Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.bofh.team!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp Message-ID: <9YCpfbWayDDTVrmI9Yye1LKiThs@jntp> JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net JNTP-DataType: Article Subject: Getting there at last... References: <1HWE6H1jV8YTvxfaaL7fnCCcpe8@jntp> <1bcd63e24f9d1f35a1aa7af1b44091d2@www.novabbs.org> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math JNTP-HashClient: WvNW2hVGfaOr_codPk1OKhOArlg JNTP-ThreadID: 5ipMllmo3ZDdVjvYIsvl1ofrDVs JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=9YCpfbWayDDTVrmI9Yye1LKiThs@jntp User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net Date: Tue, 26 Mar 24 23:49:21 +0000 Organization: Nemoweb JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/121.0.0.0 Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="601f4a4a60dc6043f0c3ab83656fd85fb6bc327d"; logging-data="2024-03-26T23:49:21Z/8793799"; posting-account="219@news2.nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="julien.arlandis@gmail.com" JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1 JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96 From: Arindam Banerjee Bytes: 5394 Lines: 101 Le 23/03/2024 ร  21:24, bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (bertitaylor) a รฉcrit : > Thomas Heger wrote: > >> Am 21.03.2024 um 14:05 schrieb bertitaylor: > >>>>>> Sure, the increase of entropy over time is a known fact. >>>>>> But that does not say very much about time itself, because time is >>>>>> required for the increase of entropy in the first place. >>>>> >>>>> the Entropy ๐—œ๐—ฆ time. Please stop ๐—ป๐—ผ๐˜ undrestanding tensors. Look >>>>> at this: >>>> No, because both terms are related, but not equal. >>> >>>> Second law of thermodynamics means actually heat distribution. >>> >>> They had no clue about the radiant nature of heat when they started >>> talking about entropy. > >> Heat transfer is possible in three different ways: > >> transport of heated media (convection) >> dissipation of heat within some sort of stuff (conduction) >> radiation > >> Therefore it is not true, that thermal energy is always transported by >> radiation. > > I did not say that. What did I say? ">> They had no clue about the radiant > nature of heat when they started >>> talking about entropy." Heat engines, laws of thermodynamics (1824) antedated >>> Maxwell and JC Bose. > > >>> Radiation is essentially force. > >> Well, but no. > > It is force all right, going by fields magnetic and electric which relate to > force. If we believe in aether, radiation as travelling electromagnetic waves > using aether medium, etc. > >> Actually you (apparently) mean 'fields' with 'essential'. > > When I say heat, I mean radiant force, coming from electromagnetic fields, that > exert force when something material is impacted. > > >> To call a field 'force' is totally wrong. > > A field causes a force when impacted as I said. The notion of force very much > attends an electric field. Look up the basics, relating to classical physics. > > > >> The term 'force' stems from the measurement of a field. But fields exist >> without measurement. > > Fields are practical, not theoretical, in classical physics. What exists without > measurement cannot be deemed scientific. That way, unicorns, pixies, etc. exist by > definition with no need for measurement. > > Wherever there is electric force, pushing a current, or affecting charges > otherwise, there has to be an electric field. > > > >> So, if I decode your statement properly, you like to say, that heat >> transfer by radiation utilises the em-field. > > No, radiation is travelling electromagnetic waves using the aether medium. > Wherever this radiation is obstructed, electric forces (leading to voltage > potentials) on the surfaces are created, creating currents, that cause the > sensation of heat. to humans. > > In short, the em-field is not like a soccer field. It is time and space varying > electric field spread out from the radiator, to infinity, lessening with distance > with the inverse square law. > >> That would be actually correct. > >>> With distance it becomes nearly zero from its source. >>> Creating the overall background radiation. > >> Now you want to explain CMBR? > > Easy. The fields from all the stars in the universe add up to form background > radiation, universal, and composed of all frequencies. They make electronic > oscillators possible. And nanotech too, with nanovoltages to drive nanomachines. > The fields from those stars at infinity are zero, most of it from the nearby stars > and galaxies. > > bt > >> I personally think, that CMBR has nothing to do with the big-bang, but >> is caused by the gravitational field of the Earth. >> .... > > >> TH Cheers, Arindam Banerjee