-----Original Message----- From: Stephen A. Lawrence Jones Beene wrote: > I have lost the citation from a few weeks ago that claimed that below a > threshold of about 10 nm, the expected blackbody frequency is upshifted for > nanostructures, in general.
> SAL: If I understand you, and if this is true, then it's a violation of the second law of thermodynamics. No, not if other parts of the structure compensate, so that the net energy is unchanged. IOW sub-radiance compensates for super-radiance so that net energy is conserved. This what Brian Ahern calls energy "localization". It is usually a surface effect, and that is due to nanostructure. This all goes back to simulations done by Fermi, Pasta and Ulam on one of the first supercomputers at LANL. According to Brian, they simulated a one-dimensional array of masses connected by ideal springs obeying Hooke's Law. They gave the system x-amount of vibrational energy and then followed oscillators over time. The simulation showed that all of the masses got the same amount of vibrational energy. This was important as it verified one of the most basic tenets of statistical Thermodynamics. However, this is NOT the end of story, and they quickly found exceptions to the rule. Ulam changed the equation from F = -k1X to F = -k1x + k2X*2. He kept the constant k2 small so that he was adding only a small nonlinear component. Surprisingly, even a small amount of nonlinearity caused the energy to become highly localized. A small number of the masses went into permanent large amplitude oscillations and the remaining masses became 'vibrationally cold'. Note: there is no violation of CoE - at least not until abnormally large vibrations are able to cause another reaction - such as LENR (possibly). Later all of this was picked up in the context of LENR by Preperata and has been called DPSR = Dicke-Preparata Super-radiance. Robert Dicke is the original genius behind it all, prior to LENR. Here is an earlier posting on vortex (which you commented on, so don't say you never heard of it :) http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg22621.html There's another argument (from Brian): When two objects with different surface characteristics are placed next to each other in a uniformly hot oven and a dichroic filter is placed between them, if one radiates more strongly at the filter's peak reflection frequency than the other, their relative temperatures will change. (The one which radiates more strongly at the mirror's reflection frequency will "see" more radiation coming in than the other object, and so will get warmer.) You can analogize that to a single layered material with a surface that has greater vibrational mobility. But alas, I still have not found the paper in question, but am still looking. Here is one that is close: http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0953-8984/15/7/308 Jones
