Heat conduction in solids: Why is it so slow?
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:57 pm
I've started discussing this topic here on the LHC portal over at
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=745
but have been asked to leave that thread alone.
Basically, I am challenging the modern interpretation of heat flow as 'vibrating atoms' or in Feynman's words 'jiggling atoms':
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pYRn5j ... re=related
This interpretation lacks an explanation of how heat can come to travel so slowly through solid materials. For instance compare the flow of heat through glass to the flow of acoustic energy through glass. Really, any solid material will do, and perhaps it is best to use a crystalline form as the model. Even the finest conductors of heat such as aluminum or copper are ridiculously slow in their heat conduction relative to the rate of propagation of sound through those same materials.
I propose that the modern interpretation of heat as vibrating atoms is flawed, and that rotation is a more likely explanation, for it may be possible to introduce nuclear rotation as a well isolated means of energy storage, though the rotational moment cannot be so small. There was a time when people simply admitted that they did not fully understand the explanation of well behaved phenomena such as heat flow; when people like Maxwell attempted coherent interpretations. Modern physics would have us believe that those times are gone, but I don't think so.
Kinematics in a crystalline solid do not seem to provide enough room for two modes of such discrepant nature as heat and sound, yet that sound is vibrating atoms and that heat is vibrating atoms is accepted by the modern scientist. Why? If the modern scientist is incapable of explaining why the same description holds for two very different phenomena then what of modern science?
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=745
but have been asked to leave that thread alone.
Basically, I am challenging the modern interpretation of heat flow as 'vibrating atoms' or in Feynman's words 'jiggling atoms':
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pYRn5j ... re=related
This interpretation lacks an explanation of how heat can come to travel so slowly through solid materials. For instance compare the flow of heat through glass to the flow of acoustic energy through glass. Really, any solid material will do, and perhaps it is best to use a crystalline form as the model. Even the finest conductors of heat such as aluminum or copper are ridiculously slow in their heat conduction relative to the rate of propagation of sound through those same materials.
I propose that the modern interpretation of heat as vibrating atoms is flawed, and that rotation is a more likely explanation, for it may be possible to introduce nuclear rotation as a well isolated means of energy storage, though the rotational moment cannot be so small. There was a time when people simply admitted that they did not fully understand the explanation of well behaved phenomena such as heat flow; when people like Maxwell attempted coherent interpretations. Modern physics would have us believe that those times are gone, but I don't think so.
Kinematics in a crystalline solid do not seem to provide enough room for two modes of such discrepant nature as heat and sound, yet that sound is vibrating atoms and that heat is vibrating atoms is accepted by the modern scientist. Why? If the modern scientist is incapable of explaining why the same description holds for two very different phenomena then what of modern science?