>From Wikipdia: In the presence of magnetic fields<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field>, all molecules have optical activity. A magnetic field aligned in the direction of light propagating through a material will cause the rotation of the plane of linear polarization. This Faraday effect<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_effect> is one of the first discoveries of the relationship between light and electromagnetic effects.
This allows for instance a magnetic fed to change the polarization of light. If this can or can't work I am not sure, probably, but then again there wil be other ways as you point out. The gist of it is though that there are obviously ways to make use of light to beat entropy, your way being semi practical. It should have never been called a law, it is just a generalization. John On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:13 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > Interesting idea, but I also am not aware that a magnetic field will cause > significant optical rotation. Maybe someone in the vortex is familiar with > this issue to offer guidance. Your suggestion reminds me of a circulator > used in microwave products, less the lenses of course. It can guide RF > signals in one direction. It could allow RF to be sent from one device to > the other but have no return path. It is a neat way to stabilize negative > resistance devices. Perhaps this is a way to achieve your plan. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Berry <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 6:51 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? > > You are reminding me of an idea I had long ago. > > Take 2 hot radiating objects. > > Place then in a perfect thermal insulating container (for fun). > > Now I have heard that a magnet can rotate the plane of polarization of > photons. > The second fact this is based on is that if you have 2 polarized lenses at > 90 degrees no light gets through until a 3rd is added between that is at 45 > degrees, the middle one rotates the light enough to make it through the > final one. > > Then between them have a setup of polarized lenses (at varied angles) > and a magnetic field. > > The magnetic field rotates the light such that light making the trip > from object A to B can get through the polarized lenses (some of it > anyway), but in the other direction the twist direction of the magnetic > field opposes the twist direction of the polarized lenses. > > In theory this allows light/heat to escape one to go to the other side, > but not the other way. > > I am not really sure however that I am correct about the relative > directions the magnetic field would rotate the plane of polarization. > > John > > > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:06 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Dave, you’re nothing but a heretic… **** >> ** ** >> ** ** >> ** ** >> ** ** >> ** ** >> ** ** >> ** ** >> … WELCOME to the Collective! J**** >> ** ** >> -Mark**** >> ** ** >> *From:* David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] >> *Sent:* Friday, January 18, 2013 2:03 PM >> *To:* [email protected] >> >> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?**** >> ** ** >> Robin, you are right, I was afraid that I would break that nasty >> thermodynamic law and become confined within a black hole. [image: ;-)] >> **** >> ** ** >> I was actually hoping that the solar cell argument would help me >> understand why the heat engine limitations exist. Now, I am a bit >> confused. It is just too easy to break that rule and get away with it. I >> was hoping for a good challenge.**** >> ** ** >> So why not just harvest the heat energy around us and have that >> perpetual motion machine that we would all desire? All we have to do is to >> come up with a process that converts the local IR into DC and be on the way. >> **** >> ** ** >> Something is wrong with this picture unless the patent office needs to >> reconsider their ban on patents that suggest perpetual motion. Maybe not >> after a little consideration, sooner or most likely much later all of the >> heat will be harvested and the patent office wins. No perpetual motion is >> possible.**** >> ** ** >> Dave >> >> **** >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mixent <[email protected]> >> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> >> Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:41 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?**** >> >> In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:10:12 -0500 >> (EST):**** >> >> Hi,**** >> >> [snip]**** >> >> >I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert >> >it **** >> >> into mechanical energy in a useful manner. The net effect is that the >> system **** >> >> cools down in response.**** >> >> >** ** >> >> >** ** >> >> >Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very >> >high **** >> >> temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead >> of **** >> >> the long wavelengths associated with our environment. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> That would be us, on a hot day. ;) **** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> > I guess it would resemble the surface of the sun to produce our standard >> > **** >> >> spectrum.**** >> >> >** ** >> >> >** ** >> >> >These guys construct a photoelectric cell that takes some of the ever >> >present **** >> >> light and converts it into DC voltage that is used to drive a motor. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> I have suggested several times in the past that a solar cell effectively**** >> >> "rectifies" sunlight, producing DC current. Since DC has a frequency of >> zero, it**** >> >> represents a body that doesn't radiate, i.e. it is effectively at absolute >> zero.**** >> >> IOW, ideally, heat/light goes in and is stored (in a battery). Nothing comes >> out**** >> >> (depends on your definition of system boundaries).**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> > The motor is used to transport material from the surface of their world >> > into a **** >> >> higher location thereby producing gravitational energy.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> This is the equivalent of storing the energy in a battery.**** >> >> >** ** >> >> >** ** >> >> >Since light energy has been converted into mechanical work, less of it is >> >**** >> >> present within the system so the world gets a bit cooler. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> Every body radiates and gets cooler all the time. Most of the time however >> it**** >> >> receives just as much energy as it radiates, so it is in thermal >> equilibrium**** >> >> with it's environment (the exception being active cooling/heating >> devices).**** >> >> ** ** >> >> >There is little doubt that the overall energy is conserved, but it does not >> >**** >> >> seem to require a low temperature heat sink for this engine to exhaust the >> high **** >> >> temperature heat into.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Correct. Low temperature heat sinks are only required where the energy >> remains**** >> >> in the form of molecular kinetic energy throughout the process.**** >> >> Conversion to potential rather than kinetic energy can remove the >> requirement**** >> >> for a low temperature heat sink. Which BTW is why wind chill is capable >> of**** >> >> cooling water below ambient temperature. Energy is stored as potential >> energy**** >> >> when the hydrogen bonds between water molecules are broken. Only a very >> tiny**** >> >> fraction of the energy required to create the temperature differential is**** >> >> supplied by the wind. This is because the wind only removes the molecules >> once**** >> >> thermal energy has separated them. Once they are separated they are >> effectively**** >> >> "at infinity" relative to one another, so the attractive force between them >> is**** >> >> only a minute fraction of what it was when they were bound together by >> Hydrogen**** >> >> bonds in the liquid. It is only this remaining minute attraction that needs >> to**** >> >> be broken by the wind.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> >** ** >> >> >** ** >> >> >It appears that the cold space surrounding a system can be used as the cool >> >**** >> >> sink if another is not available. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> ???????**** >> >> ** ** >> >> >In principle this suggests that it should be possible to take any system >> >that **** >> >> is above absolute zero temperature and extract heat from it which can be **** >> >> converted into another form of energy. For some reason, this seems to be >> **** >> >> getting a free lunch and I must be missing something.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> You fear you may be violating the second law of thermodynamics. ;)**** >> >> ** ** >> >> >** ** >> >> >** ** >> >> >Support for this hypothesis is evident by observing the radiation of >> >thermal **** >> >> energy from hot bodies into free space. The body cools down as it loses >> energy **** >> >> as would be expected, but perhaps there are other ways to cool it down >> besides **** >> >> radiation as the hot heads discovered. The process I proposed is very much >> like **** >> >> the conversion of gravitational energy of a gas into heat as the cloud **** >> >> collapses; only in reverse.**** >> >> >** ** >> >> >** ** >> >> >Is this assumption wrong?**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Expanding gasses often cool down. That's how refrigerators work. :)**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Unfortunately, all you have really shown is that solar cells can harvest >> energy,**** >> >> which we already knew. ;)**** >> >> Regards,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Robin van Spaandonk**** >> >> ** ** >> >> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html**** >> >> ** ** >> >> >
