# The Neutrino: A Counter Example to the Second Law of Thermodynamics

by Joseph M. Brown

The kinetic particle model of the neutrino was first discovered in 1968-9 and published in Brown and Harmon [1]. All that was known at that time was that the neutrino had to be the result of a complete condensation of the ether gas which pervades the universe. Shortly after that time it was discovered that the Maxwell-Boltzmann parameters vr and vm arranged in the form [(vr—vm)/vm]2 had the value 1/137.1. Since vr and vm characterize the gas that makes up the ether and the magnitude of the parameters so arranged was close to the fine structure constant [2], the researchers were encouraged that the kinetic particle approach to physical theory must have merit.

A little over ten years later it was discovered that if background particles were condensed, as required by the neutrino model, and aligned to all move in the same direction without changing their individual speeds, then if they were squeezed together so they all touched each other without changing their energy then the condensed assembly would translate at the speed vr—vm (see [3] and [4]). Thus, it was known that the speed of light is vr—vm.

Further, the condensation and acceleration process described above provided a means for extracting background particles, which were forming the condensed state. However, it was not known at that time (1982) how the background particles could come in from the background and result in a complete condensation. It was not known how this condensation could be possible until 2012 [5].

The following paragraphs outline the rigorous analysis of the neutrino. This is a proof that a stable inhomogeneous state of Newtonian particles can exist. This analysis shows that the second law of thermodynamics is not universally true. In this analysis the ether gas is made of brutino particles and is called the brutino gas.

In order to explain how the neutrino works let us begin with an imaginary apparatus for simulating a fluid-mechanic sink. We begin with a hollow sphere and place twenty equally spaced holes in it. Also in between three adjacent holes insert a long, small tube into the sphere as shown in the figure. The tube area is much smaller than each of the twenty holes. At the end of the tube opposite the sphere, place a vacuum pump. Place the apparatus in the brutino gas.

Start the vacuum pump. Gas will begin flowing into the sphere and out the tube. The inflow will be nearly spherically symmetric. The asymmetry is produced by the exit tube. The mass flow rate out the tube is approximately given by

m = (0.649 ρo)(πre2)(0.7vm0)
=1.43ρorevm0

The inflow velocity for the sphere with radius $r_i$, averaged over that sphere, is approximately one fourth the velocity into the tube times (re/ri)2, i.e., vs ≈ (0.7vm0/4)((re/ri)2)2. The flow will be nearly spherically symmetric. Let us remove the sphere of radius ri. The flow at radius ri will be more uniform. We want to discuss the flow for varying values of re but we will discuss the flow at ri where we take ri to be 10re.

First we let ri be much larger than the mean free path. The flow velocity at radius ri will be the sonic speed of the gas divided by 4((re/ri)2)2, i.e., the sonic speed divided by 400. The speed, obviously, is limited by particles moving radially outward which impede the inward flow.

Let us scale everything downward. We can do this with our imaginary apparatus. Let us make $r_e$ so small that ri will be equal to the mean free path divided by 2, i.e., let ri=l/2 and re= l/20. The reason this can be done is that the mean free path of the gas is fixed – independent of the apparatus. Thus we let ri be l/2 and re is simply ri/10 or re=l/20. Now gas particles entering the sphere of radius re, on the average, can travel a distance of one diameter without colliding with another particle. As a result the flow rate into sphere of radius ri will increase with the result that the particle density will increase. This density increase will decrease the transverse (tangential in contrast to radial) displacement as the particles travel inward. This increased density will result in more particles per unit time entering the exit tube of radius re. As the exiting rate increases there are fewer particles opposing the inward flow. As a result the particle density can increase to a near solid.

If the flow rate is very low, i.e., for very small m which translates to very small values of $r_e$, solidification does not occur. Particles entering the sphere of radius $r_i$ essentially can traverse the whole sphere (a distance of $2r_i$) without encountering another particle coming from any direction. The inflow rate is so low that there is no noticeable increase in particle density and, thus, no chance for solidification.

From the above two paragraphs we see that for a given gas there exists a small range of values of m which will produce solidification. When solidifications occurs the exit area becomes very small. Further, when solidification occurs the inflow reaches sonic speed since there is no back pressure to impede the inward flow. The surface where the flow is at sonic speed has a radius $r_c$, the sonic sphere radius.

From these previous arguments we know that solidification requires an inflow rate m such that the sonic sphere radius is approximately equal the mean free path. In Chapters 4 and 5 based upon the strong nuclear force we were able to obtain an estimate of the sonic sphere radius. We estimated its value as $r_c = 7.50 \times 10^{-16}/(2.35 \times 10^{-16}) = 3.19l_0$. Solidification presumably could occur for values of $r_c$ somewhat higher as well as somewhat lower than 3.19l. Our best estimate is that $3.19l_o$ is the optimal value of $r_c$.

Let us now ask how the gas particles get out of the sphere. As they approach solidification they will begin circulating about the assemblage diameter which is parallel to the assemblage transport velocity. They circulate since there is no other way to escape. In order to balance linear momentum part of the mass will flow out the back and part forward.

The gas that flows forward is the key to this whole assembly and, thus, the key to all organization in the universe. The particles which enter the back side of the forward flowing particles at the center of the sonic sphere have an average velocity $v_{m_0}$ of the background gas. Also, as they enter the central region they still have a distribution of speeds. The rms speed $v_{r_0}$ is $3/8\pi$ times the mean speed, $v_{m_0}$. The particles are not completely packed. As they are accelerated forward and continually compressed on the (cylindrical) side, they get packed solid. When packed completely solid they obviously have the same velocity. Packing is accomplished without adding energy. Thus the transport velocity must increase from $v_{m_0}$ to $v_{r_0}$ – an 8% increase in velocity. The whole assembly then translates at the velocity $v_{r_0} – v_{m_0}$.

The mechanism of the neutrino gives the magnitude of fundamental angular momentum as $ħ/2 = 10^{-35} kg \times m^2/s$ which is the basic scaling parameter for all quantum mechanics and thus practically everything we observe. The value of magnitude of angular momentum is directly dependent upon the strength of the sink, which is the vacuum pump at the core of the neutrino. The random motion of the brutino gas can produce sink strengths which vary by many orders of magnitude. If we begin monitoring the inflow with a very weak sink we find the brutinos are not directed toward the sink. Those entering a mean-free-path sized sphere are equally likely to exit anywhere over the sphere. As the flow strength increases, the particles are guided toward the center of the sphere, i.e., to the point sink, by other inflowing particles. The flow into the sink reaches a maximum then for further increases in sink strength more particles enter the mean-free-path sphere and particles coming from the opposite direction begin interfering with the flow. Eventually, there is no condensation just as there was for the very weak sinks. The optimum flow is produced by the strength in between the weak flow which has very limited guidance toward the sink and the strong flow which has particles meeting the inflowing particles and stagnating the inflow.

The neutrino thus is a stable assemblage of Newtonian particles. The discovery of its mechanism hinged on understanding the behavior of gas flows that occur in a region the size of the mean free path and that particles aligned but with distributed velocities which are forced to solidify and thus have one velocity without changing their energy must have their transport velocity increase.

The neutrino is a counter example to the second law of thermodynamics.

References:

1. Brown, J.M., Harmon, Jr. D.B., “A Kinetic Particle Theory of Physics,” J. Mississippi Academy of Sciences, VXVIII, Pages 1-26, 1972.
2. Brown, J.M., Harmon Jr., D.B., and Wood, R.M., “A Note on the Fine Structure Constant,” Mc Donnell Douglas Astronautics Company Paper MDAC WD 1372 Huntington Beach, CA, June 1970.3. Brown 2nd Law Abstract
3. Brown, J.M., “Force Production from Interacting Gas Flows for BMD Applications”, Final Report on U. S. Army Contract DAS6-80-C-0034 Administered by U. S. Army Ballistic Missile Defense Agency, Box 1500, Huntsville, Al. 35807, October 1, 1981.
4. Brown, J.M., “A Counter Example to the Second Law of Thermodynamics”, Abstract p.98, Journal of the Mississippi Academy of Sciences, Vol. XXVI Supplement, 1981. Available from Basic Research Press.
5. Brown, Joseph M., The Neutrino, ISBN: 978-0-9712944-7-9, Basic Research Press, Starkville, MS, 2011.