The Etp Model Has Been Empirically Confirmed

[Futilitist]

P.S. I forgot to mention last night, as it was so late, that this "PPS" notion seems to flip-flop (conveniently?) between the "system" associated with a single well - as shown in one of Fute's recently copy-pasted diagrams - and some sort of generalised "system" for the entire oil production of the planet, including all oil wells in existence.

The only person confused by the diagram is you.

It is the latter where the real absurdity arises of course, as new wells are constantly being added and old ones discontinued. It's nuts to extrapolate from the undoubted limits for extraction from a single well to the whole world's constantly changing flux of resources.

How does that answer my question:

So, why are the three nested control volumes used in the Etp model invalid?

You must now explain specifically why the three nested control volumes used in the Etp model are not valid.

All you say is: "It's nuts to extrapolate from the undoubted limits for extraction from a single well to the whole world's constantly changing flux of resources."

Once again, you don't say why.

Just saying something's nuts is not a valid argument. So your comment is just another useless declaration, an arrogant, vacuous argument from authority. It is utterly empty and meaningless in a real scientific discussion. Do you even understand this? Aren't you the least bit embarrassed?

I begin to suspect that this Hills bloke may be a retired petroleum engineer who has gone mad in his old age. There is no evidence that "The Hills Group" is actually a commercial organisation, as it claims to be, or that it has any members at all, apart from the founder.

Ha ha. There is no evidence that you are a real person either. Prove that you are not some old, right wing, peak oil denying propagandist doing this for a paycheck. Prove this entire forum isn't financed by Rupert Murdock.

Give me a break. We are talking about physics. Your argument is that BWHill is somehow lying? The burden of proof is on you. Prove it.

Wait, actually don't. You are just trying to change the subject again.

And you completely missed this question yet again:

And, while you are at it, please explain why a model that you keep saying couldn't possibly work keeps working, nonetheless. The Etp model uses your beloved laws of thermodynamics to correctly forecast the yearly average oil price from 1960-2013 with an accuracy of 96.5%, making it the most accurate price forecasting tool ever devised. The model is logical and well designed. It should fill your heart with scientific pride! You are just denying reality and expecting people to take your word.

Why should we trust you, while not trusting our own eyes and common sense? Using only the production history of oil and the second law of thermodynamics, the Etp model has accurately forecast the price of oil with an accuracy of 96.5%. So, if we accept that the oil production history is at least reasonably accurate, and we accept that the laws of thermodynamics are real and accurate, then the Etp model must be doing what it seems to be doing. The Etp model is accurately forecasting the price of oil.

So, if the Etp model can't possibly work, how come the Etp model works?

So go ahead and ignore my questions again, Mr. Science. You lost the argument a long time ago. Like I said before, if this is really the best you can do, the Etp model has been validated by sciforums.com.

Yes, where the black line begins to dip was the time Obama opened previously stocked US national oil reserves to the general market. It was in response to a dangerous climb in oil prices on the general market, which threatened the entire US economy. Apparently it had the desired effect, a temporary drop in price resulting in stimulation of the economy.

What a stupid comment. There is no support for anything you just said! You can't possibly really believe anything this bizarre. Saying you do is disingenuous.

And seriously, how did you just happen to post that drivel just moments after exchemist posted his? The thread had been quiet for more than 24 hours before the two of you just happened to post back to back, within 6 minutes of each other:

My last post: Yesterday at 9:39 PM

excehemist's post: Today at 2:53 AM

Write4U's post: Today at 2:59 AM

You are just putting up a useless, distracting post between exchemist and any post I might make challenging him. That has the convenient effect of messing up the continuity of the thread so it is hard for the readers to notice how deceptive and disingenuous exchemist really is. You are obviously just shielding exchemist from having one of my posts appear next to one of his, while making the page basically unreadable. You guys are like professional tag team wrestlers!

And you started out vaguely pretending to agree with me. What a joke!

This thread proves two important things:

1) The Etp model is valid.

2) This is not a real science forum.



---Futilitist

 

[Kristoffer]

This should be moved to Conspiracies after that dumb outburst.

 

[Beer w/Straw]

How is this Etp thing, science? Could I use thermodynamics to say... Make predictions about the lumber industry? Gold mining? Prostitution?

 

[Futilitist]

This should be moved to Conspiracies after that dumb outburst.

This should be moved to the top of the physics forum since we have just established the validity of the Etp model.

And my outburst was completely justified.

And you are nothing but a troll.

How is this Etp thing, science? Could I use thermodynamics to say... Make predictions about the lumber industry? Gold mining? Prostitution?

Yes, yes, and yes, provided your models are correctly designed. Especially the first two, since they are extractive industries that are subject to depletion.

"The history of resource depletion is as old as the history of mankind. Depletion is the inevitable consequence of resource extraction, and falls into the same category as death and taxes. The Emperor Constantine in 340 AD was forced to mint a gold coin, the Solidus, as a substitute for the silver coinage of the Roman Empire. Depletion at their Rio Tinto mines in Iberia had reduced the output of their primary source of silver. Coal extraction from surface operations in Britain, which began in the second century AD, came mostly to a conclusion in the 1990's when the majority of their mines became too deep and veins too narrow to continue operations. Depletion has taken its toll with these, and with many other minerals through time.

Today we face the advancing depletion of another vital resource. It is demonstrating this with characteristic symptoms: declining or stagnated production, rising price, declining quality, and fierce competition for remaining reserves. Conventional crude production has not increased since the mid 2000's, its price has increased over 450% in a decade, and we are getting continual reports that vast sums of money are being earmarked for reserves that only a few decades ago where considered to be of little value by the industry. Refineries are being re-engineered to process heavier, metallically contaminated, and high sulfur crude. Petroleum is displaying typical symptoms of latter stage depletion.

Determining the depletion state of a resource is, however, not merely a matter of determining how much of the resource remains in the ground. Rio Tinto's deposits still contain considerable amounts of silver, and we hear frequent reports of attempts to re-open old mine sites or start new ones. British citizens are undoubtedly still walking over huge deposits of coal. A resource's depletion state has as much to do with the efficiency with which it can be extracted and used as it has to do with the quantity of resource remaining in the ground. To define oil's depletion state it is necessary to look at the efficiency with which crude oil can be extracted, processed, and used. Therefore it is necessary to understand why petroleum is produced, and then be able to analysis the entire production process; not just the extraction portion. The Quality Control Engineer defines this as determining "fitness for use". To define crude oil's depletion state we must first determine the quantity of it that is "fit for use"."
~BWHill

As far as prostitution goes, you just need the right boundary conditions for your control volumes. Otherwise you can easily lose thermodynamic equilibrium. It goes without saying, of course, that "fitness for use" must be properly assessed!

The laws of thermodynamics are very powerful and useful.



---Futilitist

 

[Beer w/Straw]

Yes, yes, and yes, provided your models are correctly designed. Especially the first two, since they are extractive industries that are subject to depletion.

The laws of thermodynamics are very powerful and useful.

Say, I'm a prostitute in, Toronto. Fair enough clientele. By use of the laws of thermodynamics, however, I may be able to predict that there is another city where I could make more money as a prostitute, yes?

:EDIT:

Or, more to the point, when prostitution will become unprofitable as a whole.

 

[Futilitist]

Say, I'm a prostitute in, Toronto. Fair enough clientele. By use of the laws of thermodynamics, however, I may be able to predict that there is another city where I could make more money as a prostitute, yes?

:EDIT:

Or, more to the point, when prostitution will become unprofitable as a whole.

I think you are finally "getting it". Or at least you will be, if you do the physics right.

You could call it the End Times Prostitution model!!!



---Futilitist

 

[Beer w/Straw]

I think you are finally "getting it". Or at least you will be, if you do the physics right.

Oh, I'll be "getting it" as I'm good at what I do.

All I have to do is put my mind to it, thanks.

 

[exchemist]

This should be moved to Conspiracies after that dumb outburst.

No, this is fun. I want to see what fonts and colour schemes we can get.

Seriously though, I've rather given up trying to talk to Fute, since he clearly can't understand the nature of my objections and seems only capable of restating what he's told us, in larger and more colourful fonts.

But I am intrigued by the idea that somebody thinks they can define a thermodynamic system encompassing everything in the economy to do with oil production, and be confident they can account for all the mass and energy flows in and out of this system, and their bulk properties, in such a way that they can calculate the entropy change of the system over time.

Fute thinks that just by shouting louder and louder about "nested control volumes" he has dealt satisfactorily with this issue. But then he doesn't know what a control volume is anyway: he looks it up in Hill's book and regurgitates partial differential equations at random. But Hill is clearly bonkers or megalomaniac enough to think he has really done it.

 

[Write4U]

[write4u,
What a stupid comment. There is no support for anything you just said! You can't possibly really believe anything this bizarre. Saying you do is disingenuous.

Liberal billionaire George Soros suggested that President Barack Obama release oil from the country’s strategic reserves to lower gas prices and “ruin” Russia’s energy-dependent economy.
Soros told a panel in Berlin last week that the best way to sanction Russia for its actions in Ukraine “is in the hands of the United States,” because its oil reserves can depress the price of oil, reports Bloomberg.
“The strongest deterrent is in the hands of the United States because it can release oil from the strategic oil reserve, which would then reduce the price of oil, and that would ruin the Russian economy, which lives on oil,” he told Marketplace in an interview published Wednesday.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/27/g...elease-strategic-oil-reserves-to-ruin-russia/

And seriously, how did you just happen to post that drivel just moments after exchemist posted his? The thread had been quiet for more than 24 hours before the two of you just happened to post back to back, within 6 minutes of each other:
My last post: Yesterday at 9:39 PM
excehemist's post: Today at 2:53 AM
Write4U's post: Today at 2:59 AM

You are just putting up a useless, distracting post between exchemist and any post I might make challenging him. That has the convenient effect of messing up the continuity of the thread so it is hard for the readers to notice how deceptive and disingenuous exchemist really is. You are obviously just shielding exchemist from having one of my posts appear next to one of his, while making the page basically unreadable. You guys are like professional tag team wrestlers!

And seriously, are you really that paranoid to suspect an elaborate conspiracy between Exchemist and I to suppress your truth?

.................

..

And you started out vaguely pretending to agree with me. What a joke!

I was being generous and openminded.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle[/quote].....

 

[exchemist]

And seriously, are you really that paranoid to suspect an elaborate conspiracy between Exchemist and I to suppress your truth? Phfewwwwww

I was being generous and openminded.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Aristotle

Amazing!!

 

[Beer w/Straw]

As far as prostitution goes, you just need the right boundary conditions for your control volumes. Otherwise you can easily lose thermodynamic equilibrium. It goes without saying, of course, that "fitness for use" must be properly assessed!

"Fitness for use"? Those words could also be used for qualifications in the oil industry: location i.e. quantity and quality, equipment performance... There are many variables to look at in both prostitution and oil production.

 

[krash661]

You thought it was super important to make a side comment to Russ_Watters on the changing graphic design specs of my posts after ignoring my valid questions contained in those very posts for about the last 3 pages now. And you still have not answered my questions. WTF?!

I was right. You are faking an argument. Badly.

And you are afraid to answer me directly because you can't come up with a good response. That is because you are wrong.

If you don't have anything better, I guess we can consider the validity of the Etp model to be confirmed.

Thank you for your time.



---Futilitist

ahh yes, yes.. another hypocritical post.. address this post, #537
interesting, i see a hypocrite now...
answer questions from post #525 -532..
it's that simple, pathetic one.

 

[krash661]

So, if the Etp model can't possibly work, how come the Etp model works?

So go ahead and ignore my questions again, Mr. Science. You lost the argument a long time ago. Like I said before, if this is really the best you can do, the Etp model has been validated by sciforums.com.

i would not mind looking over THE ACTUAL TRACK RECORD, if there is one, which there SHOULD be one. this chart shows nothing. it's that simple. so once again, it's time to put up or shut up.
submit the actual track record of trades from this model, which at least should go back five years or so.
let me guess.. there is no track record. just some guy who drew a line on paper and says 'see it works'. i want to see results. not fictitious words.
IT'S THAT SIMPLE

 

[krash661]

i just want to see the point during the running of this model [at least it should have been tested], where this algorithm collapses. all these algorithms collapse, it's due to the many variables and deltas occurring in the same moment.

i already know you have no clue what i'm asking on all my post, which is why you're hypocritically sidestepping my questions.
again, experience divides the fictitious ones from the actual knowledgeable ones.

 

[Write4U]

a) Thermodynamics addresses the transfer of heat form a source system to another system which is able to absorb heat.

If a system in thermodynamic equilibrium is homogeneous, then its state can be described by a few physical variables, which are mostly classifiable as intensive variables and extensive variables
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamics#System_models

Can Price be considered a thermodynamical property?

 

[exchemist]

a) Thermodynamics addresses the transfer of heat form a source system to another system which is able to absorb heat.



Can Price be considered a thermodynamical property?

Clearly not.

Price is a function of the balance between Supply and Demand for a good (except in cases where it is artificially regulated) and as such is an Economic property. Nobody can derive a valid model for the price of something except by predicting the supply and demand for it (and any applicable artificial regulation).

 

[Futilitist]

Clearly not.
Price is a function of the balance between Supply and Demand for a good (except in cases where it is artificially regulated) and as such is an Economic property.

exchemist,

In your view, is the economy a thermodynamic system?

Nobody can derive a valid model for the price of something except by predicting the supply and demand for it (and any applicable artificial regulation).

You sound very sure of yourself. But yet the Etp model does the very thing you keep saying is impossible. It forecast the yearly average price of oil from 1960-2013 with an accuracy of 96.5%. And it accomplishes this supposedly impossible feat by applying the second law of thermodynamics, not supply and demand, as you keep claiming it must. But it still works anyway.

Do you have an explanation for this?

(Of course you are under no obligation to answer my questions if you are afraid you might embarrass yourself.)



---Futilitist

 

[krash661]

are you going to continue to sidestep my questions ?
why so ?

 

[Write4U]

Below is a scientific argument against the use of "entropy" (thermodynamics) in the calculation of depletion of durable goods.

Is the entropy law relevant to the economics of natural resource scarcity? ☆
Abstract
Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen and Herman Daly have argued that the entropy law imposes an absolute resource scarcity which cannot be overcome with technological change, exploration, or substitution.

On the contrary this paper argues that their critique is fundamentally flawed. The pessimistic scenario requires a concept of materials entropy which is highly problematic. Materials entropy cannot be defined independently of technology and it is impossible to aggregate over different types of materials to meaningfully talk about available versus unavailable matter in the aggregate. Failing a concept of materials entropy the critique fails since the earth is not closed with respect to energy.
☆
Professors Charles W. Howe and Kenneth E. Boulding both read and commented on an earlier draft of the paper. I acknowledge their help and encouragement. Naturally the views expressed in the paper as well as remaining errors are solely my responsibility. Copyright © 1991 Published by Elsevier Inc.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/009506969190040P

 

[Futilitist]

Hi Write4U.

On the contrary this paper argues that their critique is fundamentally flawed. The pessimistic scenario requires a concept of materials entropy which is highly problematic. Materials entropy cannot be defined independently of technology and it is impossible to aggregate over different types of materials to meaningfully talk about available versus unavailable matter in the aggregate. Failing a concept of materials entropy the critique fails since the earth is not closed with respect to energy.

The Etp model does not model materials entropy. It models the rate of entropy production over the life cycle of the oil production process. The design of the boundary conditions must be correct for any thermodynamic model. And the Etp model uses three nested control volumes to do the job. And it works! You can tell it works because the output of the model matches the yearly average price of oil from 1960-2013 to an accuracy of 96.5%, making it the most accurate price forecasting tool ever made.

Exchemist has made no real attempt to explain exactly why the three nested control volumes used in the Etp model are supposedly invalid. He just keeps exclaiming repeatedly that it is nuts and totally daft, etc. It's just his opinion, with absolutely no support given. And he hasn't even tried to explain why the Etp model supposedly can't work, but yet it actually does.

One would think an open minded truth seeker like yourself would be more impressed with the real, tangible results of the Etp model than you would be with the mere words of exchemist.

What do you make of the fact that the Etp model works despite all the unsupported claims from exchemist that it can't possibly work? Do you still think exchemist is right? If so, please explain why?



---Futilitist