Looking for energy in all the wrong places.

[Roger Clough]

Looking for energy in all the wrong places. Plato's One vs. zero point energy
as the ultimate source of energy.
 
If  we compare the metaphysics of Aristostle and Plato,
we see that Aristotle's fundamental level is the bottom
level of Being,  that of matter.  Plato's metraphysics, on
the other hand, emerges from the top level of Being,
Mind or Conscuiousness.
 
So far, to my kniowledge at least, nobody has been able 
to extract energy from "zero point energy." So I suggest
that we look at Plato's One as the ultimate energy source.
 
Since there can be only one ultimate source,
my speculation, guided by the lack of alternatives,
is that Plato's One or consciousness is the ultimate
source of energy.  It is the subjective form of Aristotle's mattter. 
Following thermodynamics is a good analogy,


 Perhaps infinite (or huge) energy comes from infinite non-entropy
accessible to or as part of Mind. Infinite information would' be subjective. One also sees
information generated I think by black holes. 

Then matter comes out of Mind. This is accord with thermodyanmics (2bd Law)
in which energy (information) from the One (hot information) to the
cold sink (cold energy, matter, earth, man)
 
Dr.  Roger B Clough  NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000]
See my Leibniz site at
http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough

 

Dr. Roger B Clough NIST (ret.) [1/1/2000]

See my Leibniz site at

http://independent.academia.edu/RogerClough

[Richard Ruquist]

Astronomical observations of the cosmological constant has falsified the hypothesis that all energy comes from zero-point energy by 120 orders of magnitude, probably the strongest falsification ever achieved.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Stephen Paul King]

One wonders why this simple observed fact does not percolate down to the masses that continue to spout nonsense that is contrary to the fact. The zero point energy is, at best, electromagnetic in nature and since it is off-mass-shell" cannot contribute to the momentum-energy source of curvature. This also implies that there is no such thing as Planck scale 'foaminess'!

[meekerdb]

On 6/25/2013 1:27 PM, Stephen Paul King wrote:

One wonders why this simple observed fact does not percolate down to the masses that continue to spout nonsense that is contrary to the fact. The zero point energy is, at best, electromagnetic in nature and since it is off-mass-shell" cannot contribute to the momentum-energy source of curvature. This also implies that there is no such thing as Planck scale 'foaminess'!

The zero point energy of a field is negative for bosons (like photons) and positive for fermions.  The theory predicts +hbar*w/2 for each degree of freedom (e.g. 2 for a photon).  This is what produces what Weinberg called the "worst prediction in theoretical physics".  But if you use the holographic principle and count only the degrees of freedom proportional to the surface area (instead of volume) of the hubble sphere you get an energy density close to the observed dark energy value.

Brent

[Stephen Paul King]

Ah, an even more elegant argument against ZPE than the off-mass shell argument. Thanks for that tip, Brent. :-)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/YG6eX_qL0bE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.