Maxwell's Demon Goes Electric?

Anybody who took some physics in HS and has a little imagination can understand how Maxwell's Demon thought experiment works.

So far it has been understood though the experiment is only evocative or allegorical as it can not work in reality.

You have two rooms full of gas molecules with a door in the middle, small enough for only one molecule to pass at the time. If you possess a demon (a small enough intelligent being) that has the capacity to open the small door and the energy used to open and close that door would be negligible and the demon would be smart enough to open the door each time when a fast molecule comes from right and close it when a fast one comes from left, after a while you would have all the slow molecules in the right room and all the fast ones in the left. And of course that difference of temperature could create energy if using something like a Stirling motor. But you could also commandeer the demon to open the door for all molecules coming from right or left and after a while you would have vacuum in one room and pressure in the other which again you could use to power something.

I think i've identified a couple of instances when this is happening in nature or within existing technology. Let's say you have a similar room filled with a gas with a layer of liquid of the same substance at the bottom (separated by gravity), at a pressure both phases can coexist. Due to thermal agitation there will be a continuous exchange of molecules between gas and liquid phases. However, molecules move much faster in gas phase than liquid. Because of that the molecules escape the liquid at a slower speed than some (of the fastest) gas molecules enter back the same liquid. Also, as soon as the slower raising (evaporating) molecules get hit by faster ones in the gas phase, they should enter back the liquid again at lower speeds than fastest moving in upper layer of gas and so on. So you would have a small strata at the surface of the liquid where gas will have a lower temperature that the rest.

No matter how much i've searched, i could not find anything clear and simple about such a commonly seen phenomena, the speed of electrons moving in a metal. Main reason is, you guessed, nobody ever saw them moving. Everybody agrees the electrons inside a metal are in a cloud like state, with electrons moving freely around. But as for the speed, there are many differences of opinions, because of the different models they use. In classical physics, that can explain some of the phenomena, they are moving at speeds comparable to speed of light. In quantum, you guessed, they are waveforms and the speeds can't be known exactly. However they all agree about the drift speed, the speed at which the electric charges of electrons move together when an external electric field is applied, creating what they call an "electric current" but that speed is excruciatingly slow, for practical currents, (where conductors will be stable or won't heat up and vaporise) the speeds are in the order of mm/sec. From that and from calculations it results that only a very small fraction of moving electrons or better said only a small fraction or the axial component of the speed of electrons makes our practical current.

However much more is known about the flow of currents in pure (intrinsic) semiconductors. When an electric field is applied, electrons jump from one atom to another, leaving behind "holes" that in turn are creating again electric fields (on top of the externally applied field) that are attracting other electrons in a cascading effect. This way, the average speed of electrons jumping around is always limited, if not constant at a few discrete values (have to consider acceleration and deceleration between two jumps or the paths of electrons). I found a GIF that illustrates this phenomenon.

The more interesting part happens however whey you put two of these together, on the left a pure metal and at right next to it a pure semiconductor like in series and attach a battery on the sides (your electric field) in such a way (polarity) that electrons will flow from the metal into the semiconductor. Electrons cannot enter the semiconductor at the speeds they float around in metal but only at drifting speed.

Though some models say electrons move around at speeds comparable to speed of light, in all directions, if a bunch of those would hit the semiconductor they will vaporise it, hower that is not happening. What is happening though and we can measure it, is an electric current (same) is flowing through both and the speed of that current is "regulated" by the jump speed of electrons in semiconductor.

We all know that any current generated by an external field that translates into drifting (axial motion) of the electrons through a metal generates heat. Some models predict drifting current represent a very small fraction of the motion of electrons. However if the electrons were moving in the metal at high speed, they will be slowed down by collisions with the lattice and all their energy will be turned into heat.

Though, ultimately heat itself keep the electrons moving. Compared to materials that don't have free electrons, at the same temperature the lattice itself will agitate less because some of the heat will be carried by (free moving) electrons. As i just read on a site, metal is part solid with a gas or liquid (of electrons) flowing through it, which explains thermal conductivity and other phenomena.

(By this simple idea i think we can actually calculate the non-drifting average speed of the electrons at different temperatures, by rule of three or something close including the lattice vibration, starting with the temperature difference and drift speed generated by a current that we can calculate. Which shouldn't be that high. Actually comparable with the drift speed).

By continuing this line of reasoning. At a metal/semiconductor junction with flowing of current from metal to semiconductor, electrons from the metal will be caught in newly created "holes" within the semiconductor due to external field but also due to field created by the hole itself. But within certain limits, of various speeds and directions, since the speed and generally motion of electrons in metal is random due to collisions with its own lattice. Some of them will have axial speeds exceeding the capacity of the semiconductor lattice to retain them (both external and hole field) and will be rejected back in the metal though at a lower speeds (some momentum of the electron will be transferred throughout the lattice, creating agitation or heat), where they will collide again with metal's lattice again and eventually some will come back at lower speed and be retained after a number of cycles and finally start jumping, in the direction of the field, maybe a bit more at first, but not enough to overheat the lattice (we know how keep the current below that limit, from previous trials), with again some momentum (heat) transferred between them and semiconductor lattice, until all they all reach "regular" jumping speed. So here again we come to the conclusion that electrons are being selected by the junction in a way similar to molecules in Maxwell's experiment, though in both "rooms" particles (electrons) are constantly moving (flowing) to the right though in metal they are moving more, because they are moving in all directions and carry some of the total thermal energy of the metal. So from a cloud of electrons moving randomly through the metal lattice at thermal agitation speed and drifting speed in the electrical field we extract in the semiconductor only those moving at drifting speed and we can all agree that the drifting speed is lower than the average speed of electrons moving in the metal lattice.

Some would call these phenomena that occur all around us "rectifying" the brownian motion (of molecules or electrons) and it has been admitted by mainstream that if this would be possible, it would be a source of unlimited energy. That's where our intelligence must intervene and  harvest the free energy that exist all around us. (If only we wouldn't be so busy with plotting and be slaves to fake theories).

Would the universe collapse or fragment or shatter into multiverses if we start doing that? I don't think so cause heat pumps do this for decades and nothing happened so far (that we know about, or maybe the Universe is not expanding so much anymore).

Got you thinking, maybe a little?

End of Tesla Era

Much effort is being done nowadays to cover the name of Nikola Tesla, greatest inventor of all times, father of all electrical and electronic devices as we know them. One of those efforts is the brand Tesla, a startup manufacturer for electric cars only. Why should they have designed and built a car from scratch just to make it electrical? There was so much expertise at traditional manufacturers, all they have to do is replace engine and fuel tank with an electric engine and a battery. But maybe they didn't want to and Tesla is kinda of forcing them.

Nikola Tesla. Could one single person with the education and technology existing at the end of 19th century have done what he did? 700 patents? For those who don't know, a patent is some sort of juridical protection over the design of a new device or component. If you get a patent on an idea, you can make money out of it because nobody else can use your idea without your approval. It is one way to stimulate inventors and research. But in order to do so, after you "get the idea" you have to write down a complete description in such a way it would stand in court as proof it was your idea so you would discourage eventual attempts to infringe and then file that description with the authority in your country.

Anybody knows how much time it takes to write and file a patent? I'd say from one week to one month/inventor and/or attorney, depending on complexity, novelty, previously existing similar ones. Today's filing fees are more than 5000 dollars and you cannot be sure if you have it approved and especially if you will get anything in return. Smallest mistake could lead to failure to protect. Easiest way to go around a patent is to file another one and improve enough on the original idea (so you have to cover also in your description all possible improvements).

Thinking about how much money Musk's Tesla had to pay in royalties over existing patents or to lawyers to file new ones to go around those to build a car from scratch and he how gave them all away in 2014.

There are sites that made calculation on how much money Tesla have made out of his inventions and they say he should have been one of the richest people on planet at that time but he died bankrupt and senile in hotel room he wasn't paying for. That is the reason why i highly doubt Nikola did all those by himself but they were done by whole teams. Guys like Austro-Hungarian born Nikola Tesla, all the way to Intels' co-founder Hungarian born Andrew Grove, where/are just fronts, while the source of their knowledge and technology where most likely documents found in the Great Pyramid during Napoleon's invasion of Egypt. So they first had to invent Tesla.

"Tesla" did study in Austria and worked first at Budapest Telephone Company. Telephone was the ultimate thing done with wired technology, before Tesla invented wireless. Which was first attributed to the Italian Marconi. The radio.

Which what this post is all about. Radio made possible instant spread of information to the masses. If it was used for our good or for our doom. It all depends on the source of the invention, if it was from a genuine genius or from a past civilization possibly of alien origin destroyed after a global conflict with locals.

I'm writing all these trying to coerce everybody into thinking. All of a sudden, at the beginning of the 19th century we get this out of this world technology which would allow those who control it to control the minds of all people.

One example which again, nowadays they make big efforts trying to cover. Like most anything.

The infamous live transmission of Orson Welles that "was performed and broadcast live as a Halloween episode at 8 p.m. on Sunday, October 30, 1938, over the Columbia Broadcasting System radio network".

«The program's format was a simulated live newscast of developing events. The first two-thirds of the hour-long play is a contemporary retelling of events of the novel, presented as news bulletins interrupting programs of dance music. "I had conceived the idea of doing a radio broadcast in such a manner that a crisis would actually seem to be happening," Welles later said, "and would be broadcast in such a dramatized form as to appear to be a real event taking place at that time, rather than a mere radio play.»

There was a warning at the beginning but who listened to that?

«The illusion of realism was furthered because the Mercury Theatre on the Air was a sustaining program without commercial interruptions; the first break in the drama was about 35 minutes after the introduction, right after Martian war machines were described devastating New York City. Popular legend holds that some of the radio audience may have been listening to The Chase and Sanborn Hour with Edgar Bergen and tuned in to "The War of the Worlds" during a musical interlude, thereby missing the clear introduction indicating that the show was a drama. However, «contemporary research suggests that this happened only in rare instances».

I think it is safe to assume that out of boredom people back then were browsing radio stations pretty much like we do today with TV channels. So what i think it happened is most people stumbled upon that transmission after it began, obviously without hearing the warning, could not ignore it and as they continue to listen until they went crazy, ran away, started to prepare, etc..

I first read about this on the early days of the internet, probably before that "contemporary research". They were talking about people listening to other broadcasts, then tuned later into this one. Hundreds of suicides and chaos all around the country.

But this was just a test. Done in 1938. They wanted to know exactly how people reacted to prepare the recipe with the right ingredients for psychological preparation for the future planned war. Or maybe it was the first mass media scale use of reverse psychology, a failed alien invasion, as many people kept asking themselves, where all this technology is coming for? Both?

But before that. Think about how radio changed the world. Some people could communicate faster than others, from unknown location to unknown location. For about 50 years very few had the technology to scan the whole spectrum. You could schedule a rendezvous with someone and transmit with a code during a very brief period, before they could find the frequencies.

But the idea behind this post is other. I've been intrigued lately, actually since i came to US about how smart people i talk to are. Like a whole bunch of experts in everything where whispering in their ears what to say.

Now we all know it is possible with the help of micro headphones. During that era Tesla was going around the country with his electricity promoting shows. Imagine him or others, like Einstein, awing other people in conversations with their genius.

Usually nowadays micro headphones are associated with much electronics, many components, blue tooth maybe which is a short waves short range type of radio communication.

I remember something since i was a kid. There is something called unpowered crystal radio. It is based on the fact that actual radio transmitters are broadcasting with unusually high power signals. In the US power for radio stations is limited to to 50kW or about twice the power needed for a car to cruise, or maybe to power 5 homes. A few miles away from the station, that power is still enough to move the membrane of a headphone, if hooked to a circuit tuned on that frequency. The "crystal" is a form of an early diode which was capable of rectifying (back then it was called "detecting") the high (radio) frequency of a tuned circuit made of a capacitor and a coil and turn it into a signal that could move (vibrate) a headphone's membrane enough for someone with good hearing, like a kid, to hear the broadcast. So it was also possible with the technology of those times to make a sound heard with a small power over a short distance. But i bet you don't even need a crystal for that. You can have stuck in someone's year a tiny coil that would vibrate a membrane if the transmitter is within a few meters. To greatly enhance the appearance of personalities in public. I imagine on the other side of the curtain or wall or inside a van all the experts relaxed in armchairs next to a transmitter saying (whispering) the next line. Lucky those who were convinced cause i assume only the ignorant survived Tesla Era which is being brought to an end nowadays as we speak by the new technology, the Internet, which finally gives all the people the freedom to exchange information. Though very late.

Thou Shall Not...

Când vine vorba de practicarea religiei creștine în România, totul e puțin pe dos. De exemplu. Sectele creștine protestante de inspirație mai ales americană sunt numite culte. Te-ai fi așteptat ca versiunea lor de Biblie, o traducere de Dumitru Cornilescu, să fie mă rog, tradusă din una din numeroasele versiuni din engleză. (Poate ar fi sunat însă prea exotic și neatractiv ortodocșilor chiar nepracticanți pe care sperau să-i atragă). Probabil nu sunt singurul dar destul de singular zilele acestea amintind de versul (versetul, un diminutiv) 20:14 din Exod (Ieșirea, Исход). Adverbul prea. În DEX se trece limita greșelii ocazionale dincolo de rezonabil și se adaugă și un sens "foarte mult". Asta condamnă pe vecie expresia "prea mult" la pleonasm. Și etimologia slavonă. Ca multe altele etimologii greșite din DEX. ("Doar pentru că sună atât de asemănător?"). Cel mai pro-babil în română prea vine din latinul praenimis în conjuncție cu sanscritul priya. Asta dacă vrem să lucrăm puțin pe ipoteza că sanscrita e prima sursă a limbii române, urmată de latină.

Întotdeauna am suspectat că această traducere din rusă a prefixului pre, care persistă în mod inexplicabil și într-o traducere modernă sinodală, când erau accesibile pentru comparație atâtea versiuni în engleză, împreună cu multe alte aspecte lingvistice, din care unele sunt pomenite mai sus sunt/au fost intenționat subversive. Dar probabil bat apa în piuă pentru că în primul rând ar trebui făcută ordine în DEX. Poate doar dacă se implică prea mult poliția din Constanța, să-l filtreze.

And BTW Justin here in this video is realy overdoing it, with his overly soprano voice. Way over the rainbow. (E prea mult și înalt prea soprano).

Plasma Membrane in Prokariotes, Eukariotes, Viruses

"At some point in early evolution [4 billion years ago], life became cellular. Assuming that this step was required for the origin of life, there would necessarily be a pre-existing source of amphihilic compounds capable of assembling into membranous compartments."

"Anyone who has blown a soap bubble has made a self-assembled membrane. Soaps are monocarboxylic acids, and a soap bubble is a metastable structure with a monolayer of ionic fatty acids on the outside and inside surface. The hydrocarbon chains are directed outward, and the hydrophilic head groups stabilize a thin layer of micelles and water on the interior of the membrane. Soap molecules also assemble into microscopic vesicles in aqueous phases, but the membranes are bilayers with the hydrocarbon chains directed inward. Self-assembly of amphiphilic molecules like soap is so common that it is not difficult to imagine that similar molecules, if available, would form membranous compartments on the prebiotic Earth."

"A lipid bilayer is a biological membrane consisting of two layers of lipid molecules. Each lipid molecule, or phospholipid, contains a hydrophilic head and a hydrophobic tail. The tail regions, being repelled by water and slightly attracted to each other, congregate together."

"The bilayer structure is attributable to the special properties of the lipid molecules, which cause them to assemble spontaneously into bilayers even under simple artificial conditions."

"Cells fall into one of two broad categories: prokaryotic and eukaryotic. The predominantly single-celled organisms of the domains Bacteria and Archaea are classified as prokaryotes (pro– = before; –karyon– = nucleus). Animal cells, plant cells, fungi, and protists are eukaryotes (eu– = true)."

"The oldest evidence of eukaryotes is from 2.7 billion years ago. Scientists believe that a nucleus and other organelles inside a eukaryotic cell formed when one prokaryotic organism engulfed another, which then lived inside and contributed to the functioning of its host."

They both do have a membrane made of a lipid bylayer. The "housing" of every living cell. However prokaryotes have an extra cell wall.

"Cell Walls: Most prokaryotic cells have a rigid cell wall that surrounds the plasma [lipid bylayer] membrane and gives shape to the organism. In eukaryotes, vertebrates don't have a cell wall but plants do." Jul 11, 2019

Here is a diagram of an eukariote focused on the membrane. You can see the two layers of phospholipids (with red "heads") that stay together by means hydration repulsion , hydrophobic attraction and van der Waals forces. It is this combination of forces and existence of polar phospholipids that makes possible all life.

However, as stated above, eukariotes in vertebrates lack a cell wall. To protect the fragile lipid bylayer they have to secrete a protective layer of proteins, mainly collagen, that forms what we call the extracellular matrix.

Antibiotics rely on the fact that bacteria are prokaryotes and have a cell wall (with some exceptions, but those are parasitic or live only inside host cells) and animal cells are eukaryotes. They prevent building of new bacterial cell wall made of peptidoglycan after bacterial (cellular) division. New bacteria cannot survive without a cell wall as they can't secrete an extracellular matrix.

Viruses are not cells. They are a molecular structure made of a lipid bylayer with binding proteins on the outside, ARN fragments and proteins (sometimes in a capsid) on the inside and they lack both cell walls as in prokaryotic cells and extracellular matrix as in eukaryotic cells.

Question. How coronaviruses "survive" in the environment, outside and inside of a host, without a cell wall or an extracellular matrix?

One possible answer is when they leave the host they can only "survive" inside fragments of extracellular matrix from damaged areas of the body or engulfed in mucus secretions.

Votul nominal pentru abrogarea pensiilor speciale

Atenție, fb nu face trimiterea la acest link (trunchiază link-ul, dispare partea de după semnul întrebării). Poate webmasterii de la cdep.ro au știut. Așa că l-am pus aici. O postare pentru un link. Nu-i  nimic, mai scriu comentarii aici. Parlamentarul cu numele Ciolacu Ion Marcel a votat DA (adică pentru respingerea abrogării). Am impresia că PSD se pregătește să-i dea masiv alegerile lui PNL. Dar PNL-iștii au votat și ei DA. Nu era nevoie. După cum spuneam, PSD în acest parlament poate vota orice, singur. Au majoritate aproape absolută (absolută chiar în Senat) iar dacă lipsesc suficient din ceilalți...  Scenariul a fost ăsta. PSD și PNL au votat DA. USR și UDMR a votat nu, că trebuia să fie și o opoziție. O democrație acolo. Discuție închisă (altfel ținea până la alegeri). Cine spunea că să fie numai 300 de parlamentari? Păi nu sunt niciodată mai mult de 300. Prezenți. A. PMP a lipsit de la această ședință? Ce chestie. Am observat mai demult. UDMR votează mai totdeauna politic corect. Nu ca păpușelele lor, PSD și PNL. Cum să scăpați de parlamentari? Foarte simplu. Nu-i mai votați.

http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/eVot.Nominal?idv=23126

A. Se poate sorta pe vot. Mai puțin efort.

http://www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/evot.nominal?idv=23126&ord=3

Acesastă listă poate fi accesată de pe pagina urmării proceseului legislativ (al proiectului introdus de USR, penultimul link, "rezultat vot").

http://www.cdep.ro/pls/proiecte/upl_pck.proiect?idp=16972