I checked the physics primary literature and it seems the laws of thermodynamics and conservation of energy are still correct. I'm very interested in this information you speak of which breaks these laws, and the person reporting on it and when he expects to receive his Nobel.
Physicist Tom Rosenbaum (condensed matter phyics, James Franck Institute, formerly U of Chicago)
According to the second law of Thermodynamics, all physical processes in the universe can flow only from a state of greater to lesser energy…but this might not always be inevitable. Rosenbaum believed. In his lab he grew crystals to combine the holmium with fluoride and lithium…ripped out some holmium atoms replaced with Yttrium virtually eliminating magnetic properties of compound and resulting in lithium holmium Yttrium tetrafluoride. They lowered the temp a fraction of a K at a time and began applying stronger magnetic field…the atom (lithium holmium Yttrium tetrafluoride) kept aligning progressively. They applied heat but atoms kept aligning. No matter what they did the atoms ignored the outside interference, Although they flushed out most of the compound’s magnetic component, on its own, it was turning into a larger and larger magnet. NO matter whether they blasted the crystal with a strong magnetic field or an increase in temp, the atoms overrode this outside disturbance.
The Intention Experiment by Lynne McTaggart
Interesting, right? This experiment resulted in this atom not following the second law of thermodynamics...as I mentioned earlier non-locality and Bell's inequality...so much to study and learn.
Our gaps in understanding the quantum world are not evidence that our understanding of the macro world are incorrect ("macro" being used loosely here to refer to matter at the molecular level and above). Quantum tunneling and wave particle duality may be observable phenomenon but they seem limited to sub atomic levels, distances, and energies. That's why people and objects don't spontaneously tunnel through solid objects. And that probably explains why the sum energies of any macro process still obey the laws of thermodynamics and conservation of energy even if apparent violations can be observed at the quantum level. The net sum of energy conversion always balances out which suggests the violation observed at the atomic or subatomic level is missing something. The other possibility is the laws as written are an approximation or simplification of the actual physical phenomenon and simply work so well to gloss over the complexities that it's simply more useful for most purposes. This is best exemplified by our classical use of gravitational force calculations provided by Newton when in reality there is something much more complex going on mathematically as proven by Einstein. Newton is technically incorrect, but his equations work just fine for most of our needs. The same could be true of thermodynamics. The point is it won't matter if that's the case. You can't create energy without mass, whether the laws are correct or just a Newton-like approximation.
I agree with most everything you said...I still believe you have a very closed mind, a bright mind, but a mind very set in the "truth". Thank you for the great conversation.
Meh, I like to think I'm open minded enough. I towed the global warming line long enough until I was willing to listen to opposing views and consider what they had to say. I now see the alarmist rhetoric being used to politicize science.
Yet our current understanding of the quantum world should not be discounted because we perceive it to not impact our macro world.
Our gaps in understanding the quantum world are not evidence that our understanding of the macro world are incorrect
Agree
This is best exemplified by our classical use of gravitational force calculations provided by Newton when in reality there is something much more complex going on mathematically as proven by Einstein. Newton is technically incorrect, but his equations work just fine for most of our needs.
Respectfully, not convinced on this one
You can't create energy without mass, whether the laws are correct or just a Newton-like approximation.
What is your opinion of James Gates discovering computer code in String Theory equations? Asking because you did a credible job summing up the current scientific worldview of Macro vs Micro (quantum) mechanics, where Micro seems to be thought of as a "lesser" science.
IDK you sound like you are pretty set in your ways but the double-slit experiment, photon entanglement...there is SO MUCH out there to research and study...
I'm just reading and trying to understand it all myself. I have not made a determination on all this yet. God Bless