ABV

Sure, the degree of freedom still exist. However, the magnetic field will reduce fluctuations on this degree of freedom. Therefore, this reduction of fluctuation on this degree of freedom will reduce the heat capacity of substance.

During magnetic spin polarization, the substance are losing one of the vibrational degree of freedom. This changes a heat capacity of substance and temperature goes up. When paramagnetic element away from magnetic field then substance are getting this vibration degree of freedom back and temperature does down. It seems like law of momentum conservation what is working on nuclear level. I'm sorry about confusion with terminology "distortion of entropy". It's unofficial name of this process. However, I like it better.

May be you right. However, polarizing of magnetic spins and decreasing an entropy inside substance won't allow to happen magnetocaloric effect. In this case the temperature will remain the same.

Looks like "distortion of entropy" confuses everybody. Based on second thermodynamic law the entropy should stay same or goes higher for isolated systems. So, when magnetic field polarize magnetic spins, then the entropy cannot be decreased for isolated systems. However, the entropy "changes its own shape" and temperature goes higher for substance with polarized magnetic spins. So, this I call it as distortion of entropy.

The magnetic field could distort entropy of substance and change its temperature. Based on this, possible build a kind of virtual demon of Maxwell, which is based on the distortion of entropy of the substance. This distortion of entropy also allow to have virtual locations with different temperature. In case with magnetocaloric effect the different temperature virtual locations is exists when observed object is present in this location. Will this machine work? This example shows machine which utilize the magnetocaloric effect This example contains a electromagnet, a paramagnetic element which connected with piston and cylinder with gas. All system is experiencing a gravity force. At initial time, based on magnetocaloric effect the electromagnet will increase temperature of paramagnetic from T1 to T2. The paramagnetic element will heat a gas which will increase its internal energy. This increase of internal energy will make a gas expansion into cylinder and the piston will remove paramagnetic element from magnetic field of the electromagnet. The temperature of the paramagnetic element will be decreased and it will start cool down the gas from temperature T2 to T1. This will reduce the gas internal energy and it will reduce a pressure of gas inside the cylinder. The piston will move into initial position and it will return the paramagnetic element into magnetic field of the electromagnet again.

Thank you for reading a problem with balloon from my blog. As I said, this problem would be easy calculate rather than ferromagnetic material into magnetic field. You're absolutely right. The calculation contains simplified conditions and these numbers are not realistic However, I would like calculate more realistic numbers for maximum height of the balloon and compare potential energy of load relative to earth and energy spent to compress the gas of balloon. I would appreciate to everyone who would help with this calculation.

Not sure if the refrigeration process could be used in this case. In refrigeration process pressure and temp have dependency to each other in equation, and energy has direct conversion in thermodynamic systems. Here, one of the system is mechanic. The temperature as energy cannot be converted into work between equilibrium states in magnetic field. Same for example with balloon volume and work in gravity field. I think, the better answer will be a solution for problem. The example about balloon with load would be simpler than ferromagnetic object into magnetic field

How change of physical property of object could initiate exchange of energy between closed systems? Could please explain it?

Two closed systems are linked to each other. Both use same object. In one of this closed systems was spent energy to change physical property of shareable object. After this object transformation, other closed system changes it's own equilibrium state. Will the work in changes between equilibrium states of one closed system equal to quantity of the spent energy in other closed system? Details, how is this looks like. https://somephysicsideas.wordpress.com/2016/01/23/switch-theory/

I'm looking for physics lab which can do special research my physics hypotheses from this site. http://knol.google.com/k/paradox-of-classical-mechanics-2# I'm not physics scientist and hypotheses form this site wasn't written as scientific research document. I have a doubt about classical mechanic motion principle. The modern physics say the nature has two main translational and rotational motions with their own law of momentum conservation. My hypotheses introduces the nature has just one main rotational and translational motion with it's own law of momentum conservation and rotational motion and translational motion are part of this main motion. The modern physic says net off all translational momentums of all objects into isolated system will be a zero after repulsive action. My hypotheses says net off all translational momentums of all objects into isolated system will be a zero after repulsive action if all objects of isolated system will conduct translational motion only. If one of the object after repulsive action will conduct a translational and rotational motion then the net of all translational momentums of all objects into isolated system will not equal to zero. I made some experiment which it shown on my site. However, it is not enough to show good result without physics lab environment. I want to check it and spend some money for it and prove or disapprove this modern physics motion concept. I'm looking to physics lab which can do custom research and produce this experiment. Would it possible to do this in your lab? I would appreciate if you look into my site. Thank you

DO NOT CLOSE THIS TOPIC WITHOUT DISCUSSION! IF YOU THINK SCIENE IS RELIGION THAN I BETTER FIND ANOTHER FORUM AND I WILL BLAME THIS SITE FOREVER. http://knol.google.com/k/alex-belov/paradox-of-classical-mechanics-2/1xmqm1l0s4ys/9# The experiment_2 animations This is animation based on classical mechnics laws This is animation based on theory of standalone rotation with translation movement. The Natural Experiment 2. I made 3 successful experiments with 2 pencils. On all these experiments pencils with rotation movement have lower velocity than pencils without rotation. The theory is CORRECT. The simulator is WRONG. Build and materilas. 2 pencils and thin rubberband 3.5'' from Staples store. The rubberband repulce 2 objects(2 pencils). Two their parts have opposite velocities to each other. After initial action the rubberband has velocity zero. The rubberband mass much less then pencil mass. Here is some snapshots which shows experiment dynamic. Links to experiments movies (avi files) Experiment 2_1 Experiment 2_2 Experiment 2_3 Links to experiments pictures (zip files) Experiment 2_1 Experiment 2_2 Experiment 2_3 P.S. Before say something do natural experiment first and show results please.

http://knol.google.com/k/alex-belov/paradox-of-classical-mechanics-2/1xmqm1l0s4ys/9# Animated experiment 2 This is animation based on classical mechnics laws This is animation based on theory of standalon rotation with translation movement. The Nature Experiment 2. I made 3 successful experiments with 2 pencils. All these experiment shows different velocities between pencils. The theory is CORRECT. The simulator is WRONG. Here is some snapshots from experiment, which shows experiment dynamic. Links to experiments movies (avi files) Experiment 2_1 Experiment 2_2 Experiment 2_3 Links to experiments pictures (zip files) Experiment 2_1 Experiment 2_2 Experiment 2_3

D H. Just keep in mind. 2 movements. 2 trajectories. 2 acceleration2. 2 equations. and ONE force for both equations. This force must be split to rotation and translation parts. We do this miscalculation everytime because everybody did same error before. Why? Because standalone translation with rotation movement not included on classical mechanics book yet. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedAnother simulator glitch? Run Working Model and add rod and force into new project. Click Run on toolbar menu button The rod start moving with velocity 1.042. Stop simulation and attach motor into rods center. Torque 0 active t<0.01(IMPORTANT) Click Run on toolbar menu button The rod start rotating with velocity 0 Stop simulation and add circle with force into project. Click Run on toolbar menu button The rod start rotating with velocity 0 After collision the rod start moving. Stop simulation. Remove motor (Open properties windows. Select motor and click "Edit->Delete" submenu button) Change circle position. Click Run on toolbar menu button The rod and circle start moving with velocity 1.042 on opposite directions. After collision the rod and circle are changing directions. ==== Any comments? Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged The problem starts from speceship inbalance. The units problem is just a component which is multiply error.

Correct. This is classical mechanic says so. D H. I'm not a beginner of physics science. I've got some. I understand you are the one smart of the physics scientist. Because we are still talking about this idea:) Let's think logically. If an object takes acceleration on translation trajectory then this means a force applied to the object for translation movement. Correct? If an object takes acceleration on rotation trajectory then this means a force applied to the object for rotation movement. Correct? The net of these forces is resultant force which applied to the object. It's logic. The classical mechanics says - No. Force applied to the object with same values for both translation and rotation movements. However, the net of these forces is doubling resultant force. There is no logic. Why? The logic is sacrificing to law of momentum conservation for translation movement, which must work. However, the object starts 2 movements. If look back on experiment 2 then it shows how experimental rods conduct different movements. If base on classical mechanics models compare their kinetic energies and momentums then just one translation momentums have same values. This is not right. No symmetrical action. However, base on 3rd Newton's law symmetrical action must present on experiment. ==== Back to your good example about spaceships. You would probably have more information about their trajectories miscalculations relatively to center mass problem. If you would try to create a simple spaceship model which takes rotation with translation movement then the simulator is giving a wrong translation velocity result. If engine has a thrust with fixed value then no matter how spaceship rotates the translation velocity will be constant. Wrong. Practice says the spaceship with this miscalculation toward to cosmic garbage. The engineers usually build spaceships which avoid this center mass problem. This is not very friendly effects for rocket scientists. However, this effect brings new era to our civilization.

I don't see logic. Each part of force must do own job 2 Movements. Each movements has own acceleration and force. Net of these forces equal to applied to body force. For example, if apply these force separately then part of force need for translation movement and another part for rotation movement. If apply same value of initial forces for both movements then rod will have const translation velocity plus depended on applied radius angular velocity. But sum of forces values is doubling initial value. This is normal simulator behavior on wrong classical mechanics model. This is from real world: