Recently I replied to Pedro thusly:
>>Pedro -- OK, I think I see your basic point. If so, then we do agree
>>because I have concluded (tentatively) that, >>in the context of
>>Universal disequibilibrium, the principle of least action can be
>>explained by the maximum >>entropy production principle [e.g.,
the
>>fastest action would require the hardest work [therefore (ref. to
Carnot)
>>>>would produce the most entropy per dissipated gradient], and
the
>>shortest path for entropic energy flows (heat, >>light, sound)
would be
>>sought in the interest of Universal equilibration].
Koichiro reacted with:
>Folks,
>
> Stan's "Nature abhors gradients" is a thermodynamic imperative,
which QM
>has to live with. QM is instrumental for fabricating gradients and
consumers
>harnessing them. What is intriguing here is that some gradients have
already
>been frozen to some other consumers, like the nuclear binding energy
stored
>in an iron atom toward biological organisms on our earth. The fate of
>gradients experienced by any consumer is at least two-fold. One is to
simply
>dissipate them, and the other is to transform some of them into a form
>already frozen to the experiencing consumer. The rule is, first come,
>first served. There remains nothing left for the latecomers. Underlying
the
>present excuse is that we abandon the homogeneous space. Of course, if the
>homogeneous space is acceptable, the principle of least action as Pedro
>refers to would survive
>
> Cheers,
> Koichiro
to which Jamie reacted with:
>Koichiro,
>
> My thesis is that entropy is not the outfall
>of thermodynamic rules of actions, but rather that
>thermodynamic entropy is a specialized enaction of
>-precursive- rules of "gradients interacts", including
>the transduction of information and alternate gradient
>forms. I call these geneeralized forms Troepic Gradients
>because the include confluences of entropic and negentropic
>dynamics -- NOT limited to thermodynamics at all.
>
>Spacetime is a NON-thermodynamic troepic manifold --
>having gradiented structure -and- performance action
>features. Which includes strong negentropic dynamics,
>which in no way support 'nature abhors gradients'
>or is commanded by thermodynamic SUB-category behaviors.
>
>Respectfully,
>Jamie
To which I reply: Within any isolated system away from thermodynamic
equilibrium (as presumbly our Universe is), no new (negentropic') gradients
can be erected without spending some energy gradient in the effort
(Prigogine). Furthermore, in our world, given typical workloads, work is
not much more than 50% efficient at best, and strenuous work is MUCH less
efficient (Odum). This suggests a kind of Universal necessary 'deficiency
of information' with respect to work. Consumers seem not to be able to
align themselves with gradients so as to greatly increase their
thermodynamic efficiency. The reason appears to be the Universal project
of regaining thermodynamic equilibrium, which was lost via the Big Bang
(which is why the U abhors gradients). The harder we work (or fight), the
more we serve the Universe's goal!
Now, it has been asserted that spacetime is a 'non-thermodynamic manifold',
presumably because it has been constructed so as to replace gravitation =
large scale acceleration (acceleration IS the general result of work) with
geometric curvature. Acceleration is still allowed to generate force in
smaller scale local scenarios like the one we live in (it is amusing to try
to imagine the spacetime curvature picture of running a race!). So General
Relativity, with its nonhomogeneous space (spacetime), is a
non-thermodynamic construction. QM, on the other hand, as pointed out by
Koichiro, must be constrained by thermodynamics, presumably because it
transpires in homogeneous space. I would like to hear more about
dissipation in QM, as I don't recall seeing anything about it.
STAN
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Sat Jun 24 22:20:52 2006
