In one example I use bond energies to calculate the energy per mole of sucrose and TNT (the explosive trinitrotoluene). Most students expect that TNT has more energy, but it turns out the two have about the same. So why is TNT an explosive (actually a conflagration)? TNT burns rapidly and involves a huge volume change. It is the rate of reaction (chemical kinetics) and the rapid volume change that causes the explosive damage. Then I can move to the thermodynamics overview.
Undeterred by rejection of EPR paper.
A Local Realistic Reconciliation of the EPR Paradox – Research Paper
A Local Realistic Reconciliation of the EPR Paradox – Simulation
Most recent articles
I am sure the reviewer is knowledgeable about the EPR paradox and the foundations of quantum mechanics but he missed or dismissed a departing point of my approach: quantum mechanics is a theory of measurement and I find states that exist only when not measured. These undetected states account for the quantum correlation usually attributed to non-locality. Although the reviewer’s comments are easily answered, I was not allowed a rebuttal:
When I start into heat capacity I contrast the temperature of a substance with the feeling of hot and cold. A thermometer will tell you the temperature of a substance, but that does not tell you how much heat is present. If you touch something, you can tell if it is hotter or colder than your hand, but what about two substances at the same temperature?
Suppose outside it is -10 C (14 F) and there you find a piece of steel and a piece of Styrofoam. Which is colder? If you touch the steel it feels colder than the Styrofoam, but they are both at the same temperature. If you placed the steel on the Styrofoam, no heat will flow between them (Third Law of thermodynamics). Since your hand is much hotter than the objects, heat must flow from your hand into them.
Although the obvious “pro” of recording is to give students the chance to listen numerous times; review the material; and listen to missed lectures, there is a huge “con” and that is they skip class and opt to listen to my lectures at home. Last year the attendance dropped to half because lectures are available on line, but this year the time has been shifted to 8:30 a.m. from 10:30. I am going to predict that very few will want to attend at that hour.
Thermo does take time to become familiar and I try many ways to get these ideas over. I think that it helps some when I tell them that when I was a student taking thermo, I failed my first midterm.
One question I pose every year to my physical chemistry class of life science students in the first lecture is “Where is chemical energy stored?” Almost all of them say in chemical bonds. Ask how the energy is released, and they say “When bonds are broken.”
a required course on physical chemistry that deals with entropy and laws, ugh this is not what they want to know and, besides, “How useful will it be?” they naively ask. The problem is that it is impossible to avoid the use of mathematics, and they are not motivated to work through simple derivations.
HOW do we know the other particle “magically assumes” the opposite state, rather than it just had the opposite state all the time?
The answer is “nobody knows because it makes no physical sense”. When a physicist is asked how this happens, they indeed invoke the word “magic” as in quantum magic or quantum weirdness.
But if the model does stand up, what have I accomplished? There is presently no experimental way to distinguish between one or two axes of quantization. Including counterfactual coincidences can be rejected out of hand and quantum mechanics still viewed as complete. The mechanics of applying quantum will not change. Having the option to accept local reality might have a salving effect on those generations of physicists who have been brought up believing the Copenhagen Interpretation and Bell. One can sigh a sigh of relief that non-locality is history and Nature is both real and deterministic, at least for spin. That would make a lot of people happy.
When there are nagging doubts about something in my work I worry about them until they make sense. Experience shows me that if I brush something aside, it comes back later to bite me. So I feel that those in the field of quantum information must have the same uneasiness about non-locality. and a stubborn, even defensive, acceptance of Bell’s theorem. So there must be a sense of paranoia about this inexplicable property. Local realists are a thorn, and I will only shut up if I am shown to be wrong, or some other viable local realistic explanation comes along.
Nonetheless, the Moderators (of ArXiv) blacklisted me in 2009, denying me the exposure that others have, and for unknown reasons too. When I asked for the reasons, I get a note with no name, other than signed by “the Moderators” stating that in order to find out why they blacklisted me, I should submit the paper for publication.
By the way, most of the papers on the archives never get published.
I am, by the way, an interloping chemist. I actually think that not being brought up in physics has helped me see through the EPR paradox, but I can actually concur with the earlier negative responses I got as I blundered onto the field and asked stupid questions like, “What is the mechanism for teleportation?”.