1

New Theories / Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?

« on: 14/07/2020 16:25:38 »

Consider this scenario. We have two factories that each make widgets. Both factories are identical and each makes 1 defect per thousand widgets. The defect is connected to entropy. We throw these away defects, since it takes too much energy to reverse the defects entropy increase. it can be done but it is not cost effective. 

I will take one factory and place it on a massive planet so its clock time slows due to GR. The other factory will be moved to a reference where time speeds up. In a side by side comparison, from a neutral reference, the factory with the faster time reference will make more defects per unit of third reference time. Less mass allows for more entropy to be expressed compared to extra mass. The expansion of the universe is increasing the rate of entropy; tim speeds up, to make up for the slowing and reversal of entropy by gravity and mass.

The entropy associated with "1 fault in 1000" is not rate dependent.
So your example makes no sense.

Since gravity is a force

Not really, it's a field.

Since gravity is a force, when it lowers potential, it should give off energy.

Even if gravity was a force there's no reason for it to give off energy
If I put a rubber band round a rock the band exerts a force on the rock (and vice versa) but it doesn't give off energy.

As an easier to see example, say we expand a Nobel gas like Helium, so we can treat it as an ideal gas. We start with a compressed cylinder of gas at 20,000 PSI and open the valve. The gas and cylinder will get very cold as the gas expands due to the entropy increase.

The word is "noble"
The effect is nothing to do with helium being a noble gas.
And, most importantly, you are simply wrong.

Helium is one of the few gases (at normal temperatures) which gets hot when it expands.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule%E2%80%93Thomson_effect

You really don't know what you are talking about; why not stop?

2

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Can an object be confined to a region smaller than its Compton wavelength?

« on: 06/07/2020 22:55:32 »

@ What did you mean by observing the Event Horizon?

It is possible, if you had a nearby stellar-mass black hole, to see what is happening at the event horizon using a telescope of some kind, watching as pebbles (or thermonuclear bombs) get dropped into the inky blackness.
- We would learn even more if we could observe the final seconds of a relic micro-black hole from the Big Bang.
- I am sure that we would learn even more about the universe if the LHC (or some successor) could produce a subatomic black hole on demand. (That would require some new physics!)
- In a sense, these would all be observations of the event horizon, which could be reported to other people (peer-reviewed).

Observations made while approaching the singularity of a supermassive black hole, while real to the observers, can't be published in a peer-reviewed journal (as far as we know). The infinite turnaround time for responding to reviewer comments gets in the way of publishing deadlines...

Personally, I would be quite comfortable if the nearest black hole were 1,000 light-years away..
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-52560812

Are there other infinities associated with the Event Horizon?

There are a number of debates that are not resolved about the Event Horizon:
- The Firewall Hypothesis: Would someone entering the black hole be scorched by enormous temperatures, or is that only an illusion for a distant observer?
- Relativistic Time Dilation approaches infinity (from the viewpoint of a distant observer)
- Hawking Radiation: The mechanism of this is still not fully understood, as it is hard to calculate

I agree that the human-level scenarios you propose are a possible resolution, but the quantum behavior of the event horizon is still unresolved, as I understand it.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_horizon#Beyond_general_relativity

in GR there is no playing games with infinities to make them go away, like in QED.

Einstein suggested that the presence of infinities at the singularity indicate that his equations of general relativity break down there.

In my primitive understanding, one dilemma of quantum gravity is that the graviton has some equivalent mass, which adds to the mass of an object, and together these rapidly become infinite. At present there is no resolution of this infinity.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renormalization#Renormalizability