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, 101 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

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

Events

Hot Links
Aetherometry

American Antigravity

AESOP Institute

Closeminded Science

EarthTech

Innoplaza

Integrity Research Institute

New Energy Movement

New Energy Times

The Orion Proj.

Panacea-BOCAF

QVac_Eng

RexResearch

Science Hobbyist

Tom Bearden's Page

USPTO

Want to Know

Other Info-Sources
NE News Sites
AER_Network
Alternative Energy News
E-Cat World
NexusNewsfeed ZPE
FringeEnergy News
NE Discussion Groups
Energetic Forum
Energy21 YT Channel
EMediaPress
Energy Science Forum
Free_Energy FB Group
The KeelyNet Blog
OverUnity
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
Find Jobs

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.