Room-temperature superconductivity?

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

icarus wrote: Except in the case where the field contains discontinuous jumps (e.g. branch cuts to a higher plane for the 2-D case, Cauchy residues etc,).
This obviously only occurs on an Argand plane. When using a real scalar function, even if you call it a phase angle (or whatever you fancy), you are taking the gradient of a REAL scalar field. This is only possible when such a field is differentiable: i.e. when it does not contain "discontinuous jumps".

If you want to cut a hole in it, you make it non-differentiable and therefore you cannot generate a vector field from it by using the gradient operator. Thus to take a loop integral as if the field is generated by taking the gradient of such a scalar field is, according to my insight, practising voodoo. Oh icarus, I just looove your posts. I cannot wait for the next one.

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

Thus to take a loop integral as if the field is generated by taking the gradient of such a scalar field is, according to my insight, practising voodoo.
Okay, I can see where you are coming from. Regardless of your "insight" skills, I'm not going to go try and teach you field theory with you here and at your age but I'll just state that you are wrong. Someday you might find out why if you stop blasting people with accusations of "voodoo!" etc, etc. It might be better if you embarass yourself in a less public forum that is not recording your every statement for eternity.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

icarus wrote: Okay, I can see where you are coming from. Regardless of your "insight" skills, I'm not going to go try and teach you field theory with you here and at your age but I'll just state that you are wrong.
What a wonderful retreat! You are not able to explain why, when a scalar field is not continuous, such a field can against all the rules of calculus be differentiated to obtain a vector-field. Wow! For this you need a special insight into "field theory" which I at my "advanced age" will not be able to understand: Just as Einstein in his "advanced age" could not understand anymore since his "senile brain" could not handle "new insights"! So icarus spoke and said "you are wrong" and therefore I must be wrong! I did not know that you are the Oracle: You should have warned me!

If you cannot explain "your physics" in simple logical terms, then I really hope that for the future of science you will do something else than physics!
Someday you might find out why if you stop blasting people with accusations of "voodoo!" etc, etc. It might be better if you embarass yourself in a less public forum that is not recording your every statement for eternity.
What is wrong when a I call a mathematical derivation which violates the very laws on which calculus is based "voodoo". What else can it be? I have "blasted" nobody by stating this; and I am not ashamed to have this opinion recorded: If I am wrong it gives the opportunity for somebody with "more insight" to prove me wrong, without just stating that I am wrong.

I have found in all my encounters in my life that when a person acts like you act now, it is a concession that he/she cannot prove you wrong and wants to keep on believing what he/she wants to believe. As Epictetus said: "it is impossible to teach a man that which he thinks he already knows". You have just now proved that you are such a person.

Maybe you are flying too near to the Sun?

nogo
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:42 pm

Post by nogo »

It has been dificoult to trace the original derivation given that I dont have paid access to the online journals, I lack the books refered to in the papers and the fact that some papers are old (1950's).

For now, I will settle with this 1959 paper:
http://www.w2agz.com/Library/Classic%20 ... 959%29.pdf

I suspect that the depairing current limit was derived from BCS and then Ginzberg-Landau equations were adapted to reach the same equation.

Btw, apparently, Jdp has been experimentally reached before on certain materials. Unfortunately papers were, again, behind a paywall and I could only peruse the abstracts.

In any case, ignoring Jdp limit, and given that GL theory is, for a lack of a better term, an exercise in curve fitting (yeah I know but cut me some slack here) and it doesnt claim to even attempt to describe the mechanism, I dont see any problem with it using power series, arbitrarily using only two terms (alpha and beta) and the like. Correlation is ok if you just say "look, this is funny; the experimental data points can be approximated this way...".

Or maybe I misunderstood what GL theory is about (if I have to read about free energy-Greene functions again my head will explode).

So, this goes back to: there are experiments where specially arranged materials present a measured critical current which is higher than what you get in bulk material. How does it fit into your theory?

(put here standard disclaimer about me not being a physicist and stuff)

EDIT: http://www.w2agz.com/Library/Classic%20 ... ductivity/ for all your superconductivity archeology needs.
Last edited by nogo on Mon Sep 06, 2010 2:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

jp:
If you cannot explain "your physics" in simple logical terms, then I really hope that for the future of science you will do something else than physics!
You really are beyond help (and a vicious, abusive jerk to boot). It is simple vector calculus that a field can be differentiable yet contain discontinuous regions, albeit infinitesimal. The forum medium does not lend itself to math symbols and I can't be bothered doing the 101 stuff for someone like you in ascii.

Just think of the line integral for the length of a circle in circular-polar coordinates ... at 2*pi the coordinates 'jump' or are multi-valued. Anytime you introduce angles into your coordinates (almost inevitably) you get discontinuities, any physics done based on angular quantities cannot avoid these types of issues (simple-connectedness, multi-valued, etc), it can all be dealt with, no mysteries just difficulties ..... wait, don't tell me you have solved one of maths great problems too!

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

nogo wrote: For now, I will settle with this 1959 paper:
http://www.w2agz.com/Library/Classic%20 ... 959%29.pdf
Thanks I will look at this paper and get back to you: Although I suspect that I have already read it.
I suspect that the depairing current limit was derived from BCS and then Ginzberg-Landau equations were adapted to reach the same equation.
I suspect you are totally correct!
Btw, apparently, Jdp has been experimentally reached before on certain materials. Unfortunately papers were, again, behind a paywall and I could only peruse the abstracts.
If anybody on this thread can give us a clear definition what is meant by a depairing current and why an experimentalist would conclude that he/she measured a depairing current instead of just a "critical current" I will appreciate it very highly.
In any case, ignoring Jdp limit, and given that GL theory is, for a lack of a better term, an exercise in curve fitting
Exactly! Now the problem I have is that a large amount of quantum field theory and specifically "The Standard Model" is based on the same "curve-fitting" procedure.
So, this goes back to: there are experiments where specially arranged materials present a measured critical current which is higher than what you get in bulk material. How does it fit into your theory?
It fits my model perfectly: The charge-carriers are stationary entities ("orbitals") which replace adjacent stationary entities by jumping from one occupied position to the next and replacing this entity which in turn jumps further. The energy for this comes from Heisenberg's relationship for energy and time: i.e. the energy to jump is loaned from the "vacuum" (However, this vacuum has VERY LITTLE in common with the one postulated for quantum field theory since it comes directly from the solution of Schroedinger's equation). Nonetheless, the kinetic energy used to move is returned to the "vacuum" and therefore the charge-carriers can move without generating entropy.
The best maximum current will be reached when the "orbitals" are arranged on a perfect lattice. In most bulk materials this is impossible and therefore the maximum current relates to a percolation threshold. Now when you make a mesh, you are forcing the "orbitals" to form a more perfect lattice. The critical current is then higher.

There is of course also the density of the orbitals which plays a role and this density is decreased when the applied electric-field increases. WHY? Because the orbitals polarise to cancel he applied electric-field: This decreases their activation energy and thus also their density. etc. This is well modelled within my forthcoming book.

In South Africa we have massive strikes at the moment and this holding up the publication of my book. It is however "press-ready" and as soon as I get an ISBN number from the striking personel at our National Library, I will go ahead.

I am now on my way to see a printer and will thus attend to the latest nonsense icarus has posted later in the day!

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

icarus wrote: You really are beyond help (and a vicious, abusive jerk to boot).
And you are so niiice!
It is simple vector calculus that a field can be differentiable yet contain discontinuous regions, albeit infinitesimal. The forum medium does not lend itself to math symbols and I can't be bothered doing the 101 stuff for someone like you in ascii.
As usual you are missing the point. We are not talking here about any scalar field but about the phase angle of a harmonic wave. Your problem is that you do not understand what a harmonic wave is and what the properties of its phase angle must be.

Although each point of the wave field has a phase angle which continuously changes with an angular frequency (omega), the way in which this phase angle changes with position is determined by the symmetry of the situation, and the boundary conditions which apply. What you are claiming is that one can model a harmonic wave by ignoring the symmetry and boundary conditions. This is again voodoo!
Just think of the line integral for the length of a circle in circular-polar coordinates ... at 2*pi the coordinates 'jump' or are multi-valued.
Yes let's do this. What you are saying is that the phase angle changes periodically from one point to the other on and along the circular path so that there are crests and troughs along this circular path. What this means in physics is that you have a running wave moving along the circle. This is not mathematically nor physically possible.

Let me try and explain it to you in simpler terms: If you go to a first year physics book, you will find that the phase angle only changes continuously with position when you have a coherent running wave. The change is then maximum in the directions perpendicular to the wavefronts (since one has that the undulations are moving in this direction) and zero parallel to the wave fronts because the wavefronts cannot move parallel to themselves.

Now let us consider a supercurrent around a ring. You have circular symmetry. By taking a loop integral along the ring, as the "experts" do, they are modelling the current as if it is caused by wavefronts moving along the ring: As already pointed out, this not possible.

What you first have to do is to solve the differential wave equation in terms of polar coordinates. Guess what!! The wave function becomes the product of an "angular wave function" and a "radial wave" function. This symmetry demands that, if there are wave fronts moving, they can only move out as circles: Thus there are no crests and troughs around such a circle. Thus there cannot be any crests and troughs along a circular path ever. The change in phase angle is totally determined by the angualr wave function. And this is a hidden phase angle which only plays a role when you break the circular symmetry by, for example, applying a magnetic field at an angle to the symmetry axis. Otherwise it has no effect whatsoever!
Anytime you introduce angles into your coordinates (almost inevitably) you get discontinuities, any physics done based on angular quantities cannot avoid these types of issues ..
This does not remove the simple fact that you cannot calculate the change in phase angle as if it is driving a coherent harmonic wave around a ring. There are no crests and troughs along any such ring. Such a wave cannot model a current flowing around a ring as the "experts" on superconduction are claiming. I hope the penny has dropped.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

nogo wrote: For now, I will settle with this 1959 paper:
http://www.w2agz.com/Library/Classic%20 ... 959%29.pdf

I suspect that the depairing current limit was derived from BCS and then Ginzberg-Landau equations were adapted to reach the same equation.
I said I will be back on this one. I have read this paper years ago and it is quoted with great reverence. Gorkov does deserve a prize for reconciling two wrong models using Green's functions to fudge the result. Buit it is not physics!

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

I am going "cold turkey" because I miss icarus sooooo much. How are you my friend? Any further inputs on phase angle fields that have to be discontinuous? I have searched and searched and could find none. Would you be kind enough to enlighten me? I am sure I do not understand the issue: How can a "jerk" be able to do so?

Betruger
Posts: 2321
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Post by Betruger »

News from South Africa?

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

Betruger wrote:News from South Africa?
Yes the first fifty copies of my book "The Physics Delsuion" will be delivered to me this weekend. Some of them has already been sold through my website www.cathodixx.com

I would advise overseas buyers to wait a few days since we have had problems with our integration with PayPal (especially for residents in the USA). At present the delivery cost charged is only for delivery by air mail and this costs more than the book. If you want a cheaper option wait until my website gives you the choice and then order. I hope this will be fixed before the end of this week.

So far the interest has astounded me and I might have to soon order more copies of the book.

Giorgio
Posts: 3066
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

johanfprins wrote:
Betruger wrote:News from South Africa?
Yes the first fifty copies of my book "The Physics Delsuion" will be delivered to me this weekend. Some of them has already been sold through my website www.cathodixx.com

I would advise overseas buyers to wait a few days since we have had problems with our integration with PayPal (especially for residents in the USA). At present the delivery cost charged is only for delivery by air mail and this costs more than the book. If you want a cheaper option wait until my website gives you the choice and then order. I hope this will be fixed before the end of this week.

So far the interest has astounded me and I might have to soon order more copies of the book.
Nice to hear that it is finally ready.
Does the book also go into details on the derivation of the equations you use?

Let me know when shipping issues will be fixed so I'll place my order too.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

Giorgio wrote:Nice to hear that it is finally ready.
Does the book also go into details on the derivation of the equations you use?

Let me know when shipping issues will be fixed so I'll place my order too.
Thanks I will post it on this site. I believe that the equations are well enough explained that any physicist should be able to fill in the gaps; while any non-physicist should be able to follow the logic..

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

So far the interest has astounded me and I might have to soon order more copies of the book.
Since you are hawking it here good sir, may I ask how much for a personally signed copy of your ground-breaking text?

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

icarus wrote: Since you are hawking it here good sir, may I ask how much for a personally signed copy of your ground-breaking text?
Deaa icarus,

We have become such good friends on this forum that I will gladly dedicate and sign a book for you after you have bought it through my website. The cost i $34-95 plus handling and postage.

Just inform me after you have bought the book which book it si that I have to sign.

Regards,
Johan

Post Reply