Time yet to reconsider "the arrow of time"?

[Grumblenuts]

Aaron Murakami - some highlights:
"Mainstream science actually has no idea what energy or potential is"
"The concept of storing potential is a figment of the imagination because the potential changes based on perspective."
"Potential energy is never stored."
"Energy is never conserved."
"100% of all energy to lift an object is 100% dissipated at the peak of the lift so there is nothing left to store after it is already used up."
"A new dipole is formed between the object and the ground."
"A gravitational dipole."
I'll just note here that gravitational dipoles are also just a matter of perspective. One could envision such dipoles between the object and Earth's mass center, just down a step, or up two. In no case does simply knowing an object's physical location relate to energy.

 

[Grumblenuts]

The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant; energy can be transformed from one form to another, but can be neither created nor destroyed.

Aaron Murakami (from Hacking the Aether):
"The work done when the object falls and impacts the ground {...} is completely different from the energy used to lift the object" {thus} "showing there is no such thing as conservation of energy."
"Energy never changes from one form to another."
"Energy is simply the dissipation of the source potential back to its symmetrical state in the environment."
"Energy always is and only is created and destroyed."
"Energy is materialized (created) & de-materialized (destroyed) simultaneously the moment organized potential is dissipated by a resistance."
"Energy is the appearance of work - nothing more, nothing less."

 

[Grumblenuts]

Though clearly at stark odds with the previously provided definition, Aaron's statements are reasonably consistent with the following:

The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases over time. Isolated systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium, the state with maximum entropy. Non-isolated systems, like organisms, may lose entropy, provided their environment's entropy increases by at least that amount so that the total entropy either increases or remains constant. Therefore, the entropy in a specific system can decrease as long as the total entropy of the Universe does not.

Entropy "increases." Entropy "remains constant." Entropy "can decrease." This indicates that "the arrow of time" can point backwards in special circumstances, but shall always remain pointing forward in general.

 

[ding]

 

[james bond]

Asimov was a great writer.

Truth is we simply don't know whether or not it's "getting more disorderly."

If you're talking sci-fi, then not Darwin? He's the perfect example of disorder which came from his racist, racist, racist theories. Today, we BLM because of him. I think he made the most money with one or two books.

Which books of Asimov did you enjoy? He's either the best or the only one who comes to mind as kids.

 

[james bond]

The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant; energy can be transformed from one form to another, but can be neither created nor destroyed.

Aaron Murakami (from Hacking the Aether):
"The work done when the object falls and impacts the ground {...} is completely different from the energy used to lift the object" {thus} "showing there is no such thing as conservation of energy."
"Energy never changes from one form to another."
"Energy is simply the dissipation of the source potential back to its symmetrical state in the environment."
"Energy always is and only is created and destroyed."
"Energy is materialized (created) & de-materialized (destroyed) simultaneously the moment organized potential is dissipated by a resistance."
"Energy is the appearance of work - nothing more, nothing less."

Murakami is in error because the work done to lift the object has to be set off balance in order for it to fall, i.e. whatever was done to lift the object has to be undone first for gravity to take over. He makes a lot claims like you, but where are his calculations to back it up?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Asimov was a great writer.

Truth is we simply don't know whether or not it's "getting more disorderly."

If you're talking sci-fi, then not Darwin? He's the perfect example of disorder which came from his racist, racist, racist theories. Today, we BLM because of him. I think he made the most money with one or two books.

Which books of Asimov did you enjoy? He's either the best or the only one who comes to mind as kids.

I don't recall reading his books. Lots of inspiring bits and quotes. Sexist pig perhaps.. racist? Whaa?

 

[Grumblenuts]

The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant; energy can be transformed from one form to another, but can be neither created nor destroyed.

Aaron Murakami (from Hacking the Aether):
"The work done when the object falls and impacts the ground {...} is completely different from the energy used to lift the object" {thus} "showing there is no such thing as conservation of energy."
"Energy never changes from one form to another."
"Energy is simply the dissipation of the source potential back to its symmetrical state in the environment."
"Energy always is and only is created and destroyed."
"Energy is materialized (created) & de-materialized (destroyed) simultaneously the moment organized potential is dissipated by a resistance."
"Energy is the appearance of work - nothing more, nothing less."

Murakami is in error because the work done to lift the object has to be set off balance in order for it to fall, i.e. whatever was done to lift the object has to be undone first for gravity to take over. He makes a lot claims like you, but where are his calculations to back it up?

Whaa? The work done to lift the object has already been "set off" (dissipated) as heat. Keep lifting bowling balls onto a rack,.. your arm gets tired and hot. Those balls never need go anywhere. The calculations generally end up being the same. What really went on to get there is the question.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Murakami is in error because the work done to lift the object has to be set off balance in order for it to fall, i.e. whatever was done to lift the object has to be undone first for gravity to take over.

Thank you for that. It's a great reminder. I recall being allowed to take physics in seventh grade where most were taking it in ninth. I initially felt so honored, humbled, excited, and scared.. That all turned gradually into irritation, disbelief, frustration, and finally being seriously pissed off at being offered only those sorts of backwards sounding, vacuous explanations time and again..

 

[Grumblenuts]

More Murakami:
Corrected First "Law" of Motion - Space preserves its state of equilibrium by resisting the acceleration of moving bodies within it.
Notes:

• Law of Inertia
• Rate of change is required
• Applies to stationary bodies beginning to move
• Applies to bodies in uniform motion
• Does not apply to a body just sitting there
• Inertia is an action not a lack of action

I presume Aaron meant to include bodies coming to rest as well. This helps with understanding momentum..

 

[Grumblenuts]

I'm just reviewing some of Murakami's "The Quantum Key" here to help clarify where I'm coming from since I vastly agree with him in this area and he usually words things very well. This part stems from his review of what Newton referred to as his "Axioms of Motion" (not "Laws") since these motion notions were already considered established scientific principles at the time. I've already gone over the First. Aaron "corrects" nothing in the Second - "of Acceleration" - The Alteration of motion is ever proportional to the motive force impressed; and is made in the direction of the right line in which that force is impressed. But he "corrects" the Third to simply read, "Every action generates an equal reaction that may be at any phase angle with the primary action." Not sure that bit beyond "an equal reaction" is strictly correct or helpful, but whatever. All this intro helps to really understand how acceleration, time, and inertia relate to the Aether.. which I'll get back to soon..

 

[ding]

Aether.. which I'll get back to soon..

 

[Grumblenuts]

So could one black hole grow so big, so fast that it swallows our entire observable universe some sunny day? Uh,.. Hmm!,.. Gulp!,.. Bang!, Uh,.. Hmm!,.. Gulp!,.. Bang!,..

 

[james bond]

Sexist pig perhaps.. racist? Whaa?

No. Isaac Asimov is cool. I was referring to Charles "Farking Racist" Darwin. Hater Darwin wrote a lot of fiction, too.

 

[james bond]

Whaa? The work done to lift the object has already been "set off" (dissipated) as heat. Keep lifting bowling balls onto a rack,.. your arm gets tired and hot. Those balls never need go anywhere. The calculations generally end up being the same. What really went on to get there is the question.

I asked for calculations as my article provided the calculations. There are no calculations to show what Murakami is claiming.

Let's say we lift tie Mr. Murakami with a rope and you lift him 100 ft. in the air. It is solid concrete as the ground below you. He is screaming his arse off for you to not let go of the rope. However, you are quickly getting tired. The amount of work you did to lift Murakami off the ground and 100 ft in the air is 17,500 foot pounds. Once you let go of the rope, he will hit the ground at 17,500 foot pounds. Now, this is the amount of energy or heat dissipated. How much force will Murakami experience before he likely dies?

 

[Grumblenuts]

my article provided the calculations.

What article?

Let's say we lift tie Mr. Murakami with a rope and you lift him 100 ft. in the air. It is solid concrete as the ground below you. He is screaming his arse off for you to not let go of the rope. However, you are quickly getting tired. The amount of work you did to lift Murakami off the ground and 100 ft in the air is 17,500 foot pounds.

Dunno about this "we" business? Yes, the total lifting work I apparently performed and simultaneously burned off as heat..

Once you let go of the rope,

Nope. After free falling "100 ft.",..

he will hit the ground at 17,500 foot pounds.

Nope. The force of impact will be 17,500 lbs.

Now, this is the amount of energy or heat dissipated.

Okay, so "17,500 foot pounds" total will be dissipated as heat upon impact.

How much force will Murakami experience before he likely dies?

Somewhat less, I imagine. Pretty tough looking dude, but the first 500 lbs might be enough to do the trick. Presuming the rope weightless and that Aaron dies instantly,.. let's say the total "force" Aaron experiences upon impact is 17,500 lbs. F = mgh = Wh = 175 lbs x 100 ft. Lifted only 10 ft, F would equal only 1,750 lbs. Drop him ten times from 10 ft? 17,500 lbs total. In any case, it's not the fall but the sudden stop that really burns. Note: heat is generated in both the floor and the fallen object upon impact and may take a while to fully dissipate (equilibrate). Consider a bouncing body.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Just to drive home the point, pun intended, picture a clearly inelastic collision like pounding a metal stake into the ground with a sledgehammer. The contact period for each blow is long. Heat is generated in the stake, ground, and sledge simultaneously. Then, much more slowly,.. that heat returns (dissipates) into the larger environment (Earth, air, space) until all is equally cool again.

In the short run, the "action" - the hammer striking the stake, produces heat.
The "reaction" - the stake smacking the hammer back, if you will, while also rubbing the ground, produces equivalent heat. Both appear to do the same work or exert the same energy, simultaneously.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Time I got back to time.

Time/Space is the 4th Dimension that is created by gravity

I'm going to leave inertia alone for now and skip ahead. I'm not crazy about how Aaron handles this so I'll just give you my version which I'm only slightly happier about. Again, "Space" has but 1 actual dimension, space. Various coordinates can be used to locate points within. We think volume (3D) vs. plane (2D) vs line (1D) but it can all be seen as contained by and definable within the same space.

But what of Time? Dimension? Maybe. I don't think so. I think of it as a higher order point coordinate in Space. Time is more important than x,y, or z because the distance between two points will often depend upon what time it is, and less so vice versa. Though we measure time in periodic increments, it simply marches on and clearly doesn't care. One might ask for the time, another answer "2 o'clock," and the first respond "What year?"

In outer space we most often measure time in light years. We observe the speed of light as a constant because the Aether makes it appear so regardless of its local density. Time may simply be motion through the Aether. Aaron describes it as being relative to the movement of the local Aether, but I don't think the Aether necessarily moves. I just see its density changing which seems all that's required. May help explain why some have seen results with an interferometer while others didn't.

If one could have an absolute perspective, they could see light travelling faster in less dense Aether and slower where denser. But, in reality, as light enters our hood, the Aether makes it all look and measure like it's going c. How's this amount to an "arrow" and stuff? I dunno.. Maybe get back to it eventually..

 

[Grumblenuts]

"There is no energy in matter except that absorbed from the medium."

 

[james bond]

Somewhat less, I imagine. Pretty tough looking dude, but the first 500 lbs might be enough to do the trick.

Your calculations were were way off. 17,500 ft lbs is the heat dissipated, not the force generated.

It will be around 4500 lbs of force which will be more than enough to put an end to Mr. Murakami. I agree 500 lbs of force should be the end for Murakami.

Calculate the force of a fall while using the fall protection force calculator

Use our free fall protection force calculator to determine the force generated on the body when using fall protection.

wilmes.co

SLOT happens. Murakami no you haven't provided any calculations to back up the claims.