quentron.com

[Philip Hardcastle]

@Sarkeizen,


If you want a polite conversation on the subject I will engage with you for a while as I have some free time at the moment.


I say that a device (such as Sebithenco) sorts particles (electrons) into two regions based simply on the ability of the electron to overcome an energy barrier.


You say that some information is needed to do that, and I assume that you would also say that information is a form of energy and so it takes energy to sort electrons, and that furthermore the information energy cannot be conserved as eventually we will run out of paper to write entries upon and so have to erase old information (this of course is the idea put forward by people before you who believe proof of the 2nd Law lies solely with information theory).


Is the above a fair summation?

[sarkeizen]

I assume that you would also say that information is a form of energy and so it takes energy to sort electrons, and that furthermore the information energy cannot be conserved as eventually we will run out of paper to write entries upon and so have to erase old information

Ah no.   The reason that's not going to be a productive conversation is because what you've outlined is an illustration not an argument.  The difference between the two is a) the reason that profitis can't believe his battery won't work forever and b) why your counter will effectively be "my thing doesn't have to do that" and c) at least few hundred pages of rather important formalisms.  Since I'm already teaching a remedial math class over in the Pi=4 thread.  I think there's a more productive path for us here.

A problem with your device is that there is almost no useful description of it's mechanism (even Lumen who was pretty far up your butt for a while appeared to acknowledge this).  So you can start by answering this question for me: Can your device's sorting mechanism be described in macroscopic terms?  i.e. the user called "register" considered that it was essentially "salmon jumping".

If not, then would you agree that the sorting mechanism for your device can essentially be described as "quantum magic".  Not to deride your amazing...some would say impossible...invention with that term.   Consider that in some contexts I'd also say: A gate-model quantum computer can factor large integers quickly through quantum magic.

This of course is the idea put forward by people before you who believe proof of the 2nd Law lies solely with information theory

The way I would say it is: Those who consider the Physical Church-Turing Thesis to be likely true which would accept an information theory proof.  If you don't then you can do what I think you're doing is postulating "substance X" which can magically decide undecidable problems.

[Philip Hardcastle]

@Sarkeizen,


Jumping Salmon is not going to do it.


I will try to explain the Sebithenco device in a few words;


Electrons having extraordinary kinetic energy (their population being significant) in room A, can escape the weak tethers (work function) that bind them, and travel to room B if they have enough remaining energy to overcome an intervening electrostatic barrier, but electrons in room B, though also having extraordinary kinetic energy, cannot do the reciprocal journey because the work function that tethers them to room B is too strong, such that there is no significant population that has sufficient energy to break their tethers and still have enough energy to overcome the intervening electrostatic barrier.

[sarkeizen]

Jumping Salmon is not going to do it.

Then marbles, billiard balls, whatever.  Perhaps I'm not being clear enough.  What I'm asking is: Is there any macroscopic model which accurately describes your sorting mechanism?

I think, because you appear to have to resort to talking about electrons the answer is "no".  In which case I'm going to refer to your mechanism as "quantum magic".

[MarkE]

@Sarkeizen,


Jumping Salmon is not going to do it.


I will try to explain the Sebithenco device in a few words;


Electrons having extraordinary kinetic energy (their population being significant) in room A, can escape the weak tethers (work function) that bind them, and travel to room B if they have enough remaining energy to overcome an intervening electrostatic barrier, but electrons in room B, though also having extraordinary kinetic energy, cannot do the reciprocal journey because the work function that tethers them to room B is too strong, such that there is no significant population that has sufficient energy to break their tethers and still have enough energy to overcome the intervening electrostatic barrier.

Mr. Hardcastle:  The magnitude of an electrostatic potential does not establish on which side of the potential where the greater energy is.  A good example of a PMM of the second kind that doesn't work for that very reason is the Brillioun diode.  Even a zero bias diode cannot harvest Johnson Noise because of this.