# Fractal Universe - 5D Space-Time: Frequency Of Cycles In Dimensional Scale

Status
Not open for further replies.

#### GatheringKnowledge

What exactly is it that you want from us?
Opinions? Thoughts? Arguments? Ideas? Suggestions? Any help? I don't like the idea of making it all, just by myself - I did more than enough already...
And yet I still didn't make any actual math...

Here's a question for all interested: what will give you higher potential energy - compressing a gas to fluid, or heating it up? Because I honestly don't know the answer...

Last edited:

#### benit13

Can you be more specific? It's not even clear to me what you're trying to do; you've just posted massive big walls of text and want us to say something about it?

#### benit13

Here's a question for all interested: what will give you higher potential energy - compressing a gas to fluid, or heating it up? Because I honestly don't know the answer...
The heat energy associated with a change of phase (latent heat transfer) is:

$$\displaystyle \Delta Q = \Delta m l$$

where $$\displaystyle \Delta m$$ is the mass of the substance undergoing the phase change and l is the latent heat term (in J/kg), which differs for each substance and for each phase transition (e.g. liquid <-> solid or liquid <-> gas).

The heat energy associated with heating/cooling a substance (sensible heat transfer) is:

$$\displaystyle \Delta Q = m c_p \Delta T$$

where $$\displaystyle c_p$$ is the specific heat capacity (in J/(kg.K)), which differs for each substance and is a weak function of temperature and $$\displaystyle \Delta T$$ is the change in temperature (in oC or K).

In some situations you will only have latent transfer. In some situations you will only have sensible heat transfer. In some situations you will have both, so you can compare the two numbers. In those situations where have both, one could be higher than the other; it depends on how much substance you have and the change in temperature for the sensible part.

• GatheringKnowledge

#### GatheringKnowledge

Can you be more specific? It's not even clear to me what you're trying to do; you've just posted massive big walls of text and want us to say something about it?
You call 4 posts "massive walls of text"? I've read longer texts, when I was like 10yo... Add also the fact, that there's quite a lot of illustrations and movies... I might be an ignorant, but I try to be as specific as I can - someone who is interested in physics should be able to understand more or less, what I'm trying to say. i'm not dealing here with somekind of n-dimensional Hilbert space - but with the basic foundation of theoretical physics. Mass/energy equivalence suppose to be something, what sets the base for all further statements and assumptions.

But if you want me to be more specific - you probably overlooked that part, which starts with "Here's a question"...? Ahh, those damn walls of text...

#### GatheringKnowledge

The heat energy associated with a change of phase (latent heat transfer) is:

$$\displaystyle \Delta Q = \Delta m l$$

where $$\displaystyle \Delta m$$ is the mass of the substance undergoing the phase change and l is the latent heat term (in J/kg), which differs for each substance and for each phase transition (e.g. liquid <-> solid or liquid <-> gas).

The heat energy associated with heating/cooling a substance (sensible heat transfer) is:

$$\displaystyle \Delta Q = m c_p \Delta T$$

where $$\displaystyle c_p$$ is the specific heat capacity (in J/(kg.K)), which differs for each substance and is a weak function of temperature and $$\displaystyle \Delta T$$ is the change in temperature (in oC or K).

In some situations you will only have latent transfer. In some situations you will only have sensible heat transfer. In some situations you will have both, so you can compare the two numbers. In those situations where have both, one could be higher than the other; it depends on how much substance you have and the change in temperature for the sensible part.
Thanks!that's what i like

#### GatheringKnowledge

The heat energy associated with a change of phase (latent heat transfer) is:

$$\displaystyle \Delta Q = \Delta m l$$

where $$\displaystyle \Delta m$$ is the mass of the substance undergoing the phase change and l is the latent heat term (in J/kg), which differs for each substance and for each phase transition (e.g. liquid <-> solid or liquid <-> gas).

The heat energy associated with heating/cooling a substance (sensible heat transfer) is:

$$\displaystyle \Delta Q = m c_p \Delta T$$

where $$\displaystyle c_p$$ is the specific heat capacity (in J/(kg.K)), which differs for each substance and is a weak function of temperature and $$\displaystyle \Delta T$$ is the change in temperature (in oC or K).

In some situations you will only have latent transfer. In some situations you will only have sensible heat transfer. In some situations you will have both, so you can compare the two numbers. In those situations where have both, one could be higher than the other; it depends on how much substance you have and the change in temperature for the sensible part.
Can you guess already, where I'm going with this chain of deduction? Can you tell me, what mainstrean physics says about the changes in energy equivalence due to compression and due to increase/decrease of thermal energy?

Because I came to my own conclusions and it seems, that due to mechanical compression of matter, what changes, is the potential energy, while due to heating/cooling, we are changing the kinetic energy of a body. It might appear, that both processes work in the same way - since due to heating, density of matter is decreasing, while it's volume increases and by compression we are increasing the density of matter as volume of an object decreases. However cooling down the matter will give different results, than for compressing it with a mechanical force.

The question, which should be asked right now, is: "how due to heating, we can get a definitive change of a relativistic kinetic energy?" And to get a proper answer, we need to remember about the fact, that multiple bodies will have higher mass/energy, than a single object with mass/energy equal to the sum of all masses in a system - so if we think about particles of matter, as about separate bodies, then it should become clear, that due to increase of thermal energy, rest mass of a body will grow as well. However due to mechanical compression, potential energy of a body will grow, while it's rest mass will decrease.

Difference between cooling down a body and a mechanical compression of matter becomes obvious, in a scenario, where we compress a body with increased thermal energy. Best example of such sprocess, is the Sun - but I will leave this case for now...

My question now is - how all of this goes with officially approved knowledge?

#### benit13

Can you guess already, where I'm going with this chain of deduction? Can you tell me, what mainstrean physics says about the changes in energy equivalence due to compression and due to increase/decrease of thermal energy?

Because I came to my own conclusions and it seems, that due to mechanical compression of matter, what changes, is the potential energy, while due to heating/cooling, we are changing the kinetic energy of a body.
In latent heat transfer, one substance is undergoing a change of phase. As thermal energy is transferred, the energy is used to break/form bonds between atoms/molecules that form the body of the structure. Potential energy stored in bonds can be considered as chemical potential energy.

In sensible heat transfer, one substance is increasing/decreasing its temperature, so the energy becomes internal energy. Internal energy is energy wrapped up in translational, rotational and vibrational degrees of freedom of the atoms/molecules of the substance depending on the equipartition theorem. It is a combination of linear and rotational kinetic energy and chemical potential energy.

If you want to study the microscopic nature of thermodynamics, then you should get a textbook on statistical mechanics.

It might appear, that both processes work in the same way - since due to heating, density of matter is decreasing, while it's volume increases and by compression we are increasing the density of matter as volume of an object decreases. However cooling down the matter will give different results, than for compressing it with a mechanical force.

The question, which should be asked right now, is: "how due to heating, we can get a definitive change of a relativistic kinetic energy?" And to get a proper answer, we need to remember about the fact, that multiple bodies will have higher mass/energy, than a single object with mass/energy equal to the sum of all masses in a system - so if we think about particles of matter, as about separate bodies, then it should become clear, that due to increase of thermal energy, rest mass of a body will grow as well. However due to mechanical compression, potential energy of a body will grow, while it's rest mass will decrease.

Difference between cooling down a body and a mechanical compression of matter becomes obvious, in a scenario, where we compress a body with increased thermal energy. Best example of such sprocess, is the Sun - but I will leave this case for now...

My question now is - how all of this goes with officially approved knowledge?
There's no such thing as "officially approved knowledge".

• topsquark

#### GatheringKnowledge

In latent heat transfer, one substance is undergoing a change of phase. As thermal energy is transferred, the energy is used to break/form bonds between atoms/molecules that form the body of the structure. Potential energy stored in bonds can be considered as chemical potential energy.

In sensible heat transfer, one substance is increasing/decreasing its temperature, so the energy becomes internal energy. Internal energy is energy wrapped up in translational, rotational and vibrational degrees of freedom of the atoms/molecules of the substance depending on the equipartition theorem. It is a combination of linear and rotational kinetic energy and chemical potential energy.
Thanks! Is it proven, that heat transfer has influence on rest mass of a macroscopic object? And how about mechanical compression of matter?

#### benit13

Thanks! Is it proven, that heat transfer has influence on rest mass of a macroscopic object? And how about mechanical compression of matter?
Nothing affects rest mass. It is a fundamental parameter of the type of particle by definition. If a measurement shows that the (effective) mass has changed for whatever reason, then the theory that defines the coupling between the rest mass and with effective mass needs to describe the change and the measurement constrains that change.

Atoms/molecules within a substance that are not undergoing bulk motion still move due to thermodynamics (statistical mechanics), but the typical speeds of particles in substances are small enough to not be considered as relativistic, so the change in effective mass due to this kind of motion is negligibly small. If a substance is accelerated to relativistic speeds, then its motion is described by the bulk motion and the effect of local thermodynamics is negligibly small in comparison.

Last edited:
• topsquark

#### GatheringKnowledge

Nothing affects rest mass. It is a fundamental parameter of the type of particle by definition. If a measurement shows that the (effective) mass has changed for whatever reason, then the theory that defines the coupling between the rest mass and with effective mass needs to describe the change and the measurement constrains that change.

Atoms/molecules within a substance that are not undergoing bulk motion still move due to thermodynamics (statistical mechanics), but the typical speeds of particles in substances are small enough to not be considered as relativistic, so the change in effective mass due to this kind of motion is negligibly small. If a substance is accelerated to relativistic speeds, then its motion is described by the bulk motion and the effect of local thermodynamics is negligibly small in comparison.

"The special-relativistic thermodynamics is an interesting area which has not been settled to full satisfaction AFAIK but nonetheless, it should be pointed out that when you heat up a body, the individual particles of the body only gain kinetic energy--so the rest mass of the individual particles does not change. But when you see the body as a whole with its center of mass at rest (and whose constituent particles are only engaging in thermal motion), the rest mass of the full body as a whole gets increased, in particular, the heat you provide goes into the rest mass of the body as a whole"

This is exactly, what I predicted

Status
Not open for further replies.