Is capillarity anti-gravity?

General scientific debates. Presentations of new technologies (not directly related to renewable energies or biofuels or other themes developed in other sub-sectors) forums).
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5365
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 660

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by Exnihiloest » 02/02/20, 23:39

ABC2019 wrote:
Exnihiloest wrote:We must also see that in practice, we don't care about the increase in the entropy of the universe. For us humans, if we succeed in making a system that locally decreases the entropy by extracting the heat energy from a single ambient thermal bath, even if it increases the entropy much more elsewhere, we will have won the Holy Grail !

uh no it doesn't work like that. The second principle FORBIDDEN to transform a thermal bath into work, that's all. No macroscopic system can do that. For a microscopic system, you can have random thermal fluctuations which seem to temporarily violate the 2nd principle, but if you try to do it statistically on a large number of systems to be macroscopic, the law of large numbers will make that on average you will not can't transform heat from a monothermal source into work, period.

"To increase entropy elsewhere", that means concretely to take heat in a hot source and to give some of it back to a colder source. There is no other solution, and there never will be.


"The second principle FORBIDDEN to transform a thermal bath into work": yes, that is precisely what is in the spotlight.
If you take what the second principle says as proof of its veracity, you are in a tautology.
I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm not saying it was bypassed (although there are some disturbing experiences), I'm saying that the theoretical impossibility of a Maxwell demon has not been demonstrated except for special cases. I hold the second principle for a weak link in classical physics (compared to that of energy conservation or the invariance of the space-time interval by change of reference frame, for example), and in particular because it is only true statistically.
0 x
ABC2019
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12927
Registration: 29/12/19, 11:58
x 1008

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by ABC2019 » 02/02/20, 23:43

Exnihiloest wrote:
ABC2019 wrote:
Exnihiloest wrote:We must also see that in practice, we don't care about the increase in the entropy of the universe. For us humans, if we succeed in making a system that locally decreases the entropy by extracting the heat energy from a single ambient thermal bath, even if it increases the entropy much more elsewhere, we will have won the Holy Grail !

uh no it doesn't work like that. The second principle FORBIDDEN to transform a thermal bath into work, that's all. No macroscopic system can do that. For a microscopic system, you can have random thermal fluctuations which seem to temporarily violate the 2nd principle, but if you try to do it statistically on a large number of systems to be macroscopic, the law of large numbers will make that on average you will not can't transform heat from a monothermal source into work, period.

"To increase entropy elsewhere", that means concretely to take heat in a hot source and to give some of it back to a colder source. There is no other solution, and there never will be.


"The second principle FORBIDDEN to transform a thermal bath into work": yes, that is precisely what is in the spotlight.
If you take what the second principle says as proof of its veracity, you are in a tautology.
I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm not saying it was bypassed (although there are some disturbing experiences), I'm saying that the theoretical impossibility of a Maxwell demon has not been demonstrated except for special cases. I hold the second principle for a weak link in classical physics (compared to that of energy conservation or the invariance of the space-time interval by change of reference frame, for example), and in particular because it is only true statistically.

it is true, it is only true statistically. But if you have a one in a billion billion billion chance of observing a violation of this principle, you may as well say that it is impossible.

And if you ever observed it, it could only be a very improbable random fluctuation, that is surely not a source of energy that works reliably every time.

otherwise you might as well want to make a living by borrowing to buy lotto tickets - I imagine that is not what you are doing.
0 x
To pass for an idiot in the eyes of a fool is a gourmet pleasure. (Georges COURTELINE)

Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by Christophe » 05/02/20, 00:14

Warming section divided to: climate-change-CO2 / warming-climate-variability-natural-vs-impact-anthropogenic-t16300.html

I think I have a bad memory, I had already made a subject on a possible engine by capillarity: developpement-durable / motor-by-capillarity-c-is-can-t9354.html : Shock:

After that it was almost 10 years ago ... day for day !! So there is prescription !! : Cheesy:

I will reread myself to see how I have evolved in 10 years (or regressed!) : Cheesy:
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by Christophe » 08/03/20, 13:59

I did not find the same home fragrances so I put a new wick (of the pk ...) in the old pot and here is what it gives:

After 5 minutes the wick is wet over half its height:

20200306_131913.jpg
20200306_131913.jpg (188.93 KB) Viewed times 2680


After 5 hours it is almost completely wet:

20200306_175510.jpg
20200306_175510.jpg (182.88 KB) Viewed times 2680


I checked to make sure that the air passed through the neck (following the correct remarks above):

20200306_175647.jpg
20200306_175647.jpg (139.83 KB) Viewed times 2680


I twisted the output wick:

20200306_175851.jpg
20200306_175851.jpg (163 KB) Viewed times 2680


After just under 24 hours, the tip of the wick is more colorful: the first drop may not be far away!
So I put a marker under the bottle (still PQ! : Cheesy: )

20200307_112137.jpg
20200307_112137.jpg (150.59 KB) Viewed times 2680


20200307_112154.jpg
20200307_112154.jpg (201.93 KB) Viewed times 2680


ps: sorry for the tilted photos ... it's Sunday I was too lazy to rotate them : Cheesy:
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by izentrop » 08/03/20, 15:47

Exaggerate you! After having selected everything, it is done in one operation. :P
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by Christophe » 08/03/20, 15:52

It is the fault of gravity! : Mrgreen:

ps: when we display the image ... it gets straight!
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by izentrop » 08/03/20, 16:03

But certainly.
There were relentless “free” energy 10 years ago. Quartz among others. : Wink:
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by Christophe » 08/03/20, 16:15

If I have drops falling you should lower your valve a little! : Mrgreen:

Because we are not talking about free energy here but about capillary phenomena which fight against gravity! There is a nuance!
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by izentrop » 08/03/20, 16:25

I know. I do not make the connection.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Is capillarity anti-gravity?




by Christophe » 08/03/20, 16:26

Is that so ? And what does this remark mean then?

izentrop wrote:There were relentless “free” energy 10 years ago. Quartz among others. : Wink:
0 x

Back to "Science and Technology"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Forhorse, gegyx, Remundo and 170 guests