Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 9:44 AM
Subject: RE: Question
Dear Professor S
For some time I've been working on two papers: one on the mechanism for low energy nuclear reactions in chemistry, and one on the thermodynamics of permissible COP>1.0 electrical power systems etc.
A true negative resistor will of course produce negative entropy. So one confronts the second law of thermodynamics. The Second Law would have us believe there can be no such thing as negative resistance.
That is not true, but the answer is a bit complicated.
The second law is based on statistical mechanics, of course, since modern thermodynamics is based on it. As such, it does not really apply to very small numbers of things. Also, in the last decade or so the Second Law is under very heavy attack, and violations are now being proven at increasing level. The latest work  by Wang et al. has experimentally demonstrated violation of the second law (production of negative entropy, with reactions running backwards) in certain solutions at the cubic micron level for up to two seconds. This is based totally on the transient fluctuations in the reactions (and thus in their statistics) that occurs, and is based on the rigorous transient fluctuation theorem by Evans and Searles  as extended by Crooks .
In water, e.g., a cubic micron contains some 30 billion ions and molecules. So formation of regions of 30 billion ions where reactions run backwards as shown by Wang et al., is obviously a significant effect in chemistry.
It is also a significant effect in other ways. In such a "reaction reversal zone", we argue that the law of attraction and repulsion of charges is also reversed momentarily. Thus momentarily like charges attract and unlike charges repel. This suddenly has great import for nuclear reactions. It means that the Coulomb barrier between like charges (e.g., between two deuterons in a deuterated solution) is momentarily the Coulomb ATTRACTOR. So within the normal Brownian motion the two deuterons can attract so closely together that each enters significantly into the strong force region of the other, forming a quasi-nucleus bound momentarily by the strong forces.
In hot fusion reactions, the only reason for use of high energy and high temperature is to forcibly drive like charged particles together into each other's strong force regions, forming a quasi-nucleus. From there, two reactions can occur. Many (even most) such quasi-nuclei will simply fission apart again, without any stable fusion nucleus being formed. Some, however, that are a little deeper into each other's strong force region, will undergo an energy balancing reaction (spit out a particle, emit a photon, flip a quark, etc.) and then tighten (decay) into a stable fusion nucleus. That is what hot fusion already tells us and has long since proven.
Once the quasi-nucleus stage is reached, all need for high energy and high temperature ceases, even in hot fusion. The reactions from there on proceed without regard to what happened before formation of the quasi-nucleus.
Hence in the reversal zone, once a quasi-nucleus is indeed formed by reversal of the Coulomb barrier to a Coulomb attractor, there is no difference between that case and the ordinary hot fusion case.
In other words, the formation of reversal zones is a cogent and powerful argument that a real mechanism exists for cold fusion after all, and Coulomb barrier inversion is the mechanism enabling it (enabling a new low energy and low temperature route to the formation of quasi-nuclei).
It's also a negative resistance effect, since the Coulomb barrier is analogous to the back emf in a special circuit. So the problem is for the "current" (the projectile particle in motion) to move against the back emf (the Coulomb barrier). By reversing the barrier itself into an attractor, to the external observer it has become a true negative resistance situation, producing negative entropy and temporary reversal of the law of attraction and repulsion of charges.
The negative resistance (time reversal) effect is also powerfully shown in the work of Shoulders , showing persistent clusters of like charges under appropriate conditions.
This is the gist of that work I've been doing.
The solution to the source charge problem I advanced some time ago (2000), assumed that such reversal zones occur, but at the time there was no powerful experimental evidence of such available. Now there is, with the work of Wang and Evans et al.
Also, for the total proof of true negative resistance, please be aware of Michael Leyton's work . Particle physics has been largely proceeding (since 1872) on Felix Klein's geometry  and on Klein's Erlanger project approach . In Klein geometry, a broken symmetry at one level reduces the overall group symmetry and all information of the previous symmetry is lost. Leyton  extended the geometry into a better, object-oriented geometry, and originated extended and more powerful group theoretic methods, thus uncovering the hierarchies of symmetry --- which can only be called the "self-organizing universe", in my opinion. In Leyton geometry, a broken symmetry at a given level generates a new symmetry at the next higher level, with a layer that retains all the lower symmetry information. I call this automatic generation of the next higher symmetry the Leyton Effect.
Breaking symmetry at the new higher level will in turn generate a still higher symmetry, etc. by the Leyton Effect. So Leyton's hierarchies of symmetry now like the entire universe together, from the virtual state flux (total disorder) to the entire universe, and at all levels in between.
In my view, the Leyton effect is a true negative entropy mechanism. Applied to the source charge, it matches all the levels of my proposed solution  to the charge's production of its ordered external EM fields and potentials, expanding across the universe at light speed from the time of formation of the charge. Thus the source charge steadily consumes positive entropy of the vacuum's virtual state (i.e., absorbs virtual photons from the virtual photon gas of the vacuum), converts these absorptions to unitarily increasing mass, and when the mass-energy's virtual change has grown enough for an observable photon, it decays to emit an observable photon. Thus the source charge continuously emits real, observable photons in all directions, forming and continuously replenishing its associated EM fields and potentials at light speed, and yet it has no observable EM energy input.
Note the true "Maxwell's Demon" used by the source charge. By converting repetitive absorptions of disordered EM energy (virtual photons) in the virtual state into virtual mass increases of a unitary mass, coherent integration of the virtual mass increases occurs -- and that is a true Maxwell's demon. When the virtual (subquantal) increase in mass reaches the quantum level for a photon, the excited mass-energy state decays by observable photon emission. This effect thus really does coherently integrate random, disordered energy in completely unusable (virtual) form, into energy in completely usable (observable) form.
In the conventional EM model, it is of course assumed that all EM potentials and fields come from their respective source charges. But the implied assumption is that the charge creates its fields and potentials (and their energy) right out of nothing at all. This has been a problem for a century, but has just been ignored in classical Maxwell-Heaviside EM and in electrical engineering.
Now we know that the source charge is actually a true negative resistor. It absorbs environmental energy in peculiar form (disordered virtual photons), coherently integrates that disordered energy into ordered mass-energy (a totally negative entropy function of coherent integration of disorder into order), and re-emits the absorbed energy as real observable ordered energy. Leyton's Effect shows how the fields are ordered as a function of distance, etc.
Note that Leyton's hierarchies of symmetry and the Leyton effect complete destroy the present statement of the second law of entropy, which does not permit the production of negative entropy. With the experimental proof by Wang, Evans et al. that negative entropy is a significant effect in chemistry, and with the experimental example of the ubiquitous source charge producing ordered macroscopic fields and energy to any size level and time duration desired, the present second law is dead.
Actually it has always been an oxymoron, implicitly assuming that its own contradiction has first occurred.
The Leyton effect and hierarchies of symmetry also solve the vexing century-old temporal asymmetry problem of thermodynamics.
So I corrected the second law and proposed the following statement of it (hope to submit a paper to a journal on it):
"First a negative entropy interaction occurs to produce some controlled order. Then that initial controlled order will either remain the same or be progressively disordered and decontrolled by subject entropic interactions, unless additioinal negative entropy interactions occur and intervene."
That statement is now consistent with experiment and with theory.
Evans and Rondoni  showed that in theory a nonequilibrium steady state (NESS) system can produce negative entropy continuously, so that the entropy decreases continuously and negatively, toward negative infinity, as time passes. Startled at the theoretical work, they felt that no physical system could exhibit such a continuous negative entropy production. To the contrary, I've nominated the source charge system, including its virtual state energy input and its observable state energy output, as a true entropy-to-negentropy converter, and the first physical system example of the NESS system type shown by Evans and Rondoni.
1. G. M. Wang, E. M. Sevick, Emil Mittag, Debra J. Searles, and Denis J. Evans, "Experimental Demonstration of Violations of the Second Law of Thermodynamics for Small Systems and Short Time Scales," Phys. Rev. Lett., 89(5), 29 July 2002, 050601
2. D. J. Evans and D. J. Searles, "Equilibrium microstates which generate second law violating steady states," Phys. Rev. E, Vol. 50, 1994, p. 1645-1648
3. Gavin E. Crooks, "Entropy production fluctuation theorem and the nonequilibrium work relation for free energy differences," Phys. Rev. E, Vol. 60, 1999, p. 2721-2726.
4. Kenneth R. Shoulders, U.S. Patent #5,153,901; U.S. Patent # 5,018,180; U.S. Patent # 5,123,039; and U.S. patents # 5,054,046; 5,054,047; 5,148,461. See also Kenneth R. Shoulders and Steve Shoulders, "Observations on the Role of Charge Clusters in Nuclear Cluster Reactions," J. New Energy 1(3), Fall 1996, p. 111-121.
5. Michael Leyton, A Generative Theory of Shape, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001
6. Felix Klein, "Vergleichende Betrachtungen über neuere geometrische Forschungen." 1872.
7. I. M. Yaglom, Felix Klein and Sophus Lie: Evolution of the Idea of Symmetry in the Nineteenth Century, Birkhäuser, Boston, MA, 1988
8. T. E. Bearden, "Giant Negentropy from the Common Dipole," Proceedings of Congress 2000, St. Petersburg, Russia, Vol. 1, July 2000 , p. 86-98. Also published in Journal of New Energy, 5(1), Summer 2000, p. 11-23. See also M. W. Evans, T. E. Bearden, and A. Labounsky, "The Most General Form of the Vector Potential in Electrodynamics," Foundations of Physics Letters, 15(3), June 2002, p. 245-261
9. D. J. Evans and Lamberto Rondoni, "Comments on the Entropy of Nonequilibrium Steady States," J. Stat. Phys., 109(3-4), Nov. 2002, p. 895-920.