Investigation on Selected Areas Deviating from the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Home , Poynting vector

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET) Volume 9, Issue 6, June 2018, pp.22–31, Article ID: IJMET_09_06_004 Available online at http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJMET?Volume=9&Issue=6 ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359

INVESTIGATION ON SELECTED AREAS DEVIATING FROM THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS

Patrick Wanyonyi Munialo, Chrispinus Kurusoi Ndiema, James Owuor, Seth Makokha School of Engineering and Built Environment, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kakamega 50100 KENYA

ABSTRACT In this paper we undertake an investigation of studies that show possible violations of the second law of thermodynamics. The study has identified areas recognized as violating the second law of Thermodynamics and possible violations to the second law of thermodynamics. The study Recommends further research to be undertaken to ascertain the validity and application of the investigation. Key words: Thermodynamics, Second Law Cite this Article: Patrick Wanyonyi Munialo, Chrispinus Kurusoi Ndiema, James Owuor, Seth Makokha, Investigation on Selected Areas Deviating from the Second Law of Thermodynamics, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 9(6), 2018, pp. 22–31. http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJMET?Volume=9&Issue=6

1. INTRODUCTION The Second law of thermodynamics states that: - It is impossible to construct a system which will operate in a cycle, extract heat from reservoir and do an equivalent amount of work on the surroundings. The second Law of Thermodynamics assumes a flat space-time in the relativistic sense and so it cannot be valid in curved space-time. (Prigogine 2002). In a closed system there is exchange of energy but not mass across the boundary, however since mass can be transformed into energy as given by E=MC2 (E is energy, M is mass and C is the speed of light), it can be argued that it is impossible to have a system allowing energy transfer without mass transfer. This has invalidated to some degree the application of classic thermodynamic theory to system in which mass is effectively conserved. (Bearden 2003). Since all real processes are irreversible, the entropy of the “universe” must increase whenever a change occurs within them. This has led to the broad generalization that the entropy of the universe as a whole is increasing. But, the second law is an expression of the observed behavior of finite system and it is not certain that the universe can be regarded as finite. Moreover the significance of the second law for systems consisting of living organisms is not yet clear (Bearden, 2003).

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 22 [email protected] Investigation on Selected Areas Deviating from the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Thermodynamic laws cannot apply to microscopic systems because their properties are too small to be measured for example temperature, pressure and number of moles. Therefore thermodynamic laws apply only to macroscopic systems (Rogers and Mayhew, 1995) “The law that entropy always increases – the second law of thermodynamics – holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. 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 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.” (A. Eddington 1928).

1.1. A Chronology of Second Law Formulation According to Capek and Sheehan 2005, the first modern strides in thermodynamics began perhaps with James Watt‟s (1736-1819) steam engine, which gave impetus to what we now know as the Carnot cycle. In 1824 Sadi Nicolas Carnot (1796-1832),published his only scientific work, a treatise on the theory of heat (R´eflexions sur la Puissance Motice du Feu). At the time, it was not realized that a portion of the heat used to drive steam engines was converted into work. This contributed to the initial disinterest in Carnot‟s research. Carnot turned his attention to the connection between heat and work, abandoning his previous opinion about heat as a fluidum, and almost surmised correctly the mechanical equivalent of heat (Carnot, 1825). In 1846, James Prescott Joule (1818-1889)published a paper on thermal and chemical effects of the electric current and in another (1849) he reported mechanical equivalent of heat, thus erasing the sharp boundary between mechanical and thermal energies. There were also others who, independently of Joule, contributed to this change of thinking, notably Hermann von Helmholtz (1821-1894).Much of the groundwork for these discoveries was laid by Benjamin Thompson(Count of Rumford 1753-1814). In 1798, he took part in boring artillery gun barrels. Having ordered the use of blunt borers - driven by draught horses – henoticed that substantial heat was evolved, in fact, in quantities sufficient to boil appreciable quantities of water. At roughly the same time, Sir Humphry Davy(1778-1829) observed that heat developed upon rubbing two pieces of metal or ice, even under vacuum conditions (Capek and Sheehan, 2005). These observations strongly contradicted the older fluid theories of heat. The law of energy conservation as we now know it in thermodynamics is usually ascribed to Julius Robert von Mayer (1814-1878). In classical mechanics, however, this law was known intuitively at least as far back as Galileo Galilei (1564-1642).In fact, about a dozen scientists could legitimately lay claim to discovering energy conservation. Fuller accounts can be found in books by Brush and von Baeyer. The early belief in energy conservation was so strong that, since 1775, the French Academy has forbidden consideration of any process or apparatus that purports to produce energy ex nihilo: a perpetuum mobile of the first kind. With acceptance of energy conservation, one arrives at the first law of thermodynamics. Rudolph Clausius (1822-1888) summarized it in 1850 thus: “In any process, energy may be changed from one to another form (including heat and work), but can never be produced or annihilated.” With this law, any possibility of realizing a perpetuum mobile of the first kind becomes illusory Clausius‟ formulation still stands in good stead over 150 years later, despite unanticipated discoveries of new forms of energy - e.g., nuclear energy, rest mass energy, vacuum energy, dark energy. Because the definition of energy is malleable, in a practical

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 23 [email protected] Patrick Wanyonyi Munialo, Chrispinus Kurusoi Ndiema, James Owuor, Seth Makokha sense, the first law probably need not ever be violated because, were one to propose a violation, energy could be redefined so as to correct it. Thus, conservation of energy is reduced to a tautology and the first law to a powerfully convenient accounting tool for the two general forms of energy: heat and work (Capek and Sheehan, 2005). Hence briefly, in 1824 S. Carnot (heat engine efficiency) was formulated, this was followed by R.Clausius (formal statement of second law) formulation in 1850.In 1851 W. Thomson/Lord Kelvin formulated another statement of second law.In1865 R. Clausius formulated and defined the entropy and in 1867 J.C. Maxwell equations were formulated (Maxwell demon thought experiment). In 1872 L. Boltzmann came up with H-theorem, in 1890 W. Gibbs established statistical mechanics. In 1900 M. Planck established quantum mechanics, this implied less time for thermodynamics, statistical mechanics. In 1910 Statement of second law formulation was completed (Capek and Sheehan, 2005).

2. RECOGNIZED VIOLATIONS OF THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS Analyses of thermodynamic systems not in equilibrium are based on local equilibrium which is satisfactory in a large domain of experimentation and observation. However there remain situations where some extension and modification are necessary and so constitute a well- known violation to the second law of thermodynamics. In this section, this paper will critically discuss Fluctuation theorem, Bohren experiment, rarefied media and strong gradients as recognized areas violating the second law of thermodynamics.

2.1. Fluctuation Theorem Fluctuation theorems (FTs) provide specific relations for the quantity P(W) for general nonequilibrium processes(Evans D.J and Lamberto R, 2002). In fact, until now nothing was said about the type of non-equilibrium process and the treatment given was general. We defined concepts such as the initial and final state, the perturbation protocol λ(t), the trajectory T and the work and heat along a given trajectory. The main difference between a general nonequilibrium process and a reversible one is the enormous and various type of situations one can encounter in the first case. General physically meaningful statements about the properties of the distribution quite probably do not exist and a specific type of non-equilibrium process has to be adopted to come up with specific results. Several fluctuation theorems have appeared in the literature depending on the particular non-equilibrium context. Many fall into the category of entropy production FTs. The first example in this class was proposed by Evans, Cohen and Morriss for systems in steady states. The entropy production there defined bears some resemblance with the work that is exerted by the external non-conservative forces that act upon the system. Several related theoretical results have followed as well as experiments. A comprehensive review can be found . Other more complex scenarios can be envisaged, for example in the case where the system is in a non-stationary aging state. In this case, no work is performed upon the system and the relevant quantity turns out to be the released heat from the system to the bath ((Evans D.J and Lamberto R, 2004). It has been demonstrated that the second law of thermodynamics is violated for larger- than-microscopic processes and systems. Demonstrating violations of the second law at micron level and for up to two seconds, the experiments evoked significant comments (Evans and Lamberto, 2004)

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 24 [email protected] Investigation on Selected Areas Deviating from the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Violation of the second law for small collections of very small particles, or for a molecule or small group of molecules has long been known. However, the work of Evans and Morris( Evans and morris,2002), is a dramatic extension with profound implications in physics and chemistry. Second law violations, previously thought to apply only to very small entities such as an atom or a smallgroup of molecules, and only for very short times, do in fact apply to real systems of somelarger size and for much longer times than previously suspected. In short, these systems can "run backward" for significant time periods(Evans and morris,2002). Evans and Morriss,2002, voiced an immediate concern for the emerging field of nanobots and nanotechnology. They argued that if the nanobots are made very small - micron-size or even smaller - they may not work correctly, due to erratically and frequently shifting into reversed operation as the applicability of the second law fluctuates and the law is repeatedly violated (Evans et al 2002) So the smaller nanobots may not behave as simple scaled-down versions of their "big brother" counterparts at all. The only thermodynamic statement available was the Second Law itself, stating that, for large systems and over long times, the entropy production rate is necessarily positive. Even the foundations of statistical mechanics were unsettled as thermodynamicists questioned how the Second Law of Thermodynamics could be reconciled with reversible microscopic equations of motion(Evans et al 2002). Loschmidt's Paradox states that in a time reversible system, for every phase space trajectory there exists a time- reversed anti-trajectory. As the entropy production of a trajectory and its conjugate anti- trajectory are of identical magnitude but opposite sign, then, so the argument goes, one cannot prove that entropy production is positive( Evans et al 2002) However, in 1993, a resolution and quantitative description of violations of the Second Law in finite systems was given by the Fluctuation Theorem (FT) of Evans et al (Evans et al, 2002). The theorem provides an analytic expression for the probability that the dissipative flows in the direction reverse to that required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In other words, the theorem predicts appreciable and measureable violations of the Second Law for small systems over short timescales. The Fluctuation Theorem points out that as these thermodynamic engines are made smaller and as the time of operation is made shorter, these engines are not simple scaled-down versions of their larger counterparts. As they become smaller, the probability that they will run thermodynamically in reverse inescapably becomes greater. Consequently, these results imply that the Fluctuation Theorem has important ramifications for nanotechnology and indeed for how life itself functions (Evans et al 2002)

2.2. Bohren Experiment How can a particle absorption more than the light incident on it? (Bohren, 1983) According to Bohren, 1983, a particle can indeed absorb more than the light incident on it. Metallic particles at ultraviolet frequencies are one class of such particles and insulating particles at infrared frequencies are another. In the former strong absorption is associated with excitation of surface plasmons; in the latter it is associated with excitation of surface phonons. In both instances the target area a particle presents to incident light can be much greater than its geometrical cross sectional area. This is strikingly evident from the field lines of the Poynting vector in the vicinity of a small sphere illuminated by a plane wave. Light that would have passed the sphere without impediment is deflected toward it. An absorption cross

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 25 [email protected] Patrick Wanyonyi Munialo, Chrispinus Kurusoi Ndiema, James Owuor, Seth Makokha section 18 times greater than the geometrical cross section implies that the absorption radius is about 4.2 times greater than the geometrical radius. The conclusion drawn from this experiment which has high output energy to input energy ratio is that some of the energy flow in plasma called the Poynting vector is responsible for the extra energy.

2.3. Rarefied Media In the case of rarefied media, where the idea of local equilibrium fails, the average energy at each point depends on the temperature at the boundaries. Important astrophysical situations belong to this category.

2.4. Strong Gradients We then have the case of strong gradients, where we expect the failure of linear laws such as the Fourier law for heat conduction. Attempts to introduce such nonlinear outcomes into the thermodynamic description have led to "extended thermodynamics". An example of the use of strong gradients for energy generation is highlighted. The Bedini monopole energizer uses high voltage spikes from inductive collapse of a coil‟s magnetic field to charge secondary batteries. This inductive kickback has a very sharp transient and so merits classification under strong gradients. The Bedini SSG built and tested by the Universiti Teknologi MARA team(Fakhrurrazey F. S., et al 2014) for COP improvement was carried out. Results showed their prototype to be 8% better than the inventor‟s (Bedini 2013;Bedini 2016).The measured COP from the replication was 1.43 compared 1.32 for the original (Bedini 2013; Bedini 2016). The use of Neodymiun magnets being stronger than block ceramic magnets accounted for the observed performance improvement.

2.5. Velocity Autocorrelation Function Finally, we have very interesting memory effects which appear for long times(as compared to characteristic relaxation times). This field started with important numerical simulations by Alder and Wainright (1970), who showed that nonequilibrium processes may have "long-time tails." In other words, the approach to equilibrium is not exponential, as was generally believed, but polynomial (e.g.αt-3/2), which is much slower. To explain this effect, consider a molecule we set in motion with respect to the medium; its momentum is transmitted to the medium, which in turn reacts back on the molecule. This leads to memory effects which are discussed in many papers. As a result, Nature has a much longer memory of irreversible processes than it was thought before. Again this shows that local equilibrium is an approximation, albeit a very good one(Kondepudi 2008). There are innumerable applications in very diverse fields. The first example is in materials science. Concepts such as fluctuations, dissipative structure and self-organization play an essential role in the true revolution that is occurring in this field. A good introduction is given by Walgraef. Through new technologies (laser and particle irradiation, ion implantation, ultrafast quenches) it is now possible to produce materials in highly nonequilibrium conditions-thereby escaping the tyranny of the equilibrium phase diagram. Here are some examples from Walgraef's book: Materials such as quasicrystals, high-temperature superconductors, semiconductor heterostructures and super lattices are typical examples of materials produced in

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 26 [email protected] Investigation on Selected Areas Deviating from the Second Law of Thermodynamics nonequilibrium conditions. It is now possible to produce complex structures or composites that simultaneously satisfy very diverse requirements. To do so, one has to control the material on length scales that vary from the atomic to the micrometer level. Self-organization is a precious ally for the design of such materials. Many materials are used in very demanding conditions. Submitted to deformation, corrosion, irradiation, etc., their defect populations acquire complex behaviors, well described by reaction diffusion equations, and may therefore become organized in very regular structures that affect their physical properties. It is also clear now that instabilities and patterns occur all the time in materials science. They affect the properties of the materials, hence they need to be understood and controlled(Prigogine 2008). It is well known that defects play an important role in determining material properties. Point defects play a major role in all macroscopic material properties that are related to atomic diffusion mechanisms and to electronic properties in semiconductors. Line defects, or dislocations, are unquestionably recognized as the basic elements that lead to plasticity and fracture. Although the study of individual solid-state defects has reached an advanced level, investigations into the collective behavior of defects under nonequilibrium conditions remain in their infancy. Nonetheless, significant progress has been made in dislocation dynamics and plastic instabilities over the past several years, and the importance of nonlinear phenomena has also been assessed in this field. Dislocation structures have been observed experimentally (Prigogine 2008).

3. POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS OF THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS The investigation established three areas of possible violations of second law of thermodynamics. The areas established were living systems, source charge problem, Aharonov - Bohm effect. These areas are discussed below:-

3.1. Living Systems According to Kondepudi (2008) Living systems exhibit amplification of “order through fluctuations” at a much higher level. In seeking an understanding of the thermodynamic aspects of life, we must first recognize the inadequacy of a description of life as a state of matter; no description of life is complete without the inclusion of the irreversible processes that make life what it is. The processes bring about macroscopic features such as self-replication and adaptation that we can observe in a living cell. From the thermodynamic viewpoint, our goal is not so much to seek a precise definition of „life‟ as it is to identify some characteristic features of living cells and see how we might understand them within the framework of thermodynamics. In his influential and inspiring book What is Life (Schrodinger 1945), Erwin Schrödinger established a thermodynamic framework for thinking about the processes in a living cell. Later, the concept of dissipative structures, pioneered by Ilya Prigogine and his coworkers, has shed more light on how organization could spontaneously arise in systems far from thermodynamic equilibrium. The theory of dissipative structures reveals how entropy- producing irreversible processes can generate order and structure (Prigogine 2005) The work of various scholars (Katchalsky and Curran,1965,Peacocke 1983, and Caplan and Essig, 1999) focused on biophysical processes and elucidated how modern

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 27 [email protected] Patrick Wanyonyi Munialo, Chrispinus Kurusoi Ndiema, James Owuor, Seth Makokha thermodynamics applies to biological systems. Yet fundamental questions regarding the origin of life and the evolution of complex organization from the level of individual cells to ecosystems remain and are, at best, only partially answered. Thermodynamics aspects of biological processes such as the flow of Gibbs energy drives the processes associated with life (Kondepudi 2008). There are many features of cells that clearly indicate the nonequilibrium nature of its state. First, they are open systems that exchange energy and matter with their exterior or environment. Plants absorb CO2, H2O and solar energy and expel O2 during photosynthesis. Other organisms feed on „food‟ and expel waste. Second, the complex network of chemical processes in cells is controlled by enzymes, which are protein catalysts. It is noteworthy that catalysts have no effect on the state of equilibrium. The simple fact that enzymes can alter the state of a cell implies that the cell is not in thermodynamic equilibrium (Kondepudi 2008). There is another aspect of life that indicates, in fact, that it is a far-from-equilibrium dissipative structure, the entire biochemical edifice of life as we know it is founded upon a fundamental molecular asymmetry of its building blocks. Amino acids and the ribose in nucleotides are chiral molecules. Of the two possible mirror-image structures, named L- and Denantiomers, only one kind appears in proteins and DNA of all living cells (L stands for levo and D for dextro). With rare exceptions, the chemistry of life is dominated by L-amino acids and D-sugars. In the words of Francis Crick, „The first great unifying principle of biochemistry is that the key molecules have the same hand in all organisms‟ (Crick 1981) The evolutionary origin of this particular asymmetry is still an enigma, but thermodynamics gives us a framework to understand how asymmetry might arise under far- from-equilibrium conditions, through instability and symmetry-breaking transitions. Several examples of spontaneous generation of chiral asymmetry in nonequilibrium systems are now known. Chiral asymmetry, or dominance of one hand over the other, is not peculiar to biological systems in fact it pervades the whole universe, from elementary particles to the morphology of mammals(Crick 1981). The nonequilibrium state of an organism causes it to respond to changes in external factors (such as temperature) in complex and highly sensitive ways. In the case of alligators, for example, the sex of an offspring depends on the temperature at which the egg was incubated! In contrast, the response of equilibrium systems is all described by Le Chatelier‟s principle (Kondepudi 2008) Henri Le Chatelier stated this principle thus: “Any system in chemical equilibrium undergoes, as a result of a variation in one of the factors governing the equilibrium, a compensating change in a direction such that, had this change occurred alone it would have produced a variation of the factors considered in the opposite direction”(Kondepudi 2008).

3.2. Source Charge Problem The other noted areas of possible violations of second law of thermodynamics is demonstrated by source charge problem. Every charge freely pours out real electromagnetic energy in all directions, with no observable energy input. A fixed isolated charge produces a set of associated fields and potentials in its surrounding space. The fields arise and spread outward from the charge in all radial directions at light speed, from the moment of creation or separation of the charge (Bearden 2005).

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 28 [email protected] Investigation on Selected Areas Deviating from the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Electromagnetic fields in space are comprised of photons. A photon in space is moving at the speed of light C. Hence the charge continuously emits real, observable photons in all directions, in motion at light speed c and pouring outward. This steady outpouring of observable photons establishes and continuously replenishes the associated “static” fields and potentials, expanding outward at light speed. Hence all “static” electromagnetic fields are actually steady state dynamic energy flows, in the manner pointed out by Tom Van Flandern (Flandern 1998) when he states: “we must distinguish two distinct meanings of the term „static‟. One meaning is unchanging in the sense of no moving parts. The other meaning is sameness from moment to moment by continual replacement of all moving parts. We can visualize this difference by thinking of a waterfall. A frozen waterfall is static in the first sense, and a flowing waterfall is static in the second sense. Both are essentially the same at every moment, yet the latter has moving parts capable of transferring momentum, and is made of entities that propagate.”(Flandern 1998) Experiment establishes there is no observable energy input to the source charge. Yet charges pour out energy and establish all electromagnetic fields, potentials, and their energy. Classical electromagnetic and electrical engineering models accept that the associated charges are somehow the sources of all electromagnetic fields, potentials, and their energy. But the models assume the charges create those fields and potentials and their energy, from nothing at all, because they assume there is no energy input to the charge. Thus present electrical power engineering uses a seriously flawed electromagnetic model that assumes total violation of the conservation of energy law (Bearden 2005).

3.3. Aharonov – Bohm Effect The importance of the magnetic vector potential, particularly when one looks through quantum electrodynamics and in various gauges and Motionless Electromagnetic Generator, MEG (Bearden 2003). The old notion that potentials were merely mathematical conveniences has long been falsified, particularly by the Aharonov-Bohm effect, extended to the Berry phase and further extended to the geometric phase. There are some 20,000 physics papers on geometric phase, Berry phase, and Aharonov-Bohm effect (Bearden 2003). In quantum electrodynamics, potentials are primary and force fields are derived.Thus it is of primary importance to consider both the scalar potential φ and the vector potential A in a system or circuit and in its surrounding space. In the MEG, one must particularly consider the magnetic vector potential A. Indeed, the magnetic vector potential A is so important that it can be taken as the basis of EM energy inherent in the active vacuum (Bearden 2003). Magnetic vector potential A comes in two varieties: (i) the normal A-potential, which has a curl component called the B-field, and (ii) a curl-free A-potential without a curl component and therefore without the B-field (also called a “field-free” A-potential). In the Aharonov-Bohm effect, the B-field is localized in a specific region. Outside that region, there freely appears a field-free (curl-free) magnetic vector potential A. This is a free regauging process, and its occurrence does not require work. This “field-free” A-potential still affects and moves electrons (Bearden 2003).

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 29 [email protected] Patrick Wanyonyi Munialo, Chrispinus Kurusoi Ndiema, James Owuor, Seth Makokha

    By perturbing the A, one can produce an E-field from it by  It is stressed that, in the Aharonov-Bohm effect, a regauging has taken place. The potential outside the localization zone has been freely changed, with an extra space-time curvature and extra energy transferred there by gauge freedom, at no cost to the operator. The MEG resembles a transformer, having a core of special nanocrystalline material, input coil or coils in the primary, and output coil or coils in the secondary. Its operation, however, is quite different from that of a normal transformer (Bearden 2003). The special nanocrystalline core material used in the MEG has a very special characteristic: The material itself freely localizes an inserted B-field (from the input coil, or from a separate permanent magnet, or both) within the core material itself. Therefore it also freely evokes the Aharonov-Bohm effect. Outside the core, there freely appears an extra curl-free magnetic vector potential, A (Bearden 2003). The MEG thus has two energy reservoirs: (i) the normal B-field energy and flux of any transformer resulting from the energy input to its primary coil(s), but now totally localized within the core material, and (ii) an extra free A-potential energy reservoir freely appearing just outside the core material itself (Bearden 2003) Consequently, the MEG is free to output the normal amount of energy from the B-field flux that a normal transformer would output, and also as much extra energy as it receives and collects from the A-potential in space outside the core (Bearden 2003). The MEG thus has become directly analogous to the heat pump. It has one energy reservoir - the localized B-field in the core - whose energy the operator must furnish and pay for. But it also has a second, free, environmental energy reservoir - a curl-free A-potential - freely available in the external environment. For the MEG, a COP = 3.0 or so is readily achievable, and even higher COP can be achieved by special measures (Bearden 2003). However, one notes the MEG‟s high nonlinearity, and thus its susceptibility to nonlinear  oscillations and the need for nonlinear control theory and implementation. Also, the  operation and its E-fields produced, do interact with other coils on the core, including the primary, etc. Hence timing and phasing are critical. An out-of-phase MEG-like unit can worsen the COP < 1.0 a normal transformer would produce! But a properly phased MEG with proper nonlinear control will produce all signals additive as needed at their individual locations. That “optimized” MEG then will produce COP > 1.0. Scale-up also is highly nonlinear, and requires extensive phenomenology buildups and testing to achieve proper stability and control. COP =∞ (self-powering operation similar to a solar cell) is permitted for the MEGby the laws of thermodynamics and physics (Bearden 2003).

4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AREAS OF FURTHER STUDIES This investigation has identified five areas violating the second law of thermodynamics. These areas are: - Fluctuation theorem, Bohren experiment, Rarefied media, strong gradient and velocity auto correlation function. The study has further identified three areas of possible

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 30 [email protected] Investigation on Selected Areas Deviating from the Second Law of Thermodynamics violations from the second law of thermodynamics, these are Living systems, Source charge and Aharonov-Bohn Effect. These areas are virgin and hence there is no doubt that these areas are open to further investigations to reduce the knowledge deficit in the areas deviating from the second law of thermodynamics.

REFERENCES [1] Abramo D. G. (2010). Thermo-charged capacitors and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Physics Letters (374) 1801. [2] Alder, B.J. & Wainwright, T. E. (1970). Decay of the Velocity Autocorrelation Function. Physical review, (1): 18-21. [3] Bearden T. E. (2003). The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator: How It Works. [4] Bedini J. & Bearden T.E. (2006). Free Energy Generation: Circuits and Schematics. Cheniere Press p46-47 [5] Bedini C. John(2013); Monopole Energiser. From http://www.johnbedini.net [6] Bedini C. John(2016); Monopole Energiser. From http://www.johnbedini.net [7] Bohren C.F. (1983). How can a particle absorb more than the light incident on it? Am. J. Phys., 51(4): 323-327. [8] Capek V. & Sheehan D.P. (2005). Challenges to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, Fundamental Theories of Physics; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, volume 146. [9] Capek V. et al., (2014). “Challenges to the Second Law of Thermodynamics”, Fundamental Theories of Physics Series. (7): 211-237, (10) 305. [10] Caplan R.S. & Essig A.(1999). Bioenergetics and Linear Nonequilibrium Thermodynamics: The Steady State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [11] Crick F. (1981). Life Itself. New York: Simon and Schuster (6) 43. [12] Evans D. J. & Lamberto R. (2002). "Comments on the Entropy of Nonequilibrium Steady States," J. Stat. Phys. (109)3-4. Kosyakov B. P. (1992). “Radiation in Electrodynamics And in Yang-Mills Theory," Sov. Phys. Usp. 35(2), Feb.135 -141. [13] Fakhrurrazey F. S., et al., (2014). Performance comparison of 4-pole Neodymium Magnet Bedini SSG free energy generator. IEEE. [14] Flandern T.V. (1998). The Speed of Gravity - What the Experiments say. Physics Letters, Vol. (250) 8-9. [15] Katchalsky A. & Curran P.F. (1965). Nonequilibrium Thermodynamics in Biophysics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 3. [16] Kondepudi D.K. & Asakura K.(2001). Accounts of Chemical Research. (43): 946–954. [17] Peacocke A.R. (1983). An Introduction to the Physical Chemistry of Biological Organization. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [18] Prigogine I., Nicolis G. & Babloyantz A. (1972). Physics Today, (25); 11, 12, (23); 38. [19] Prigogine I., Nicolis G. & Babloyantz A. (2002). Physics Today, (25); 11, 12, (23); 38. [20] Rodgers and mayheu(1995)

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJMET 31 [email protected]