Physical Energy = Thermal Energy

It seems rather simple to imagine biokinetic energy being converted into gravitational potential energy should the amount of energy needed to switch which pole is positive and which negative is less than that gained during the length of time the bugs reproduce and live swimming from one side to the other. One simply builds a gearing system that the bugs swim through, pushing weights out of the water, provided the bending of their cilia does not wear out before they can reproduce.Now the rest of the text was The large one on the right is one of those mum's a words.
Also thread head to explain the prior illustration you might consider:

quote:

---

In A the cilia on the right are reversed, those on the left beat normally. This causes the animal to turn to the right as shown by the arrow. In B the same animal now faces the negative pole and is going toward it. A few cilia at the anterior end are beating in reverse, but those along both sides are beating normally and the animal moves directly to the negative wire. If the current is very strong (more batteries!) most of the cilia may be reversed as shown at C. This causes the animal to swim backwards toward the postitive wire. Sometimes the animals hit the negative wire and then become much more sensitive to the current so that they swim backwards to the positive pole even though the current has not been increased."

---

So if one worked with such a process of converting between kinetic and potential energy it seems possible to design an experimental philosophy in which biokinetic energy instead is converted into mechanical energy at the expense of biopotenial energy. There would need to be a discipline of science to undertake this however.I have for years been thinking about how to extract energy from living form-making but until recently I had always thought that the creatures had to be killed in the process. It seems to me now that if the species are still living it might be possible to decrease the genetic recombintoriality without affecting the effective phenotype (except making the species more suspectible to extinction)(and only ethically but not actually depricatable thus no matter the thermal notion etc). I dont think that in the converse of the system that is clearer as in the begining of this post above, no matter how inverted, will show that heat and kinetic energy are the same. So I dont think your synthesis is as correct as all analysis was. But working out the different views of quantum mechanics in such expts reamains to be discussed (say Born vs Bohr etc).Meanwhile in my own analysis of such a set up, there would be a decrease in the number of recombination possibilites as energy is extracted from a biopotential(energy) but the quantum states would have to increase if the reversed expt works. It will require a lot of study and tests to even get a blue print for the forward expt in your question.What species are postively and negative galvantropic and why????etcThat seems doable but *friction* would not need apply as I think you used it, if the kinds used can divide biologically and stay alive during the energy extraction. Yes, there might be some effect if microevolution ALSO occurred for the duration but I think the logics would not purport your equivalence. Instead I think the philosophy of quantum mechanics will simply change.Oh, also the ethical concerns could be addressed by only allowing energy extraction from live life should the kinds undergoing 1st law thermo affects in the lab be put into ecosystem engineering "focus" groups in the field - so as to prevent any knowable man caused extinctions of non human monophylees by finding better where the bugs fit into the total Lotka-Volterra phases of biomatter.

Yes the bo bos was a play. I could have picked any names on quantums.Humans as batteries? well, I would have to explain more about the history of Volta-Galvani. Faraday worked with chemicals in order to get beyond the difference.Yes, I did use "biopotential" and "biokinetic" as short hand terms.
I simply meant potential energy or kinetic energy in biological objects. Biokinetic was fairily obvious being simply the energy of the motion of the Paramecium and thus I might have simply called it locomotion. What I wanted to get at was Clausius's notion of "least body" relative to the equation in the thread head and specifically I wanted to distinguish the kinetic energy computed from the theory of gases, different probability interpretations of quantum mechanics and and kinetic energy in the sense that Percy has recently discussed. I have not been able to work out all of these variations, thus the call for the reverse expt and me ending with a play on words. This goes to the discussion on internal energy.Regardless, if the protozoa can actually raise weights out of water thus converting the kinetic energy of locomotion into potential gravitational energy at the (energetic) cost of electrically switching the absolute values anode and cathode signs and given that some OTHER kinds can move in the opposite direction OR simply twist and turn I inferred that I would be able to distinguish biokinetic energy of a different kind than simple enumeration of quantum states.In any case it would not permit the asscociation of heat, kinetic energy, physical energy and thermal energy. I'll explain more later. I am off for break. I wont be back for a week or so.I have not developed this part of the argument in this thread and said only scattered things around the board on it and the notion of biopotential which would rigorously seperate vis viva from molecular potential energy. I assumed that protein expression can? maintain molecular potentials irrespective of quantum states of vis viva, no matter the heritibility of the internal energy and granting the standard overemphasis on natural selection I supposed in line more with Dennent than Gould that such optimized could produced creatures adapted in the figure of Gladyshev's interference with the genome phenotpes able to continue "give off" energy by a process that seems to reverse the direction of Gibbs minimization but instead is a pure issue in quantum mechanics. Molecular substitutions in lipids occurr at a faster rate than say DNA in organisms accordiing to Georgi and each expt equipment must be designed on the basis of the taxa specific correlation but because the protozoans provided so many different qualities with respect to galvantropisms I trusted my biological intuition that mutations for this suffienceny can be found if looked for. I could be wrong.So the machine would work by degrading the Gibbs' minimization prior changes INCREASING the "entropy" of quantum state ordinations' numbers. All of this stuff questionable stuff is about using the clearer model indeed of having a paramecium lift a weight like a human above our heads as the observable base to continue an investigation that indeed could disproove the equation of physical and thermal energy by brining biology to bear on the linguistics of "vis viva" under a more advanced molecular biology of the molecular potential of configuration held in any given form.

quote:

---

Biokinetic and biopotential energies are complex, high-level energies, in my current understanding. But if I got it right, you're saying that biopotential energy (does this range from the lowest level of DNA (potential expression) to the highest level (a dormant organism) ? ) gets converted to mechanical energy via biokinetic energy (does this range from the lowest level of cell reproduction / gene expression to the highest level of an active organism?) ? So, like throwing a baseball?

---

They are "high" level energies only in the sense that science does not have Gladyshev's difference of hierarchical and phenomenological thermodynamics integrated. If the proposal works this will eventually just be a logical hierarchy of our present understanding but in terms of the biology possessing some properties genetically not found in other chemical mixes it is obviously correct to name it "high level" as it depends on reproduction of cells. The real issue is more about how physics might have lost too much of inner sight with foucus on nuclear process etc but that is pure opinion and thus not something I should be really saying etc.So indeed- "biopotential energy" from the form's molecular potential energy might get in such a device converted into increasing the number of quantum states per the biology involved into work without being identically thermal energy through vis viva of REACTING to electrolytic flows fundamentally genomic and on the lowest DNA level (but also involving lipids etc) and the "base balls" that the critter throws are not exceptions to physics but different relations of overvolatages to purely chemical electrolytic rxns(ions) concomittant with increased friction of the bugs on the device electrodes. Note that somehow the protozoans can get more sensitive to the affect. How does that chemically occurr? or is it purely bioelectric??your understanding is good enough for brad work.

i dont see that that necessarily follows. You would have to say that the paraflagellar body of anEuglenaian preinsertion kinetsome morphological place is such muscle if one ^consistently^ attempted to extrapolote from the first form I introduced (paramecium). The MECHANICAL energy would be in the machine that extracts the energy and if I am thusly correct the gain physically will ony be lost recomBinatorially during reproduction ( Opposite effect of inbreeding?). It could be thought of muscle though. I dont.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 03-17-2005 12:13 PM

quote:

---

There is no energy present within machines.We can introduce energy to engines by using a fuel or other source of energy,or in this case by the gravitational potential energy becoming kinetic energy in the falling water.

---

Figure from Lerner's "The Genetic Basis of Selection"
I use the introduction of the region in yellow in to the device. amoeba galvantropism
Now imagine it due to internal changes and you have the thing without the muscle I suggested above.I was suggesting that the these ion basebaseballs are acutually under adaptive control. I might be wrong. But a little googling did not so indicate.If the device was built(@"external"etc) to move the creatures into the inbreeding line in yellow places and the molecular potential lateralization is restricted to place R in terms of the ion electrophoresis(an additional design constraint I have not investigated), the mechanical difference in genetic variance on inbreeding might be extracted between JorK and Z IN A LINE and THUS.. the changes in the amoeba and even possibly some bacteria(other research not reported) might work the EFFECT of ion lateralization on the molecular potential physically subject to heritability and thus the potential energy WOULD INDEED have a kinetic result irrespecitve of the metazoan intuition(such as "falling water") even if the relation of the quantum mechanics is not what I suspect in the same figuration between lipids and bases said.The place is that on inbreeding the genetic variance decreases within lines and these lines might power machines kinematically but not other living things EXACTLY as these researchers noted is not likely due as

quote:

---

The results presented are difficult to reconcile with the attempt to explain the cell galvanotaxis as a consequence of the membrane protein lateral electrophoresis or electroosmosis.

---

.
Thus given actual reasearch my idea still can hold its conceptual end at the place of Sidelined note ,of, Newton's first law. Indeed it might be the statistical differences of heritbility under Gladyshev's law and not inertia keep the thing moving(without attributing which is alive and what is not) provided the inbreeding does not terminate the line of reproduction.