Second Essay For The Gravitational Research Foundation

[Dubbelosix]

Also, I remember a small group suggested experimental errors, but it has also been [clearly argued] the variation is too significant to be a simple case of experimental error.

[exchemist]

Maybe for clarity, you would like to express exactly what it is about my statement in my essay you disagree with?

 

I said in my essay that it is an experimental fact that a system cannot cool down to absolute temperatures. You say the article supports what you say, yet you don't seem to see my essay says exactly the same thing.

You said this: 

 

"Well almost shielded, since experimentation shows we cannot freeze a system to absolute zero, an indirect evidence of the fluctuations."

 

I am pointing out that the unattainability of absolute zero is not evidence of any quantum process. 

[Dubbelosix]

You said this: 

 

"Well almost shielded, since experimentation shows we cannot freeze a system to absolute zero, an indirect evidence of the fluctuations."

 

I am pointing out that the unattainability of absolute zero is not evidence of any quantum process. 

 

 

Did you not read the wiki statements I provided?

 

Secondly, you clearly still don't understand the situation. Do you not understand that zero point energy is a residual fluctuation, a residual motion attributed to the field? Even if you remove all the matter and energy you think exists in a space (as you try to make a perfect vacuum), it doesn't matter what square area of space you measure, there is no such thing as an empty space. The fact systems cannot freeze to absolute zero is often taken as an indirect evidence of quantum fluctuations, so you are absolutely wrong in this instance.

[exchemist]

No you don't understand, because you said a true zero point state can exist, when I have repeatedly told you that experimentally a system cannot reach a true absolute zero state. I also said to you that a ground state [is] the zero point energy correction - which also means the ground state is not a true zero point field.

 

You can try and backtrack as much as you like, I know fine well, as anyone else does, what you objected to and what you claimed was wrong. Everything I have said, here and in my essay, is correct within standard terminology and understanding.

You are still labouring under the delusion that there is something called the "zero-point state" which has something to do with temperature. This is rubbish.

 

Zero point energy is simply the residual energy in the ground state of a QM system. For example, the energy of a harmonic oscillator it is hω/2π. (n +1/2), so when n=0, the zero point energy is  1/2 hω/2π, as you yourself said. Temperature does not come into this anywhere. You also get a zero point energy in the ground state of the particle in a box problem, and in the ground state of bond vibrations and in electronic states in atoms, though not in the case of the particle on a ring, or rotational ground states. 

 

If you present an essay thinking that zero point energy is something to do with absolute zero temperature, you will look a fool. I guarantee it.   

Edited January 2, 2019 by exchemist

[exchemist]

Did you not read the wiki statements I provided?

 

Secondly, you clearly still don't understand the situation. Do you not understand that zero point energy is a residual fluctuation, a residual motion attributed to the field? Even if you remove all the matter and energy you think exists in a space (as you try to make a perfect vacuum), it doesn't matter what square area of space you measure, there is no such thing as an empty space. The fact systems cannot freeze to absolute zero is often taken as an indirect evidence of quantum fluctuations, so you are absolutely wrong in this instance.

This is bilge. You seem to be obsessed with zero point field energy, i.e. the zero point energy of the vacuum, completely ignoring the fact that zero point energy exists in the ground states of matter as well.

 

And as for the notion that the zero point energy of the vacuum has anything to do with inability of matter to reach absolute zero, that is ridiculous. You can only get to absolute zero by extracting thermal energy and you can only extract energy by thermal flow into something colder. So obviously you can never get to absolute zero. It really is that simple. This is not a quantum phenomenon. 

 

Zero point energy does not contribute to temperature, because it is unextractable, whereas by definition temperature is a measure of the potential that heat has to flow. Zero point energy has no potential for flowing as it cannot escape and therefore it is irrelevant to temperature. 

 

If only you spent half the time you devote to exotic maths to actually learning some physics, you would do yourself and the world a big favour. And then you might not get banned from every science forum on the internet apart from this one. And maybe, just maybe, one of your papers might even get accepted, one day.

Edited January 2, 2019 by exchemist

[Dubbelosix]

Another one who doesn't understand it!

 

The vacuum actually was predicted by classical mechanics, to be able to be modeled in a zero temperature state: So no, I am not laboring under any delusion that such terminology exists. What you and the other poster doesn't realize, is that zero kevlin cannot be reached and what we call zero point energy is in fact always a ground residual fluctuation of order

 

[math]\frac{1}{2}\hbar \omega[/math]

 

But I have had run-in's with you plenty times, you don't know your physics very well either. Also it is clearly a matter of temperature since it was equivalent to the temperature equation provided by Planck. I could provide this temperature dependence, but I fear it would fall on deaf ears.

[Dubbelosix]

This is bilge. You seem to be obsessed with zero point field energy, i.e. the zero point energy of the vacuum, completely ignoring the fact that zero point energy exists in the ground states of matter as well.

 

 

Not in classical mechanics, you fool. Classical mechanics says something completely different and the existence of zero point energy was the result of quantum theory. This has nothing to do with me having an obsession.

[Dubbelosix]

If you really care about brushing up on your knowledge, you'll clearly see the fluctuation is a matter of the quantum vacuum, not the classical one

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_state

[exchemist]

Not in classical mechanics, you fool. Classical mechanics says something completely different and the existence of zero point energy was the result of quantum theory. This has nothing to do with me having an obsession.

Eh? 

 

Ah, now I remember...it's been so long....I'd forgotten that one feature of your rather, um, unique mental state is that you cannot argue coherently.

 

Well in that case I'd better bow out now, as I've made my point amply for those with the capacity and interest to follow it.

 

So, back to your mathematical knitting, Reiku, and l look forward to the summary rejection of your essay in due course.  

[Dubbelosix]

Stop trolling, exchemist. You don' t know me, so stop acting like you do. Also, stop changing the subject.

 

If you followed the last post, your statement that the existence of the zero point field (is not a quantum phenomenon) was proven incorrect. Suck it up and **** off,

[Dubbelosix]

Also, you don't seem to understand something, essays are not submitted to be ''accepted or rejected'' but are entered as part of a competition. Last year my paper was accepted on curvature in Hilbert space.

Edited January 2, 2019 by Dubbelosix

[Dubbelosix]

Last night I came across a nice paper, which shows the temperature-dependence of the zero point field. Again, it was Plancks law that did this.

 

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.562.7818&rep=rep1&type=pdf