not be constant at all. Shock, horror! Does this mean the next Great Revolution in Science is just around the corner?" http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17.html#seventeen George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth. (...) It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more intelligent, the less sane." Pentcho Valev wrote: Today's scientists stop reading, thinking, even breathing, as soon as they bump into the idea that the second law of thermodynamics might be false or that Einstein's 1905 light postulate might be false: http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17.html#seventeen George Orwell: "Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity." So a number of fundamental questions simply cannot be discussed in today's science. One of them is: Why does immersing a constant-charge parallel-plate capacitor in water drastically DECREASE (80 times) the force of attraction between the plates while inserting a SOLID dielectric between the plates INCREASES the force of attraction? http://www.physorg.com/news110191847.html "When exposed to a high-voltage electric field, water in two beakers climbs out of the beakers and crosses empty space to meet, forming the water bridge. The liquid bridge, hovering in space, appears to the human eye to defy gravity." In a strong electrical field water dipoles are ordered in such a way that thermal agitation of molecules produces a SPECIFIC PRESSURE inside the liquid acting in the direction of the field (it is this pressure that makes the water bridge described above "defy gravity"). In certain experiments this specific pressure can lift water: the energy needed for lifting is in fact heat absorbed from the surroundings. If lifted water is allowed to leave the field pushed by the specific pressure (for instance, when water has been lifted between the plates of a capacitor, the specific pressure could push it through a hole in one of the plates), the liquid will form, ideally, an eternal waterfall outside the strong field. Perhaps the device cannot be of any practical use as a heat engine but still it violates the second law of thermodynamics. A few years ago, at the 2002 First International Conference on Quantum Limits to the Second Law, I tried to draw the attention to the fact that charged capacitors immersed in water develop a strange pressure between the plates, a pressure that, on close inspection, seems to violate the second law of thermodynamics: http://link.aip.org/link/?APCPCS/643/430/1 http://www.wbabin.net/valev/valev2.pdf The scientific community remained silent and hostile but now I see the idea that capacitors can violate the second law has been developed ever since: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0912/0912.4818v3.pdf "Recently (Physics Letters A 374 (2010) 1801) the concept of vacuum capacitor spontaneously charged harnessing the heat absorbed from a single thermal reservoir at room temperature has been introduced..." http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0904/0904.3188v4.pdf "In this paper we describe a vacuum spherical capacitor that generates a macroscopic voltage between its spheres harnessing the heat from a single thermal reservoir at room temperature. (...) The author wishes also gratefully acknowledge stimulating and encouraging discussions with Prof. Daniel P. Sheehan (University of San Diego) during the preparation of an early draft of the manuscript." Bravo, Daniel P. Sheehan! You were hostile in 2002 but now I see you have taken some notice of what I told you. Your triumph will come soon: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/dec/13/quantum-challenge-usd-professor/ "Clean-cut and middle-aged, a tenured professor at a conservative Catholic university, Sheehan is hardly a rebel. Yet for years, he and a few other physicists have been pressing peers to re-examine the Second Law of Thermodynamics, one of the most celebrated and cherished tenets of physics. (...) But Sheehan suggests big things are possible if even the tiniest of violations can be proven, and ultimately exploited in an economically feasible way. For example, it might become possible to convert ambient heat into an infinite energy source, he said." Pentcho Valev pvalev(a)yahoo.com |