The missing neutrino problem solved - Physics Reunited

[DrDaleCoxStudent]

I wouldn't put money on oil futures yet- I have patent applicition for Synthetic oil

I wouldn't put money on oil futures yet- I have patent application for Synthetic oil. With nuclear power you could make all you want.

Go to http://pair.uspto.gov and look up patent application # 10/270,767

Let's figure the Nuclear Force Crystal thing out, and put your money on united we stand.

 

[Nereid]

The Japanese have noticed a slight lower than normal neutrino count at night coming from Sun (See book Solar Neutrinos by John Bachall)

You forgot to mention that this effect is consistent with the MSW theory of neutrino oscilliations ... my guess is that while the Bahcall website contains a tremendous amount of information about neutrinos, theories of neutrinos, the Standard Model, experimental results, etc, you are having difficulty understanding all this material, and are simply selecting a subset of it that you think might be consistent with your Nuclear Crystal idea.

Unfortunately for you, without some detailed, quantitative predictions of your idea, you can't even get to first base (let alone a comparison of the relative merits of your idea vs MSW oscillations, etc).

 

[Deeviant]

A neutrino can travel though a LIGHT YEAR of lead(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino) without being stopped. And as their name implies, they are neutral of charge, thus weaking interacting.

The only real way for your "force crystals" to work if they were super dense(ie more dense than I light year of lead).

Due to the profound effect such a material would have on its surrounding, I'm sure it will be easy to prove your theory just as soon as you tell me how the Earth hasn't been destroyed by your force crystal. Do not think what you are doing is science. True scientists do not cling on to their theories and disregard all reasonable evidence against it.

Oh yeah, why would you want to create synthetic food using electrolosis. The process of seperating hydrogen and oxygen is anything but efficient. There are a great many sources of hydrogen and carbon that would be much more economical to gather and process such as hydrocarbon compounds. And your idea truly falls in my eyes when you say you'll use your extremely inefficient process to feed one of the most inefficient sources of food(cattle). During a Ice Age Crisis, I'd rather hope we wouldn't make millions die of starvation while we answer our mac attacks.

 

[DrDaleCoxStudent]

I heard it would take a light year of lead to stop all neutrinos, keeping in mind you have a Trillion neutrinos going through your body each second form Sun.

The fast and efficient way to separate water into hydrogen and Oxygen would be a plasma I would think, but let's use Thermodynamics efficiency equations. I worked on Plasma Reactors at Texas Instruments.

Dr Dale Cox, one of few people alive that has his Doctors in Dr Einsteins General Theory of Relativity,came to Alpine, Texas to teach(Sul Ross University) so he could be next to Observatory that was shooting laser to moon and reflecting it back(via reflector left by apollo mission to moon)to see if space is warped by gravity as Einstein predicted.


He stressed Thermodynamics as something very useful in everyday life, and taught Thermodynamics also. Einstein had a part in the development of Thermodynamics.

 

[Chronos]

Actually, a neutrino has a 50-50 chance of making it through a light year of lead.

 

[russ_watters]

I wouldn't put money on oil futures yet- I have patent application for Synthetic oil. With nuclear power you could make all you want.

Go to http://pair.uspto.gov and look up patent application # 10/270,767

Let's figure the Nuclear Force Crystal thing out, and put your money on united we stand.

From the title, it looks like oil from sugar - is there any net energy benefit to it, IE can it top the efficiency of nuclear electricity->hydrogen->car fuel cell?

Actually, a neutrino has a 50-50 chance of making it through a light year of lead.

That's pretty neat.

 

[DrDaleCoxStudent]

The process uses carbon dioxide and water

The process uses carbon dioxide and water. The water is separated into Hydrogen and Oxygen using electricity, and then the hydrogen is added to carbon dioxide.

 

[Deeviant]

The process uses carbon dioxide and water. The water is separated into Hydrogen and Oxygen using electricity, and then the hydrogen is added to carbon dioxide.

The question is why.

 

[DrDaleCoxStudent]

When I first started I got a small amount of blackish matter that looked like oil like material and heating with match glowed red and removing match, smoked like an ember.

When the blackish material was mildly oxidized by putting a drop of water and putting in Sun light, turned white like sugar.

I seamed as if I was making oil like material and something like sugar (carbohydrate).


When I made large quantities, I found that the blackish material was a fungus like material that would burn and looks to be able to be distilled to make gasoline.

So I say that the plant uses photosynthesis to produce electricity from photoelectric effect, and the electricity is used to separate the water into Hydrogen and Oxygen and the hydrogen is added to carbon dioxide to make carbon dioxide hydrogenation which a fungus can thrive and make chemicals for the plant. So in every seed there is different fungus, bacteria and algae to make different chemicals for plant, is what I am trying to prove now.

 

[Deeviant]

So I say that the plant uses photosynthesis to produce electricity from photoelectric effect, and the electricity is used to separate the water into Hydrogen and Oxygen and the hydrogen is added to carbon dioxide to make carbon dioxide hydrogenation which a fungus can thrive and make chemicals for the plant. So in every seed there is different fungus, bacteria and algae to make different chemicals for plant, is what I am trying to prove now.

Ah, fungi do not use photosynthesis, and photosynthesis does not produce electricity. Actually I have no clue at what you are trying to state, and it mostly sounds that you are in the same boat as I am.

 

[DrDaleCoxStudent]

Entropy

Well I have a mathematical proof do you have one?

Thermodynamics Entropy: When they first started studying chemical reactions they figured chemical reactions will go in the direction that would release heat (gas will burn to carbon dioxide and water, carbon dioxide and water will not turn to gas and oxygen naturally). But then they found some chemical reactions that get colder rather than release heat. So they came up with Entropy(Symbol = S). It is based on statistics. It can also be calculated from Heat capacity of a chemical, by dividing the heat capacity of the chemical, every degree from absolute zero to the temperature you are at but normally considered at 25 degrees C, and sum the results! Entropy always increases and never decreases. So if you calculate the entropy of gas and oxygen and then carbon dioxide and water, you find carbon dioxide and water has a higher entropy, so the chemical reaction will naturally go in the direction of gas and oxygen to carbon dioxide and water. What I am trying to do is turn Carbon Dioxide and water to Sugar and Oxygen but found that 3CO2 +2H2 + C3H8 = C6O6H12 is possible! Looking at the equation: C6O6H12 + 6O2 = 6CO2 + 6H2O Since Entropy only increases and never decreases, 6CO2 + 6H2O must have a higher Entropy than C6O6H12 + 6O2 , and since by adding sun light(heat) to 6CO2 + 6H2O will increase its temperature and Entropy and would make it even harder for it to go to lower Entropy of C6O6H12 + 6O2 . Because of this I have all ways argued that Sun light is not added to 6CO2 + 6H2O to make C6O6H12 + 6O2 , but that Sun light is used to make electricity(photoelectric effect). Now that electricity could be used to make H2 and O2 by letting the current flow through water, and the gases could be used to drive a chemical reaction in the direction of sugar from carbon dioxide The chemical reaction C6O6H12 + 6O2 = 6CO2 + 6H2O will go in the direction of sugar and oxygen to carbon dioxide and water. We know the Entropy of each gas, C6O6H12 + 6O2 (6 X 230) = 6CO2 (6 X 210)+ 6H2O (6 X 180) leaving sugar with a Entropy that must be less than or About 1000. Keeping in mind the high heat capacity of water and also its high Entropy because of this and the chemical reaction goes in the direction that has water, so let's see if we can get water on the product of chemical reaction and get the Entropy to be more on product side or close to that. Now to reverse this process, to go from carbon dioxide and water to sugar and oxygen but let's change and use the water to be separated into H2 and O2 and then add H2 to CO2 , let's look at this equation: 4H2 + CO2 = CH4 + 2H2O The Entropy 4H2 + CO2 (About 700J/K)= Entropy CH4 + 2H2O(About 600J/K) Trying to go from Entropy 4H2 + CO2 (About 700J/K)-To - Entropy CH4 + 2H2O(About 600J/K) there is a decrease of Entropy of about 100 and a chemical reaction will go in the direction that Entropy will increase and there is two ways to accomplish this. One way is to decrease the Entropy of 4H2 + CO2 (About 700J/K) by adding pressure to it giving it a lower Entropy than CH4 + 2H2O(About 600J/K). Now looking at this equation there is 5 moles on one side of equation and 3 moles on the other(product side) so by doing work(adding pressure to product side you could increase Entropy to product side and make the chemical reaction go in the direction of the product, and doing this in normal pressure of one atmosphere work will be done and could make reaction go forward to product side ). The other way is to increase the temperature as you look at the heat capacities( symbol Cp )of reactance and the products and we know that Entropy can be calculated by dividing the heat capacity per degree Kelvin from absolute zero to temperature you are at. Now if you have something that has high heat capacity like water( Cp = 75) its Entropy will increase faster than Co2(Cp = 37), So let's look at the equation again Entropy 4H2 + CO2 (About 700J/K)= Entropy CH4 + 2H2O(About 600J/K) and let's look at the heat capacity of each 4H2 (Cp = 29 per mole or 116)+ CO2 (Cp = 37) and CH4 (Cp = 36) + 2H2O(Cp = 75 per mole or 150). Giving us 116 + 37 = 153 on one side of equation (reactance)and 36 + 150 = 186 on the other(products). So as you increase the temperature the products will gain in entropy and when the products have more Entropy than reactance the chemical reaction will go forward.


Getting to the point, they have tryed to duplicate the process of plants(taking carbon dioxide and water and make sugar and oxygen out of it) with little luck. Text books add the photon to carbon dioxide and water to make sugar and oxygen, but from entropy we know that if you add heat to carbon dioxide and water it only increases the entropy and this would make it harder for it to go to the lower entropy of sugar and oxygen(since entropy only increases and never decreases).

Separate water into hydrogen and oxygen and then add the hydrogen to carbon dioxide and now from entropy the reaction comes close to being higher on products side, and if you have some water forming on the products side, with waters high heat capacity, adding heat now would put more entropy on the products side and the reaction will go forward.