Prev: Mathematical Proof that Relativity Might be Wrong !
Next: THE JOURNAL NATURE INVOLUNTARILY TOPPLES EINSTEIN
From: guskz on 22 Jun 2010 06:11
On Jun 21, 8:44 pm, Uncle Al <Uncle...(a)hate.spam.net> wrote:
> "gu...(a)hotmail.com" wrote:
>
> > One can heat air, food. Can vacuum be heated?
>
> [snipc rap]

What r u snipping, you believe a vacuum can be heated? Or r u
trolling.

>
>    1) 1/2 virtual photon for every allowed electromagnetic mode.
>    2) Sparking the vacuum for nuclei with Z larger than the reciprocal
> fine structure constant.
>    3) Vacuum dichroism for magnetic fields ca. 100X those in
> magnetars.
>    4) Pair formation for heavy nucleus-grazing photons exceeding 1.022
> MeV.
>    5) idiot
>
> --
> Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
>  (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

We both know your links are irrelevant.

From: Darwin123 on 22 Jun 2010 13:02
On Jun 21, 5:18 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> One can heat air, food. Can vacuum be heated?
Yes it can. If photons are added to an empty cavity in such a way
as to satisfy the Bose-Einstein distribution for photons, then the
vacuum in that cavity is heated.
The problem of the black body radiator really started the field of
quantum mechanics. Look up "black body radiator" and "ultraviolet
catastrophe" to find out how vacuums are "heated".
>
> #1. If not, then photons in a pure vacuum cannot generate heat.
This statement is highly ambiguous from the physics point of
view. However, this is not entirely your fault.
I'll first answer your question to the best of my ability in
reading fuzzy sentences. Then, I will get on my soap box on the
scientific meaning of "heat".
For photons to generate energy, they have to become disordered.
If there is an orderly arrangement of photons, then the photons can't
be described as heat. The only way they can "generate heat" is to
become disordered. Then the photons that are left become heat energy.
Photons can't collide. They pass through each other. So photons
in a vacuum can't spontaneously turn into heat energy. When they hit
the boundary, such as a blackened wall, they can be absorbed generally
by electrons. The electrons can remit photons in a disorderly
arrangement. Then, the energy becomes "heat energy." So you need an
absorbing material with electrons to change a laser beam into "heat
energy."
Physics teachers don't address the ambiguity in the word "heat".
I will teach you a "trick" I learned that will help you through
thermodynamic problems.
Science teachers often define heat as "a form of energy." Some
mislead teachers then differentiate "heat energy" from light energy,
electrical energy, sound energy, etc. However, this gets to be really
confusing. For instance, they also often refer to infrared radiation
as heat. The infrared radiation emitted from an infrared laser is
about as far from heat as any form of energy can be. The motion of
molecules is often referred to as "heat energy." However, the motion
of molecules can also be called "sound waves." There is not sharp
boundary between "heat energy" and infrared radiation. There is no
sharp boundary between "heat energy" and sound waves. The word heat
refers to how the energy is distributed, not the form of energy.
The problem is that the word heat has colloquial meanings that
aren't consistent with "heat being a form of energy." There are
several meanings. Very often, the word heat is used to mean the
entropy. Heat energy is that portion of the energy, whatever form the
energy takes, that is bound to the entropy. It is that portion of the
energy that is disordered.
You can eliminate some of this confusion by thinking of heat as
being entropy, not energy. Since the word heat is used ambiguously,
you have to be careful with it. However, all the definitions of heat
are somehow tied up with entropy. Any form of energy can be heat
energy, if there is disorder associated with the energy.
The rest of your post presents something on cosmology. I don't
understand it. I suspect that some of the problem deals with the
concept that the universe doesn't have a border. I hope you rethink
your problem with the understanding that the "heat" your references
are talking about may be entropy. The references may not be referring
to heat as energy.
From: PD on 22 Jun 2010 14:14
On Jun 22, 12:02 pm, Darwin123 <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 21, 5:18 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:> One can heat air, food. Can vacuum be heated?
>
>     Yes it can. If photons are added to an empty cavity in such a way
> as to satisfy the Bose-Einstein distribution for photons, then the
> vacuum in that cavity is heated.
>     The problem of the black body radiator really started the field of
> quantum mechanics. Look up "black body radiator" and "ultraviolet
> catastrophe" to find out how vacuums are "heated".
>
> > #1. If not, then photons in a pure vacuum cannot generate heat.
>
>        This statement is highly ambiguous from the physics point of
> view. However, this is not entirely your fault.
>       I'll first answer your question to the best of my ability in
> reading fuzzy sentences. Then, I will get on my soap box on the
> scientific meaning of "heat".
>      For photons to generate energy, they have to become disordered..
> If there is an orderly arrangement of photons, then the photons can't
> be described as heat. The only way they can "generate heat" is to
> become disordered. Then the photons that are left become heat energy.
>     Photons can't collide. They pass through each other. So  photons
> in a vacuum can't spontaneously turn into heat energy. When they hit
> the boundary, such as a blackened wall, they can be absorbed generally
> by electrons. The electrons can remit photons in a disorderly
> arrangement. Then, the energy becomes "heat energy." So you need an
> absorbing material with electrons to change a laser beam into "heat
> energy."
>       Physics teachers don't address the ambiguity in the word "heat".
> I will teach you a "trick" I learned that will help you through
> thermodynamic problems.
>       Science teachers often define heat as "a form of energy." Some
> mislead teachers then differentiate "heat energy" from light energy,
> electrical energy, sound energy, etc. However, this gets to be really
> confusing. For instance, they also often refer to infrared radiation
> as heat. The infrared radiation emitted from an infrared laser is
> about as far from heat as any form of energy can be. The motion of
> molecules is often referred to as "heat energy." However, the motion
> of molecules can also be called "sound waves." There is not sharp
> boundary between "heat energy" and infrared radiation. There is no
> sharp boundary between "heat energy" and sound waves. The word heat
> refers to how the energy is distributed, not the form of energy.
>       The problem is that the word heat has colloquial meanings that
> aren't consistent with "heat being a form of energy." There are
> several meanings. Very often, the word heat is used to mean the
> entropy. Heat energy is that portion of the energy, whatever form the
> energy takes, that is bound to the entropy. It is that portion of the
> energy that is disordered.
>      You can eliminate some of this confusion by thinking of heat as
> being entropy, not energy. Since the word heat is used ambiguously,
> you have to be careful with it. However, all the definitions of heat
> are somehow tied up with entropy. Any form of energy can be heat
> energy, if there is disorder associated with the energy.
>        The rest of your post presents something on cosmology. I don't
> understand it. I suspect that some of the problem deals with the
> concept that the universe doesn't have a border. I hope you rethink
> your problem with the understanding that the "heat" your references
> are talking about may be entropy. The references may not be referring
> to heat as energy.

Nicely said.
From: Edward Green on 23 Jun 2010 13:23
On Jun 21, 5:18 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> One can heat air, food. Can vacuum be heated?
>
> #1. If not, then photons in a pure vacuum cannot generate heat.

It depends on what one means by "vacuum". If one allows photons in the
vacuum, and still calls it "vacuum", then if the energy distribution
and intensity of the photons is given by the blackbody radiation law,
then yes, the vacuum has a temperature, and has been "heated". I
suspect if the vacuum got hot enough, you'd have significant
populations of matter and anti-matter popping in and out of existence
too, at equilibrium.

<...>
From: Darwin123 on 7 Jul 2010 19:44
On Jun 23, 1:23 pm, Edward Green <spamspamsp...(a)netzero.com> wrote:
> On Jun 21, 5:18 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > One can heat air, food. Can vacuum be heated?
>
> > #1. If not, then photons in a pure vacuum cannot generate heat.
>
> It depends on what one means by "vacuum". If one allows photons in the
> vacuum, and still calls it "vacuum", then if the energy distribution
> and intensity of the photons is given by the blackbody radiation law,
> then yes, the vacuum has a temperature, and has been "heated".  I
> suspect if the vacuum got hot enough, you'd have significant
> populations of matter and anti-matter popping in and out of existence
> too, at equilibrium.
>
> <...>

I think the basic idea is called "vacuum sparking."
If the intensity of the black body radiation were strong enough,
the electromagnetic field at any one point would be very big. The
energy density all over the universe would be very big. According to
quantum electrodynamics, matter-antimatter pairs would keep forming
(at the expense of the energy held by the electromagnetic field). The
formation of charged particles would be analogous to the break down of
a dielectric under the influence of a strong electric field. Hence the
name "vacuum sparking".
I don't know if vacuum sparking has been observed yet in nature.
Of course, dielectric break down has been studied in materials.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Mathematical Proof that Relativity Might be Wrong !
Next: THE JOURNAL NATURE INVOLUNTARILY TOPPLES EINSTEIN