Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Entropy and absurdities of modern science

Entropy and absurdities of modern science

Dear Reader,
As usual, a new breakthrough text related to Entropy is available at the following link:
http://www.elkadot.com/ro/termodinamica/Entropia.htm

In the message an analysis of entropy concept and implications of second principle of thermodynamics in different branches of science are provided.
In actual chemistry, entropy plays only a secondary importance. As Gibbs introduced long time ago the concept of free energy and the spontaneity of a chemical processes are related to this free energy, there is no use for the second principle of thermodynamics. In fact, free energy is depended on enthalpy, temperature and entropy and from the combination of these three factors a chemical process can be spontaneous or no.
Therefore, in the frame of actual science, the extension of second principle of thermodynamics to chemical and biological systems is pure imagination.
The concept of entropy and disorder are analyzed and it has been found that entropy has nothing to do with disorder. There is no proportionality between entropy increase and disorder increase as is postulated in a lot of physics treatises.
Last but not least, in the frame of kinetic molecular theory, the concept of temperature and implicit entropy is ruled out in case of most simple experiment: the mix of two ideal gases.
In proposed theory the concept of entropy as defined in present is completely ruled out.
Let see what importance will be given in the future to the affirmations of two titans of actual physics.
Of the laws of thermodynamics, Albert Einstein is quoted as saying, “. …. the deep impression which classical thermodynamics made on me. It is the only physical theory of universal content which I am convinced, that within the framework of applicability of its basic concepts will never be overthrown.”
After Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington:
,,If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations—then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation—well these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation. “

Unfortunately, the text is only in Romanian and later translation will be provided in English, French, Italian and Spanish.
For about two decades I have tried to convince the actual elites of physics about the necessity of a major change in science. With regret I must admit that I have failed. Actual promoters of science are not interested in change. Their attitude is to be understood. They are simple English correctors or traders of information (true or false) and not real scientists and of course they have been used the advantage of scientific press control in order to prevent the widespread of a new theory of science.
Therefore, from this point in advance, the posting messages are addressed mainly to the rest of the world and consequently the priority will be on translations in other then English language.
Main reference will be the Romanian text and all previous books or texts are in progress in order to finalize them as Romanian reference texts.
Changes in a society take place with or without approval of official authorities. The change in science is imminent and of course an entire generation of savants will regret what they didn’t do. History will call this change ,,the intellectual revolution”, but in my opinion is only the ,,common sense” revolution.

Best regards,

Sorin Cosofret

Hello Sorincosofret



The only way to succeed is to take every one of their criticisms and clearly show that it isn't a problem. If anyone can see even one possible hole in your ideas then they'll treat the entire thing as rubbish. If you want to convince them then you have to show them why they are wrong! Published science papers anticipate what problems the reader might see and counter them right there.

How about those I brought up on your other idea? Still no answer to them:

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=37162#Post37162

Dear Superstar,

Dear superstar,
Your judgement is not correct:
Quote: If anyone can see even one possible hole in your ideas then they'll treat the entire thing as rubbish.

If I found hundreds of holes and absurdities in actual physics and chemistry, this it seems to be a normal thing .....

Quote If you want to convince them then you have to show them why they are wrong! Published science papers anticipate what problems the reader might see and counter them right there.
You don’t understand the point. To date, I am not interested to publish in official journals. In this moment I am in competition with official journals and one of the competitors must leave the market. There is no place for both. Dealing with them, it means I will gain a position or something like that and of course the entire affair will pass in a second plane. I have the interest to humiliate a entire class of spoiled correctors of English scientific literature or traders of false scientific information.

If I will answer to your previous comment for a previous message, you will think again that I want to insult you.

http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=37162#Post37162

Do you have any idea how big is an ionization chamber? Several meters? Several kilometers?
What is your estimation?
Of course I presented a scheme of the experiment. It is possible to use some collimators and select the electrons which present only a horizontal component of velocity and in this case your remark is useless and the problem unsolved.
When you will find these data, and you will perform a demonstration of what you are saying I will bother to give a complete answer.
Of course I am waiting to read the demonstration in a scietific journal with a IF greater then 4.
I do not want to insult you, but I think it is better to look at your limitations...
This fight is not for you ....

By the way, my name is Kallog. 'Superstar' is a label assigned by the website.


OK, but that's none of my business. I'm only concerned with the ideas you presented.



Why guess a random number? OK, I pick several meters. Now can you show that the sensitivity of your instruments was sufficient to detect the signals you expected?



OK. That makes the diagram on your website wrong. Why didn't you draw something representing the real experiment and avoid this confusion?


What are you asking for? Why don't you answer my questions? If you really performed that experiment then you should have the answers available.



Then why did you post on this forum?

Hi again Sorin. I had a look at other pages on your site and it confirms what I see in your message style.

Sorry, but you're doomed to suffer frustration and anger forever unless you develop the strength to criticize your own work, accept it's wrong, get a rewarding job and a wife, put those two wasted decades behind you and enjoy real life.

No need to answer my questions. I already know it will achieve nothing. You have to work it out for yourself.

What for? Are you playing star wars here?


You are concerned on everything less my ideas....



Srry, I forgot to put a wall of lead for operator protection and therefore the operator died and no results are available. This means the experiment is wrong too ... and produce confusion?


The results will be presented in the book. Here you want only ideas, so I had the idea of a new experiment, which in certain conditions ( a colimator after your oppinion) leave the entire community with the open mouth.




I present on this forum ( this is not the only one) in order to have a proof that a vilain person coming from an undevelopped country can do science better than your spoiled english correctors. And more than that he fighted with wind mills for decades...

I don't think you have been ever able to publish at least a paper in a scientifc journal with a impact factor greater then 3. By comparison I was able:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rcm.3105/abstract

I don't think you have been ever able to propose at least an invention (in fact I don't think you know about the existence of an office for this kind of stuff). By comparison I have an European patent EP 1 939 142 A1. You cand see this:
https://data.epo.org/publication-server/...mp;iepatch=.pdf

If you want to compare my previous scientific activity, in my country, be sure there are other two national patents and about 40 scientific papers.


I'm sure you are frustrated because your scientific activity regards surveillance of a forum and probably you imagine this is the most important activity in the world. Come on
Please present at least a paper from your collection of important scientific papers…
I told you the face of physics will be changed.... so don't make me lose my time with small things.

So what? You still didn't defend your ideas, so they have no more value than the thousands of crackpot theories all over the internet. No matter how hard you struggle, if nobody listened to you for 20 years, that's not going to change in another 20 years.

Unless you defend against every criticism! Then people will stand gaping. Then you will have something useful.

My ideas are wide spread and there is no need for a protection wall. When an idea is sound and true sooner or later will produce the effect.
In any case, as percentage, I have spent more time in widespread of ideas and time lost with publication trials then the time dedicated directly to the science. You can imagine at what point the science should be arrived if from the beginning the official journals should accepted the publishing.
But this is the market economy now… one is raising another one is dying.
Don’t be afraid about me … Be concerned about you! Those who haven’t learned the history will have the tendency to repeat again!
Copernicus died without seeing his theory accepted…. Today none speak about the struggle between official science and his ideas…
Boltzman commit suicide because for 20 years none granted a little bit attention to his writings. Now everyone didn’t mention these facts at least in order to repair post mortem a situation.
Einstein waited 20 years for accepting the special relativity. In fact without the fraud of a English lord (you can find his name easily), his theory would never be accepted. The Russian scientist accepted the theory late in ’50 (of course it was aa little bit socialist politic here).
I have the time to wait and to empty some pockets. The author rights are covering my life and 75 years after my death. So I enjoy my life waiting for a treasure and I am sure it will come.
I am sure the change will come sooner than you believe.
If in 2007 I have 50 visitors per month, now the number was 3000 in January and is increasing…
I can't insert here my statistic data...

Einstein died without seeing his geometric electromagnetic theory accepted. It still isn't and probably never will be. But he actually knew what was wrong with it. He actually tried to make it work. He didn't just yell it into the wind and sit around waiting for somebody else to do the hard work.


That's a very depressing view. It also shows again that you've given up working on these things. I truly don't expect you to engage in any productive discussion about any of your work. That would have helped you many years ago but I guess you only met arrogant, dismissive people. So your ideas were never exposed to criticism.

Now you have the opportunity for useful criticism but it's too late. You're emotionally bound to your ideas. No amount of reason can change that.

It's just sad to see deluded people. You remind me of some Christians I know who are expecting an afterlife.

You are really pathetic...
I consider the discussion closed because I am short of time.
In few days, it will be presented a new text related to an engine which convert 100 % heat in mechanical work, and of course other absurdities of actual thermodynamics.
See you…

An engine which you will always refuse to build. If you build it you have a guaranteed Nobel prize waiting for you and the money will pay all your costs. But you clearly don't expect it to work because you won't take that risk.

No amount of text can distinguish you from the thousands of cranks out there.