Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: sorincosofret on 05/06/2008 05:38:58
-
NMR and quantum idea experiment
The experiment needs some improvement at an existent NMR device. If it is accepted the actual explanation regarding the basic principle of NMR, can we find another possibility to obtain a population inversion instead of using a variable magnetic field?
The idea of experiment is:
A cooled body emits electromagnetic radiations. Consequently, removing the sinusoidal and variable magnetic field, and using a cooling device, in the sample an inversion of population should appear and keeping the static magnetic field constant, the sample should emit electromagnetic radiations on the same frequency like in the presence of variable magnetic field.
The difference between actual working NMR device and proposed modification is illustrated in fig. 1, and as is observed only the radio frequency input is changed with a cooling device.
[ Invalid Attachment ]
In the instrument, maintaining the H0 constant a sample is introduced and the spectra are registered by a PC.
What should happen according to actual quantum interpretation?
When a group of spins is placed in a magnetic field, each spin aligns in one of the two possible orientations. At room temperature, the number of spins in the lower energy level slightly outnumbers the number in the upper level.
The energetic difference between the α(spin up) and β (spin down) states is given by Boltzmann statistics:
[ Invalid Attachment ]
where:
E is the energy difference between the spin states
k is Boltzmann's constant, 1.3805x10-23 J/Kelvin;
T is the temperature in Kelvin.
Without applying the radio frequency input, the system is in equilibrium (nothing is happening). The equilibrium is disrupting by applying a radio-frequency wave and the NMR spectra appear on PC desktop.
The same equilibrium can be disrupt if the radiofrequency input is eliminated, and the sample is cooled, up to let say 10ºK, considering the initial temperature 293 ºK. The spins in upper level must jump to lower level and of course an electromagnetic signal is expected to appear on the desktop.
Contrary to our expectation, the cooling device and the inversion of population produced by this method has no consequence an emission of an electromagnetic pulse.
I will be gratefully if Rose or another reader has time to correct a little bit my English.
-
Sorin
I don't think the problem here is one of not understanding the language.
It's just that you simply have not understood the idea of science.
You have not actually done the experiment you describe.
You have guessed at an outcome- this may well be based on your "new idea" but it's not a fact.
Then you ask us to explain why it gives that outcome.
Why should we bother?
If you actually did the experiment and got the result you expect then it might be interesting.
Why should we try to explain your guess?
Anyway, perhaps you would like to calculate the power required to get, say 1 gram, of water to cool by 10K in a small fraction of a second. It will be quite large.
Then calculate the population inversion for a typical set of NMR conditions- it will be small.
Then calculate it again for a temperature 10C higher- It will be very nearly identical to the first population inversion.
If you did the experiment the cooling anticipated would give rise to a tiny change in the number of protons in the higher state. These would release energy- but the amount of stored energy would be tiny. Worse yet, the radiation would be emited throughout the sample- much of it would be re absorbed by other protons and lost as heat.
You would be left with a practically non existent signal to look for and you would be trying to find it in the presence of the huge power spike needed to cool the sample.
It's a pipe dream. I can't see why anyone is ever going to do the experiment. After all, apart from your "theory" there's no reason to supose the answer would be anything other than what we would expect.
-
Bored Chemist,
I'm glad there is at least a frame for a discussion.
At the moment it is only a ,,imaginary experiment". It represent a guess or a prediction for a negative answer. Physics needs sometimes gedanken experiment, but I don't think this one is so difficult to be performed. General relativity was build on a gedanken experiment ....
To date, a NMR device is able to detect 1 to 3% of spin inversion in the sample and this procent is in fact counted in everyday experiments.
In the same time it is necessary to be considered that in a actual NMR measurements a entire spectra is scanned. If the sample consist only in water or another known compound, it is possible to fix the detector on a certain small domain and this increase the accuracy.
There are simple and quite cheap possibilities to obtain small temperatures; for example liquid helium can decrease the temperature of a sample up to few Kelvin in few seconds. I work properly with liquid nitrogen and it is not a big deal to obtain a temperature of 80 K and I suppose is the same for liquid helium.
The modification of temperature should give a signal in the detector even in case of a multiple emmision-absorbtion inside the sample. This is due to the initial distribution spin up and spin down at 293K and final distribution at 6-10 K. The difference between the system energies at these temperatures should be released and counted in detector.
As I said the intention is to put only cut off experiments in order to make a discrimination between actual orthodox explanation and dissident one.
Maybe from 10 or 20 experiments, one physicist will try in absence of another better idea one of these experiments.
Who knows!?...
-
" intention is to put only cut off experiments in order to make a discrimination between actual orthodox explanation and dissident one."
Then stop talking and do an experiment. Like your "10 Euro" ones, it will probably show you are wrong
-
Naked scientists,
I've seen your explanation for a ten euro experiment (regarding the passing of an electric current through a solution at a potential of 1.5V) and I think is better to think more at the possibility for a electron to be influenced by pressure of a gas. Probably immediately after a electron is emitted at electrod a hydrogen atom or other ion carry the electron through solution and deposit the electron on the other electrode in order to exist a electric current.
In proposed theory a moving charge can be a secondary effect of a electric current, but not a electric current.
More then that, even is accepted that a accelerated charge generate electromagnetic waves, this is not the case in reality (and in proposed theory).
Accepting actual definition of electric current like a charge acceleration this means around a conductor a emission of electromagnetic waves must be detected.
In reality around such conductor only a magnetic field is counted.
In order to have a electromagnetic wave around a conductor it is necessary to have a oscillating circuit. Without this there are no electromagnetic waves...
The second falsity of actual physics regards the generation of electromagnetic waves due to the cooling or heating of material body.
In reality cooling a body up to a certain limit there is a emission of photons (visible, IR) and under that limit the cooling is made by conduction and convection.
There is no emission of electromagnetic wave (more exactly microwave and radio wave ) by cooled or heated body.
I've made the experiments about 10 years ago with radioamatorial techniques folowing the emission of cooled body in UHF band.
NOW is possible to make the same experiment with simple microwave detectors working in the GHz domain used to check the leak of microwave in oven.
If you take as example water and the energy released by solidification a simple calculation can be made.
Every molecule at phase transition loose a photon in the THz domain (details at http://www.elkadot.com/corpuscular/Thermodynamic%20and%20quantum%20hypothesis.htm). In this case it should be detected these flux (enormous in case of high quantity of water) of microwave photons. In reality there is no such emission.
-
Excuse me for doubting you but the link doesn't actually describe a laboratory experiment. It describes a thought experiment. There are no experimental details, no data and no analysis of data, just elementary textbook formulae.
Could we, perhaps, see some photographs of the equipment?
-
Sophie,
I think you have as much chance of getting Sorin to do an experiment as I have convincing him to accept the outcome of one.
For example, here's a reference to the microwave emision from the moon.
http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=AD0734375
so if Sorin's "theory" says "There is no emission of electromagnetic wave (more exactly microwave and radio wave ) by cooled or heated body." then it's clearly wrong.
-
If there were no microwave energy given off by a body at room temperature all of our radio receivers could be a lot better.
Is there any communications Engineer who hasn't heard of the concept of 'Noise Temperature"?
-
B.C,
I'm not interested to respond at your comments.
Please make a mental control, learn to speak polite, and after that maybe I will answer to you.
-
And what about my point about thermal noise?
I made it very politely.
-
Sorin, trust me, compared to what an anonymous peer reviewer would say about your stuff, I am being very polite.
Still, if you won't talk to me at least have the decency to answer other people's questions.
(BTW If there are any other people who want to ask the questions I asked I'm not going to sue for breach of copyright.)
-
Sophie,
Sorry for my delay but I have other obligations to do before discusion (and as you see I stay up to 12 in the night in order to be polite and to answer at discussion forum, even tomorrow at 8 I have to work).
The thermal noise has nothing to do with electromagnetic wave emitted by a body due to its temperature.
Of course thermal noise affect all the electronic device and there are more to describe here. The principal idea regard the result of temperature increasing over metallic network (if we consider a current passing through a metallic conductor). Look at the Thomson effect known from one century and try to measure the electromagnetic wave produced by the temperature modification.
The microwave signal coming from System solar cosmic body has another explanation instead of thermal reason.
I have found in a book of physics (orthodox one ) which presents the performance of actual masers that it was possible to detect a microwave signal coming from Venus with power of 10exp(-20) watts. At a rough estimation a planet like Venus probably emits less then 1 Watt in a microwave domain. Other body like Jupiter have a quite noisy presence at least in medium and short radiowave due to its magnetosphere.
Moon is very close to us, does not have a atmosphere and has a quite small magnetosphere. In this case it should be possible to detect the microwave generated by black body comportment at a specific temperature.
The microwave received on the Earth (from the moon) are produced principally as results of tectonic movement and not as consequence of blackbody radiation.
At the folowing link some short and clear informations are provided:
http://www.cosis.net/abstracts/EGU04/04525/EGU04-A-04525.pdf
Without making any calculus one should imagine what power of microwave should be on Earth if we are able to detect the microwave generated by interplanetar and interstellar matter (at a density of 10exp(-22)g/cm3 in comparison with Moon (taking into consideration the temperature difference too).
-
The thermal noise has nothing to do with electromagnetic wave emitted by a body due to its temperature.
Well. are you aware that a microwave radio telescope for receiving weak signals is always designed so that its sidelobes, facing the Earth are kept to a minimum because, if you don't, you get thermal radiation from the Earth's surface at 300K. The spectrum of the noise signal corresponds to black body radiation of the corresponding temperature.
I think we are wasting time here.
I think this stuff is destined for New Theories.
I think you must have a random number generator and that you pick a key word from a randomly chosen page in your Science Dictionary each time you make a new posting.
-
To be fair to Sorin "thermal noise" has 2 meanings, or at least, 2 aspects and that might be producing some confusion.
Causing even more confusion is his interpretation of the paper he cited. It shows that non- thermal microwave sources are also present on the moon- seismic activity being one of them.
OK, so what?
The very fact that the paper is headed "Interpretation of non thermal..." means there's a thermal emision that they need to distinguish it from.
"Moon is very close to us, does not have a atmosphere and has a quite small magnetosphere. In this case it should be possible to detect the microwave generated by black body comportment at a specific temperature. "
People have and I posted a link to such an experiment. Sorin is, of course, ignoring it.