3 ms·

Oh well, if you come up with magic materials you can do anything, of course.

by mnl 7y ago

cinquemb 7y ago
Its magic when you say embed Au angsrtom scale layering in an Si structure in order to control the wave plane? Any decent E&M research lab can pull out many examples of magic then…
- mnl 7y ago
  I still don't get why people do this. You can't use snippets of Wikipedia to make a point you don't understand. We're talking about macroscopic systems here. The laws of thermodynamics depend on the law of large numbers (if you take the stat mech route), they can be considered laws about statistical averages. It doesn't matter that somebody in nanowhatever claims a deviation from the macroscopic behaviour, that's their job. You still have a macroscopic Earth. An Earth brimming with grey goo would still obey the laws of thermodynamics.
  - cinquemb 7y ago
    > I still don't get why people do this. You can't use snippets of Wikipedia to make a point you don't understand. I referenced wikipedia and cited an example of such from my experience in physics lab in college nearly a decade ago… I don't get why people try to use some "law" built upon a particular set assumptions that work on a particular set of circumstances expect their leaky abstractions on top of it to govern everything that could ever be possible… >The laws of thermodynamics depend on the law of large numbers (if you take the stat mech route), they can be considered laws about statistical averages. On systems operating under certain assumptions… just like navier-stokes predicting singularities from a specific set of IC's in theory that don't happen in real life from said IC's, which have to be handled with a bunch of corrections and adjustments that are more accurate… we're still working out the math as to why that is…
    - mnl 7y ago
      You're mixing up laws with models. Conservation of momentum is a physical law, that is, we're not making that up, we always see it. The Navier-Stokes equation is a continuum mechanics model of fluids with interesting mathematics, but it's not fundamental, it relies on conservation of momentum and additional reasonable assumptions about the fluid, in the same way that for instance the van der Waals equation is reasonable but it's not a law, you find deviations and there are better models. As far as we can tell the laws of thermodynamics are laws indeed, that's why no one is proposing perpetual motion machines of the second kind any more.
      - cinquemb 7y ago
        The law I was referring to in this case was Stefan–Boltzmann law (heavily reliant upon assumptions on a given black body that break down under certain circumstances, that people like to hand wave away because they haven't had to deal with the complexities of said circumstances before), which may as well as be a model as far as I'm concerned.
        mnl 7y ago
        No, it isn't, it's what you get after integrating to all frequencies the Planck distribution for the radiation of a black body in thermodynamic equilibrium, which if you can get a sufficiently black one, you can check out it matches perfectly. I mean perfectly, that's what remote sensing satellites start with for determining surface temperature, after convenient linearization and modeling emissivity. That's what we see in the CMB, again perfectly. It's like this, I'm sorry. (Look at the CMB spectrum —and refs therein—: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cmbr.svg https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cmbr.svg)
        cinquemb 7y ago
        And then take those same sensors and apply that to the said materials I mentioned above, above and it breaks down… "Oh but we haven't observed it in the cosmos from our cherry picked backtested 'sufficiently black' ones so it doesn't matter" Rah rah rah, if you want to continue more just, email me cinque [underscore] mcfarlane - blake [ - a - t] brown [- d - o -t] edu

Oh well, if you come up with magic materials you can do anything, of course.

by mnl 7y ago

Oh well, if you come up with magic materials you can do anything, of course.

Its magic when you say embed Au angsrtom scale layering in an Si structure in order to control the wave plane? Any decent E&M research lab can pull out many examples of magic then…

mnl 7y ago
I still don't get why people do this. You can't use snippets of Wikipedia to make a point you don't understand. We're talking about macroscopic systems here. The laws of thermodynamics depend on the law of large numbers (if you take the stat mech route), they can be considered laws about statistical averages. It doesn't matter that somebody in nanowhatever claims a deviation from the macroscopic behaviour, that's their job. You still have a macroscopic Earth. An Earth brimming with grey goo would still obey the laws of thermodynamics.
- cinquemb 7y ago
  > I still don't get why people do this. You can't use snippets of Wikipedia to make a point you don't understand. I referenced wikipedia and cited an example of such from my experience in physics lab in college nearly a decade ago… I don't get why people try to use some "law" built upon a particular set assumptions that work on a particular set of circumstances expect their leaky abstractions on top of it to govern everything that could ever be possible… >The laws of thermodynamics depend on the law of large numbers (if you take the stat mech route), they can be considered laws about statistical averages. On systems operating under certain assumptions… just like navier-stokes predicting singularities from a specific set of IC's in theory that don't happen in real life from said IC's, which have to be handled with a bunch of corrections and adjustments that are more accurate… we're still working out the math as to why that is…
  - mnl 7y ago
    You're mixing up laws with models. Conservation of momentum is a physical law, that is, we're not making that up, we always see it. The Navier-Stokes equation is a continuum mechanics model of fluids with interesting mathematics, but it's not fundamental, it relies on conservation of momentum and additional reasonable assumptions about the fluid, in the same way that for instance the van der Waals equation is reasonable but it's not a law, you find deviations and there are better models. As far as we can tell the laws of thermodynamics are laws indeed, that's why no one is proposing perpetual motion machines of the second kind any more.
    - cinquemb 7y ago
      The law I was referring to in this case was Stefan–Boltzmann law (heavily reliant upon assumptions on a given black body that break down under certain circumstances, that people like to hand wave away because they haven't had to deal with the complexities of said circumstances before), which may as well as be a model as far as I'm concerned.
      - mnl 7y ago
        No, it isn't, it's what you get after integrating to all frequencies the Planck distribution for the radiation of a black body in thermodynamic equilibrium, which if you can get a sufficiently black one, you can check out it matches perfectly. I mean perfectly, that's what remote sensing satellites start with for determining surface temperature, after convenient linearization and modeling emissivity. That's what we see in the CMB, again perfectly. It's like this, I'm sorry. (Look at the CMB spectrum —and refs therein—: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cmbr.svg https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cmbr.svg)
        cinquemb 7y ago
        And then take those same sensors and apply that to the said materials I mentioned above, above and it breaks down… "Oh but we haven't observed it in the cosmos from our cherry picked backtested 'sufficiently black' ones so it doesn't matter" Rah rah rah, if you want to continue more just, email me cinque [underscore] mcfarlane - blake [ - a - t] brown [- d - o -t] edu