ZPE_Logo
  
Search        
  Create an account Home  ·  Topics  ·  Downloads  ·  Your Account  ·  Submit News  ·  Top 10  
Mission Statement

Modules
· Home
· Forum
· LATEST COMMENTS
· Special Sections
· SUPPORT ZPEnergy
· Advertising
· AvantGo
· Books
· Downloads
· Events
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Private Messages
· Search
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links
· Your Account

Who's Online
There are currently, 133 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

Events
  • (August 7, 2024 - August 11, 2024) 2024 ExtraOrdinary Technology Conference

  • Hot Links
    Aetherometry

    American Antigravity

    Closeminded Science

    EarthTech

    ECW E-Cat World

    Innoplaza

    Integrity Research Institute

    New Energy Movement

    New Energy Times

    Panacea-BOCAF

    RexResearch

    Science Hobbyist

    T. Bearden Mirror Site

    USPTO

    Want to Know

    Other Info-Sources
    NE News Sites
    AER_Network
    E-Cat World
    NexusNewsfeed ZPE
    NE Discussion Groups
    Energetic Forum
    EMediaPress
    Energy Science Forum
    Free_Energy FB Group
    The KeelyNet Blog
    OverUnity Research
    Sarfatti_Physics
    Tesla Science Foundation (FB)
    Vortex (old Interact)
    Magazine Sites
    Electrifying Times (FB)
    ExtraOrdinary Technology
    IE Magazine
    New Energy Times

    Interesting Links

    Click Here for the DISCLOSURE PROJECT
    SciTech Daily Review
    NEXUS Magazine

    Maxwell's Demon
    Posted on Saturday, August 30, 2003 @ 18:25:20 GMT by vlad

    Science Robert Lerwill writes: "This is brief history of how Maxwell's Demon has been viewed by the scientific establishment. My intention in giving this summary is to show that it is not a settled matter, but is in fact the subject of an ongoing debate. Over the 132 years since the idea was first published, many reasons have been put forward to show that Maxwell's Demon cannot exist. Most of them have been accepted at the time. Most of them have later been shown to be wrong.


    Maxwell's demon is a molecule size demon that sits over a hole in a barrier between two gas-filled chambers and has the power to bar or let pass molecules that try to go through the hole. He takes it upon himself to only allow "hot" molecules through from right to left and "cold" ones from left to right. Soon he will create a spontaneous temperature difference between the two halves in violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

    This is the original description of the demon. However the idea and the use of the term has been extended. The "intelligence" behind the demons action can be mechanical. The demon can separate pressure instead of temperature. Any scheme that acts on individual molecules to sort them in some way and so spontaneously reduce entropy has become to be referred to as an example of Maxwell's demon.

    In a letter Maxwell wrote in 1868, he said he come up with the notion of the demon "To show that the 2nd law of thermodynamics is only a statistical certainty." In other words, he used them to illustrate that the law only applied for macroscopic processes, where statistics came into play. He thought the sustained and concerted unidirectional action of a microscopic process, like the demon, could violate the law.

    Later physicists sought to show that Maxwell's demon and its analogues were impossible. The first notable attempt was by Leo Szilard in 1929. He proposed a version of the engine that created a pressure difference rather than a temperature difference. However he showed that the energy needed to "see" the molecules approaching the hole would exceed the energy separated.

    This idea was accepted for over a century. However Bennet (Scientific American, Nov 1987) eventually showed that Szilard was wrong and that it was possible to detect the position of an individual molecule without expending energy. His alternate theory was that it was the storing of information about the molecules position that took up the energy.

    Landauer showed in 1989 that Bennet was wrong to claim energy was required for storage. He claimed instead that it was the decision making process itself that took up the excess energy.

    Following on from this, Caves claimed in 1990 that Landauer was wrong and that if an array of cells was used, the decision making process could be made to consume less than the excess energy (Physical review letters, vol. 64 pg.2111).

    Last episode I heard was Zurek et al had found a flaw in Caves reasoning, and Caves conceded. They were preparing a paper for Physical Review Letters in June 1990. But the story does not end there. Zurek thought that it still might be possible to build an analogue of Maxwell's demon using overlapping processes. All the analysis so far had all been carried out on discrete processes (Science News, Vol. 137).

    Any advances on Zurek?
    (from Yahoo free_energy list)

     
    Login
    Nickname

    Password

    Security Code: Security Code
    Type Security Code

    Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like theme manager, comments configuration and post comments with your name.

    Related Links
    · More about Science
    · News by vlad


    Most read story about Science:
    100 miles on 4 ounces of water?


    Article Rating
    Average Score: 4.5
    Votes: 2


    Please take a second and vote for this article:

    Excellent
    Very Good
    Good
    Regular
    Bad


    Options

     Printer Friendly Printer Friendly


    "Maxwell's Demon" | Login/Create an Account | 3 comments | Search Discussion
    The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

    No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

    Re: Maxwell's Demon (Score: 0)
    by Anonymous on Sunday, August 31, 2003 @ 05:01:33 GMT
    What about the Uncertainty Principle? If you know exactly where the molecule is (in a very small hole) you cannot know whether it is "hot" or "cold".

    atoller



     

    All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2002-2016 by ZPEnergy. Disclaimer: No content, on or affiliated with ZPEnergy should be construed as or relied upon as investment advice. While every effort is made to ensure that the information contained on ZPEnergy is correct, the operators of ZPEnergy make no warranties as to its accuracy. In all respects visitors should seek independent verification and investment advice.
    Keywords: ZPE, ZPF, Zero Point Energy, Zero Point Fluctuations, ZPEnergy, New Energy Technology, Small Scale Implementation, Energy Storage Technology, Space-Energy, Space Energy, Natural Potential, Investors, Investing, Vacuum Energy, Electromagnetic, Over Unity, Overunity, Over-Unity, Free Energy, Free-Energy, Ether, Aether, Cold Fusion, Cold-Fusion, Fuel Cell, Quantum Mechanics, Van der Waals, Casimir, Advanced Physics, Vibrations, Advanced Energy Conversion, Rotational Magnetics, Vortex Mechanics, Rotational Electromagnetics, Earth Electromagnetics, Gyroscopes, Gyroscopic Effects

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.