Remember me
▼ Content

The Kent Papers: Author


The Kent Papers: Author31-01-2023 19:50
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14373)
Kent W Mayhew

Independent researcher (not institutionalized) who is challenging accepted thermodynamic principles which is too often based upon mathematical implications over logic. This applies to both entropy and the second law, both of which are mathematical contrivances. Moreover all that was explained using these contrivances can be explained in other first principle based terms. Providing simpler constructive logic based reasoning is the easy part. Convincing other trained in traditional thermodynamics to rethink what they believe is the hard part. It is a sad state that those who mentor the sciences do not appreciate true open mindedness.Whether you call it arrogance or human nature, it has to stop!




Independent researcher (not institutionalized) who is challenging accepted thermodynamic principles which is too often based upon mathematical implications over logic.

Thermodynamics is based on countless observations and not on any "mathematical implications". There is no point in qualifying the thermodynamic principles being challenged as the "accepted" ones because all of them are accepted. Nobody who actually understands the laws of thermodynamics has falsified any of them. Kent does not appear to understand the laws of thermodynamics. My recommendation to him is to learn the laws of thermodynamics first and then see whether or not he can falsify any of them. I recommend Kent wait until he has falsified one or more of the laws before announcing that he is "challenging" any of them.

This applies to both entropy and the second law, both of which are mathematical contrivances.

I think about an ice cube melting in hot coffee and wonder how this qualifies as a mathematical contrivance. Perhaps Kent will explain how this is the case. Perhaps Kent will explain in which specific way he is challenging entropy.

Moreover all that was explained using these contrivances can be explained in other first principle based terms.

My hope is that Kent will explain what, precisely, are "first principle based terms." I'm eager to see how all aspects of thermodynamics can be explained in these terms and why my current understanding is comprised of mere contrivances.

Providing simpler constructive logic based reasoning is the easy part.

It would seem that no one has ever applied an apparently badly needed Occam's Razor, even though this would have been the "easy part." Who was asleep at the wheel?

Convincing other trained in traditional thermodynamics to rethink what they believe is the hard part.

Yes, I can see how it would be difficult to convince scientists and engineers to abandon thermodynamics, especially without having falsified any of them. Perhaps Kent will explain why any rational adult should rethink thermodynamics to something else.

It is a sad state that those who mentor the sciences do not appreciate true open mindedness.

Everyone who knows me should be aware of my loathing for hurling the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, ... BUT ... what constitutes "true" open mindedness? Might Kent be equating "true" open mindedness with the abandonment of science in deference to allowing others to do one's thinking for them? Should those who mentor the sciences be mentoring what others tell them to mentor?

Whether you call it arrogance or human nature, it has to stop!

Mentoring the sciences? Insisting on independent, critical reasoning? I'm sure Kent will clarify.
01-02-2023 17:00
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(3314)
IBdaMann wrote:
I'm sure Kent will clarify.

If he's run away already, then I'm afraid that it might already be too late.
01-02-2023 17:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14373)
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:I'm sure Kent will clarify.
If he's run away already, then I'm afraid that it might already be too late.

Your finely honed insights are razor sharp.

Let me ask you, if you truly wanted to challenge the traditional view of thermodynamics, wouldn't the easiest and most effective method be to simply step into a bonfire and get a good feel for those erroneous mathematical contrivances that create the whole deceptive illusion? I see "Nobel prize", "book deal" and "lecture circuit" for the first person to help the world see the errors of all the "great" (but totally fooled and misguided) physicists of yesterday.
01-02-2023 23:57
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(3314)
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:I'm sure Kent will clarify.
If he's run away already, then I'm afraid that it might already be too late.

Your finely honed insights are razor sharp.

Let me ask you, if you truly wanted to challenge the traditional view of thermodynamics, wouldn't the easiest and most effective method be to simply step into a bonfire and get a good feel for those erroneous mathematical contrivances that create the whole deceptive illusion? I see "Nobel prize", "book deal" and "lecture circuit" for the first person to help the world see the errors of all the "great" (but totally fooled and misguided) physicists of yesterday.

Sounds like an easy method to me. Though given how determined Kent is, I suspect that his implementation of your method would end in him receiving a high number of third degree mathematical contrivances.
02-02-2023 01:34
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14373)
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:I'm sure Kent will clarify.
If he's run away already, then I'm afraid that it might already be too late.

Your finely honed insights are razor sharp.

Let me ask you, if you truly wanted to challenge the traditional view of thermodynamics, wouldn't the easiest and most effective method be to simply step into a bonfire and get a good feel for those erroneous mathematical contrivances that create the whole deceptive illusion? I see "Nobel prize", "book deal" and "lecture circuit" for the first person to help the world see the errors of all the "great" (but totally fooled and misguided) physicists of yesterday.

Sounds like an easy method to me. Though given how determined Kent is, I suspect that his implementation of your method would end in him receiving a high number of third degree mathematical contrivances.

What if he were to just store himself in GasGuzzler's garage? Would gravity keep him 40C warmer than everything else?
02-02-2023 02:58
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(3314)
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:I'm sure Kent will clarify.
If he's run away already, then I'm afraid that it might already be too late.

Your finely honed insights are razor sharp.

Let me ask you, if you truly wanted to challenge the traditional view of thermodynamics, wouldn't the easiest and most effective method be to simply step into a bonfire and get a good feel for those erroneous mathematical contrivances that create the whole deceptive illusion? I see "Nobel prize", "book deal" and "lecture circuit" for the first person to help the world see the errors of all the "great" (but totally fooled and misguided) physicists of yesterday.

Sounds like an easy method to me. Though given how determined Kent is, I suspect that his implementation of your method would end in him receiving a high number of third degree mathematical contrivances.

What if he were to just store himself in GasGuzzler's garage? Would gravity keep him 40C warmer than everything else?

Where's Pete Rogers when you need him? Oh well, maybe duncan will chime in with his "understanding" of Pete's dogma...
02-02-2023 05:20
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14373)
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:I'm sure Kent will clarify.
If he's run away already, then I'm afraid that it might already be too late.

Your finely honed insights are razor sharp.

Let me ask you, if you truly wanted to challenge the traditional view of thermodynamics, wouldn't the easiest and most effective method be to simply step into a bonfire and get a good feel for those erroneous mathematical contrivances that create the whole deceptive illusion? I see "Nobel prize", "book deal" and "lecture circuit" for the first person to help the world see the errors of all the "great" (but totally fooled and misguided) physicists of yesterday.

Sounds like an easy method to me. Though given how determined Kent is, I suspect that his implementation of your method would end in him receiving a high number of third degree mathematical contrivances.

What if he were to just store himself in GasGuzzler's garage? Would gravity keep him 40C warmer than everything else?

Where's Pete Rogers when you need him? Oh well, maybe duncan will chime in with his "understanding" of Pete's dogma...

Wait, hear me out. What if we stored two crypto exchanges in GasGuzzler's garage, but one had additional CO2, and we shined an IR lamp at each one while keeping the gravity compression equal and constant for both, Wouldn't the mathematical thermodynamics contrivances become 40C hotter in the exchange that was incorporated in the Bahamas?
02-02-2023 05:33
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2932)
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:I'm sure Kent will clarify.
If he's run away already, then I'm afraid that it might already be too late.

Your finely honed insights are razor sharp.

Let me ask you, if you truly wanted to challenge the traditional view of thermodynamics, wouldn't the easiest and most effective method be to simply step into a bonfire and get a good feel for those erroneous mathematical contrivances that create the whole deceptive illusion? I see "Nobel prize", "book deal" and "lecture circuit" for the first person to help the world see the errors of all the "great" (but totally fooled and misguided) physicists of yesterday.

Sounds like an easy method to me. Though given how determined Kent is, I suspect that his implementation of your method would end in him receiving a high number of third degree mathematical contrivances.

What if he were to just store himself in GasGuzzler's garage? Would gravity keep him 40C warmer than everything else?


You wait just a damn minute! Where do you get off thinking it's OK to offer NewthermoDKent living quarters in my garage? I gave up on the compressed CO2 theory anyway. After 2 years my garage was still cold, BUT.....

...over the weekend I finally got my net thermal heat energy transfer all straightened out. It turns out that a diesel burning torpedo heater actually works because thermal energy flows from the cold garage air into the flame. This is true, all you must do is believe it.

But I digress, back to your rudeness. Who mentors your manners anyway? Whether you call it arrogance or human manure, it has to stop! You're nothing but a thermodynamics traditionalist loser.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
Edited on 02-02-2023 06:05
02-02-2023 15:44
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14373)
GasGuzzler wrote:You wait just a damn minute! Where do you get off thinking it's OK to offer NewthermoDKent living quarters in my garage?

I'm sure that you're aware of the universally representational gravitational compression characteristics of your garage. Where else would you suggest we store him? Edwards AFB? The Binance exchange? You are well aware that Ralph is hibernating at the moment so he's out of the equation.

A great deal of planning went into the site selection so don't shoot down the plan unless you have a better suggestion.

GasGuzzler wrote: I gave up on the compressed CO2 theory anyway. After 2 years my garage was still cold, BUT.....

That was my fault. Only recently have I learned that I had everything backwards. Now that Kent has so clearly explained my error, it seems so obvious. Naturally, if you store compressed CO2 in your garage, it will be 40C colder, exactly the Climate Change that has been observed.

GasGuzzler wrote:...over the weekend I finally got my net thermal heat energy transfer all straightened out.

It's good that you have that curve all straightened out.

GasGuzzler wrote: It turns out that a diesel burning torpedo heater actually works because thermal energy flows from the cold garage air into the flame.

Remember, it's a "net flow." The Kursk's demise resulted from too much thermal energy flowing from the Arctic ocean to the torpedo bay, but even more thermal energy thereafter flowing from the torpedo bay to the rest of the sub and then to the Arctic ocean.

This is true, all you must do is believe it.

GasGuzzler wrote:But I digress, back to your rudeness. Who mentors your manners anyway?

Fuqq you! What the fuqq are you even talking about?

GasGuzzler wrote:Whether you call it arrogance or human manure, it has to stop!

It's my humble arrogance.

GasGuzzler wrote: You're nothing but a thermodynamics traditionalist loser.

Full house. Contrivances over jacks.
02-02-2023 19:14
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(3314)
GasGuzzler wrote:
thermodynamics traditionalist

I think you've earned some points for this one. Well done!
02-02-2023 20:36
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14373)
gfm7175 wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:thermodynamics traditionalist
I think you've earned some points for this one. Well done!

Agreed. I am inclined to remind you that we should also give credit to Kent ... but I think that's what we've been doing.
03-02-2023 05:27
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14373)
Two interesting things about Kent's "point of view":

1. Do you remember Pete Rogers' amazing concept of "negative work"? Kent likes to explain things in terms of "lost work". In both cases, the term represents energy that is to be subtracted from some other quantity of energy ... ostensibly to make the math produce the desired result.

2. Kent, however, "challenges" the commonly accepted mathematical contrivance of entropy being the amount of usable energy that becomes unusable to the closed system to perform work, and hence is "lost" as energy changes form, i.e. the second law of thermodynamics. Kent instead champions a bold, new and much simpler idea that the amount of usable energy in a closed system decreases as energy changes form, and that "now-unusable-to-perform-work" energy amounts to "lost work". The difference is night and day. If I were to write out the mathematical contrivance of the 2nd law of thermodynamics mathematically, I'd have to write all of the following:

Work_Potential_Energy(T) >= Work_Potential_Energy(T+1) -> Entropy(T) <= Entropy(T+1)

... but if I apply the Kent simplification, I only need to write the following:

Work_Potential_Energy(T) >= Work_Potential_Energy(T+1) -> Lost_Work(T) <= Lost_Work(T+1)

I'm going to jot this down on my cheat sheet.
06-02-2023 04:34
GasGuzzler
★★★★★
(2932)
IBdaMann wrote:
I'm sure that you're aware of the universally representational gravitational compression characteristics of your garage. Where else would you suggest we store him? Edwards AFB? The Binance exchange? You are well aware that Ralph is hibernating at the moment so he's out of the equation.

Too easy. Kent will do just fine in a mangrove swamp.

IBdaMann wrote:
A great deal of planning went into the site selection so don't shoot down the plan unless you have a better suggestion.

I will shoot down the plan, and for sure faster than Biden can pop a balloon.

IBdaMann wrote:
Only recently have I learned that I had everything backwards. Now that Kent has so clearly explained my error, it seems so obvious. Naturally, if you store compressed CO2 in your garage, it will be 40C colder, exactly the Climate Change that has been observed.

You do seem to grasp new thermodynamics quite firmly. I'll trust you on this one a hang on to the CO2 tank until July, at which time I will observe the climate change and post up the proxy data.

IBdaMann wrote:
It's good that you have that curve all straightened out

You aught to see the parabola graph on that net flow. It's "newly" amazing!

IBdaMann wrote:
The Kursk's demise resulted from too much thermal energy flowing from the Arctic ocean to the torpedo bay, but even more thermal energy thereafter flowing from the torpedo bay to the rest of the sub and then to the Arctic ocean.

I wonder which bay or large body of water Kent lives near. Take a scroll back up to his picture. Assuming that photo was taken at his property, can someone tell me where those stair lead to? Funny how all the warmizombies still buy waterfront property. Apparently we have more than twelve years before it's not already too late.

This is true, all you must do is believe it.

IBdaMann wrote:
Fuqq you!

Right back at you, you new thermodynamics wannabe loser.

IBdaMann wrote:
It's my humble arrogance.

My bad. I thought it was your shameful pride.

IBdaMann wrote:
Full house. Contrivances over jacks.


I'll see your $20 and raise you $50.
Four of a kind. Readem' and weep.

Tmiddles, Kent, Sealover, Pete Rogers.


Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
Edited on 06-02-2023 05:01
06-02-2023 06:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(14373)
GasGuzzler wrote:Too easy. Kent will do just fine in a mangrove swamp.

Yes, I forgot to consider the mangroves. Good catch. We're going to have to restore the depleted alkalinity as we restore the depleted ozone while we deplete the hexavalent chromium. Yep, mangroves are a direct-connect on that one. Thanks for keeping me straight.

GasGuzzler wrote:I will shoot down the plan, and for sure faster than Biden can pop a balloon.

Are you planning to shoot down the plan or are you planning to shoot down the plan to shoot down the plan? Don't leave the plan depleted.

GasGuzzler wrote:You do seem to grasp new thermodynamics quite firmly.

It's more of a Kung Fu grip.

GasGuzzler wrote: I'll trust you on this one a hang on to the CO2 tank until July, at which time I will observe the climate change and post up the proxy data.

Don't forget to properly massage the proxy data before weighting it and "correcting for known errors."

GasGuzzler wrote:You aught to see the parabola graph on that net flow. It's "newly" amazing!

I have thrown away all my thermodynamics traditionalism and am now going cold turkey.

GasGuzzler wrote:I wonder which bay or large body of water Kent lives near. Take a scroll back up to his picture. Assuming that photo was taken at his property, can someone tell me where those stair lead to?

Sure. All Canada has is lots of snow and ice. Kent's stairs lead to the lower level of snow and ice. When Canadians speak of a "body of water" they often mean a nearby layer of snow and ice.

GasGuzzler wrote: Apparently we have more than twelve years before it's not already too late.

... although it might already be not too late.
07-02-2023 05:35
James_
★★★★★
(2149)
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:Too easy. Kent will do just fine in a mangrove swamp.

Yes, I forgot to consider the mangroves. Good catch. We're going to have to restore the depleted alkalinity as we restore the depleted ozone while we deplete the hexavalent chromium. Yep, mangroves are a direct-connect on that one. Thanks for keeping me straight.




Do you think this is Erin Brokovich? That anyone jokes about hexavalent chromium
is a sick bastard. Anyone who supports such poisoning is no son of mine and is permanently on the enemy list.




Join the debate The Kent Papers: Author:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Kent Papers: Book on Amazon ($4.95)13621-06-2023 21:26
The Kent Papers: NEW THERMODYNAMICS: HOW MANKIND'S USE OF ENERGY INFLUENCES CLIMATE CHANGE1102-02-2023 22:07
The Kent Papers: New Thermodynamics: The Second Law Buried by Illusions2101-02-2023 13:42
The Kent Papers: Entropy - An Ill-Conceived Mathematical Contrivance?001-02-2023 02:41
Scientific published papers8510-02-2020 18:06
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact