- A Forthcoming Scientific Paradigm Where Energy Wields Supreme Influence Over Chemical Reaction Outcomes -
Brandon E. Ogbolu, Principal Investigator
September 29, 2023 / updated: January 8, 2024
THEORY
I propose a new scientific paradigm that succeeds Chemistry, just as Chemistry succeeded Alchemy. Referred to as Energystia (pronounced “ener-jist-ee-uh”), this paradigm represents a forthcoming era where energy possesses unprecedented capabilities over mass and, consequently, chemical reactions, without any associated energy release during reactions.
The cornerstone of Energystia is The Savior’s Equation, which is a newly proposed scientific law stating that energy can programmatically interact with mass to produce a desired mass outcome, including mass replication, obliteration, or transmutation. The Savior’s Equation is expressed as “Programmatic energy + Mass → Desired mass.” The equation can be utilized to accomplish diverse and urgent tasks such as (1) duplicating water molecules to address water scarcity, e.g., “Programmatic energy + H2O → 2 H2O”; (2) eradicating carbon dioxide molecules to reduce greenhouse gasses and global temperatures, e.g., “Programmatic energy + CO2 → 0 CO2”; or (3) converting, say, carbon monoxide molecules into oxygen molecules for improved air quality, e.g., “Programmatic energy + CO → O2.” The chemical equations remain unbalanced in all three scenarios, with differing numbers of atoms in the reactants (left side of the arrow) and products (right side of the arrow). Furthermore, none of these reactions involve the release of energy.
Such a paradigm challenges two fundamental principles of Chemistry: the Law of Conservation of Mass and the Law of Conservation of Energy, both of which, by and large, govern every known chemical reaction today. The Law of Conservation of Mass implies that the number of atoms that go into a chemical reaction equals those that come out. Therefore, any proposed law suggesting the ability to create, destroy, or transform mass at the atomic or subatomic level is definitionally opposed to this law. The Law of Conservation of Energy states that energy is conserved in an isolated system. But considering the scenario when mass vanishes with no accompanying energy release (e.g., “Programmatic energy + CO2 → 0 CO2”), energy does not appear conserved. Both laws thus seem to invalidate The Savior’s Equation.
However, The Savior’s Equation suggests that programmatic energy is the ultimate equation balancer. Every equation is balanced when programmatic energy, in combination with some mass, is present on the left side of a chemical equation regardless of what appears on the right side. Therefore, energy may be conserved across a system by also considering what energy does to mass, including replicating mass, reducing it to nothingness, or transforming it into an entirely new substance.
While skepticism of this paradigm is understandable, Albert Einstein’s “E = mc^2” equation, conceptualized in 1905, all but points to its existence.[1] Einstein’s equation demonstrates two key principles that foreshadow Energystia: (1) the possibility of creating or destroying mass (converting it into or from energy) in an isolated system, challenging the Law of Conservation of Mass, especially in scenarios like nuclear reactions; and (2) the inherent superiority of energy as a form of mass, since energy can transform into mass by itself, but mass requires energy to transform into energy (challenging the idea that there is a limit to what energy can accomplish in any reaction).
Since the outcomes within Chemistry are wholly limited to the starting mass available in a chemical reaction, a new paradigm is required to account for a world where the starting mass bears minimal relevance to the desired product outcome. In this paradigm, energy, rather than mass, is the leading influencer of such outcomes. This is where Energystia gains significance. Einstein’s “E = mc^2” equation points to the plausibility of The Savior’s Equation and, consequently, Energystia.
Chemistry remains useful for describing known and newly discovered chemical reactions within its framework (i.e., reactions that abide by the Law of Conservation of Mass and the Law of Conservation of Energy). But Energystia offers the appropriate domain to tackle problems that inherently elude the lens of Chemistry. As the cornerstone of Energystia, The Savior’s Equation can be utilized to address the planet’s biggest challenges, like resource scarcity, climate change, and pollution.
The Three Laws of Energystia:
-
Superiority of Energy to Mass: Since energy can independently transform into mass, but mass requires energy to transform into energy, energy is a superior form of mass and is thus the lead influencer in the outcome of any reaction.
-
The Savior’s Equation: Energy can programmatically interact with mass to produce a desired mass outcome, including mass replication, obliteration, or transmutation.
-
Suppression of Energy Release: Just as energy can be programmed to shape mass in a desired way, energy can also be programmed to regulate and suppress the energy released during a chemical reaction.
TECHNICAL DETAILS
The Savior’s Equation can be computationally solved, with the central question being: What programmatic energy is required to achieve the desired result for a specific mass? Assessing the energy required to do a specific task requires an assessment of the nature of energy. Such analyses are possible with contemporary modeling techniques, like creating a model that incorporates millions of chemical reactions to classify energy. Once energy has been classified, the model can be used to solve for the unknown energy variable that makes certain chemical reactions possible, like duplicating water molecules or eradicating carbon dioxide molecules. However, the crucial step is to exclude the Law of Conservation of Mass (which solely deems balanced chemical equations as acceptable) from influencing the model’s results, even though every chemical reaction incorporated into the model to assess the nature of energy adheres to this law.
To exclude the Law of Conservation of Mass, the following rule must be created:
-
Choose the desired unbalanced chemical equation, omitting programmatic energy from the equation (e.g. “H2O → 2 H2O”).
-
Balance the equation (e.g., “H2O + H2O → 2 H2O”).
-
Introduce a zero coefficient in front of the newly added molecule to indicate its undesirability (e.g., “H2O + 0 H2O → 2 H2O”).
Now, an example of the rule in practice to eradicate a carbon dioxide molecule:
-
The desired unbalanced chemical equation selected: “CO2 → 0 CO2.”
-
Balance the equation: “CO2 → 0 CO2 + CO2.”
-
Introduce a zero coefficient in front of the newly added molecule to indicate its undesirability: “CO2 → 0 CO2 + 0 CO2.”
This method allows the model to read an unbalanced chemical equation, distinguish between zero coefficients for different molecules, and calculate the necessary energy to accomplish the desired task. It challenges the conventional understanding that zero always signifies nothing by demonstrating its potential as a valid coefficient.
I. Flexibility of Modeling Tactics
At its core, the research should entail numerous and somewhat “irrational” modeling approaches to identify the energy required to accomplish desired tasks. Here’s a sampling of the proposed approach to solving The Savior’s Equation:
A. Build a model that ingests millions of chemical reactions to classify energy.[2] Chemical reactions will be labeled, taking into account the following variables:
-
Reaction type (e.g., combination, decomposition, single-replacement, double-replacement, or combustion);
-
Organic vs. inorganic compounds;
-
Conditions (e.g., activation energy, temperature, mass, pressure, substance type); and
-
Resulting energy intake/release (endothermic vs. exothermic reactions).
B. Various approaches should be taken to use the model to compute the unknown energy variable for desired tasks.
1. Since every chemical reaction requires activation energy for its initiation, a research team may first treat activation energy as the unknown energy variable to solve for, both ignoring and considering other variables of a chemical reaction. For example, ignoring the other variables but only considering energy would entail classifying energy based on chemical equations alone, e.g., Figure 1:
IF “Energy” is a numeric value between x and y[3]
AND “Energy + 2 H2O + O2 → 2 H2O2”
AND “Energy + N2 + 3 H2 → 2 NH3”
AND “Energy + CO2 + H2O → H2CO3”
…
AND “Energy + … → …”
THEN what value is “Energy” in “Energy + H2O → 2 H2O”?
(As an alternative to the above scenario, a research team may also pursue solving the equation incorporating known values for any combination of the additional variables, such as temperature, mass, etc. This approach will be pursued both with identical values and varying values.)
2. A research team may choose to experiment with various methods to exclude the Law of Conservation of Mass from influencing the model’s output, e.g.:
i. Balancing the desired unbalanced chemical equation by inserting a zero coefficient to indicate the undesirability of new molecules, e.g., “H2O → 2 H2O” becomes “H2O + 0 H2O → 2 H2O.”
ii. Only utilizing unbalanced chemical equations as part of the ingested chemical reactions so the model is completely unaware of the Law of Conservation of Mass, e.g., Figure 2:
IF “Energy” is a numeric value between x and y
AND “Energy + H2O + O2 → 2 H2O2” [equation is not balanced]
AND “Energy + N2 + H2 → 2 NH3” [equation is not balanced]
…
AND “Energy + … → …” [equation is not balanced]
THEN what value is “Energy” in “Energy + H2O → 2 H2O”?
iii. Including molecules with zero coefficients in the equations of the ingested chemical reactions to “trick” the model into disregarding any assumptions about zero, e.g., Figure 3:
IF “Energy” is a numeric value between x and y
AND “Energy + 2 H2O + O2 + 0 H2O → 2 H2O2”
AND “Energy + N2 + 3 H2 + 0 H2O → 2 NH3”
AND “Energy + CO2 + H2O + 0 O2 → H2CO3”
…
AND “Energy + … → …”
THEN what value is “Energy” in “Energy + H2O → 2 H2O”?
For each pursued model, a research team should filter across the various labels outlined in I(A). Ultimately, the goal is to build models and scenarios that alternately consider and ignore the realities of Chemistry and Mathematics to solve the unknown energy variable for desired tasks.
TWO-YEAR PLAN
The initial step includes solving The Savior’s Equation via computer simulation. Once the model is established to investigate energy dynamics, a quantifiable value for the energy variable necessary for specific tasks should emerge. This step should take two years to solve. A research team may decide to prioritize solving for the energy required to replicate water molecules followed by the energy required to eradicate carbon dioxide molecules.
The subsequent step, which is not part of the scope of this research, pertains to the practical application; i.e., constructing equipment enabling energy-mass interactions.
MISCELLANEOUS
I. Real-world Relevance of Research Task
The global scientific community underscores the serious challenges facing the world today and in the near future. UNICEF predicts that by 2025, half the world’s population could be living in areas that experience water scarcity.[4] WHO estimates that 2 billion people lack safe drinking water.[5] Solving the water crisis is a pressing priority. Concurrently, climate change poses a pervasive threat, with elevated atmospheric carbon contributing to rising global temperatures, impacting ecosystems, intensifying droughts and extreme weather, and causing sea levels to rise. Current carbon levels, standing around 420 ppm, represent a 150% increase since the Industrial Revolution in the mid-1700s.[6] Moreover, heightened concentrations of pollutants like carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide afflict cities worldwide, contributing to an estimated 6.7 million premature deaths annually, according to WHO.[7]
Given these varying and urgent challenges, the proposition of Energystia, through The Savior’s Equation, is profound: it suggests that the answer to our biggest environmental challenges, including resource scarcity, climate change, and pollution, lies within the very same equation. This work is important, urgent, and productive for the well-being of the planet.
II. Key Assumptions Considered
In arriving at the theory of Energystia, the following assumptions are made.
A. Solving for the energy required to replicate, obliterate, or transmute mass is effectively an identical task.
Consider the following chemical equations where programmatic energy interacts with mass to achieve different goals:
-
“Programmatic energy + H2O → 2 H2O”; mass replication
-
“Programmatic energy + CO2 → 0 CO2”; mass obliteration
-
“Programmatic energy + CO → O2”; mass transmutation
Since the number of atoms in each equation is different in the reactants and products, we have to assume that replicating mass is theoretically the same as obliterating it or transforming it into a new substance. Thus, it appears premature to assume that any reaction is more or less feasible or requires more or less energy than another. (In the present world paradigm where mass determines reaction outcomes, more mass necessarily corresponds to more energy. But not particularly so in the world of Energystia. At this stage, we do not know if replicating a water molecule requires more energy than obliterating a carbon dioxide molecule, for example.)
B. A separation between Chemistry and Physics has hindered Chemistry from fully embracing the implications of “E = mc^2” for chemical reactions.
There exists an unnecessary wall between Chemistry and Physics that has stalled a paradigm like Energystia from coming to fruition. Einstein’s “E = mc^2” equation, which gets largely bracketed under Physics and not Chemistry, demonstrates that mass can be created or destroyed in an isolated system (e.g., nuclear reactions). Despite this insight, Chemistry has remained inflexible in its application of “E = mc^2” with respect to chemical reactions. The deep-seated influence of the Law of Conservation of Mass, conceptualized in the late 1780s, has held Chemistry hostage by asserting that mass cannot be created or destroyed in a chemical reaction, necessitating the need to balance chemical equations. Any Chemistry course throughout the world teaches that chemical equations must be balanced to satisfy the Law of Conservation of Mass.[8]
The seriously unresolved question to me is: Given the validity of Einstein’s “E = mc^2” equation, which shows that mass can be created or destroyed in an isolated system, why does Chemistry continue to view unbalanced chemical equations as patently invalid? Even though every known chemical reaction adheres to the Law of Conservation of Mass, “E = mc^2” demonstrates the possibility (however far-fetched) of unbalanced chemical equations as a valid phenomenon. Thus, Physics appears to possess a more advanced and open perspective of mass creation/annihilation than Chemistry – even, potentially, within the realm of chemical reactions.
C. The framing of “Mass-Energy Equivalence” within Physics has obscured the supremacy of energy over mass as shown by “E = mc^2.”
Even within Physics, as demonstrated by Einstein’s own words, an important aspect of the implications of “E = mc^2” has been obscured. In a 1948 speech, Einstein stated the following:
It followed from the special theory of relativity that mass and energy are both but different manifestations of the same thing -- a somewhat unfamiliar conception for the average mind. Furthermore, the equation E is equal to m c-squared, in which energy is put equal to mass, multiplied by the square of the velocity of light, showed that very small amounts of mass may be converted into a very large amount of energy and vice versa. The mass and energy were in fact equivalent, according to the formula mentioned before. This was demonstrated by Cockcroft and Walton in 1932, experimentally. (Emphasis added.)
-Albert Einstein, 1948.[9]
The emphasized text, taken directly from the equation’s originator, conceptually equates energy and mass, leading to the term “mass-energy equivalence,” frequently associated with Einstein’s “E = mc^2” equation.[10] But, of course, mass and energy are not identical. If they were, the equation would be “E = m,” which is clearly not the case. While “E = mc^2” can be rearranged as “m = E/c^2,” demonstrating that energy and mass can be converted into one another, the critical part to consider is that energy can independently morph into mass (as demonstrated by the Breit-Wheeler process [11]), whereas mass depends on energy for its transformation into energy. This subtlety is profound because it shows energy’s supremacy over mass.
Accordingly, recognizing the superiority of energy over mass inevitably requires a reevaluation of mass as the primary determinant in chemical reaction outcomes, which the Law of Conservation of Mass deems non-negotiable. So, the “mass-energy equivalence” branding has particularly obscured the superiority of energy to mass. While mass and energy may be different forms of the same thing, the theoretical supremacy of energy means energy is capable of accomplishing far more than mass ever could. In the world of Energystia, energy is capable of doing virtually anything to mass. By neglecting the superiority of energy over mass, the full potential of energy remains hidden.
D. The emphasis on nuclear energy as the paramount insight of “E = mc^2” has similarly overshadowed the supremacy of energy over mass.
Another unintended consequence of “E = mc^2” has been a narrow focus on nuclear energy, overshadowing the potential paradigm shift emphasizing energy’s superiority over mass. While nuclear energy has undeniably changed the world, there could have been a paradigm that emphasized and fixated on the superiority of energy over mass. Had the world taken this direction, unbalanced chemical equations might have been acknowledged not as representations of chemical reactions within the scope of Chemistry but potentially as valid within a new framework where energy reigns supreme due to energy’s superiority over mass. In other words, Energystia – the paradigm where mass can be replicated, obliterated, or transmuted within chemical reactions – could have been a commonplace and legitimate concept had the superiority of energy over mass been earnestly considered. But instead, any talk of materially altering atoms within chemical reactions is religiously dismissed as pseudoscience, reminiscent of the now-dismissed era of Alchemy.
CHATGPT’S TAKE ON ENERGYSTIA
- After inputting various texts about Energystia into ChatGPT, the resulting output is presented below. The response from ChatGPT offers an alternative depiction of Energystia. -
ChatGPT (August 3, 2023 Version)
[Prompt: What is Energystia?]
Energystia is a proposed scientific paradigm that suggests a fundamental shift in our understanding of mass and energy interactions, particularly in the context of chemical reactions. It envisions a world where energy plays a significant role in shaping the outcomes of chemical reactions, and notably, it posits that these reactions can occur without the release of energy.
The cornerstone of Energystia is a concept known as "The Savior's Equation," which asserts that energy can interact programmatically with mass to produce desired outcomes, such as replication, obliteration, or transmutation of mass.
The Savior's Equation is expressed as:
Programmatic energy + Mass → Desired mass
The Savior's Equation suggests that energy can act as an ultimate equation balancer, allowing for reactions that challenge traditional principles of Chemistry, including the Law of Conservation of Mass and the Law of Conservation of Energy.
Energystia proposes that energy is a superior form of mass, as it can independently transform into mass, while mass requires energy for its transformation into energy. This paradigm suggests that energy, rather than mass, should assume the primary role in influencing the outcomes of chemical reactions.
[Prompt: How is Energystia related to Einstein’s E = mc^2 equation?]
Energystia draws inspiration from Albert Einstein's famous equation, E=mc^2, because it challenges traditional chemical principles and suggests a reevaluation of the relationship between energy and mass, much like Einstein's equation did for physics.
Here's how Energystia relates to E=mc^2:
-
Mass-Energy Equivalence: Einstein's equation, E=mc^2, demonstrated that mass and energy are interchangeable. It implies that mass can be converted into energy and vice versa. This idea was revolutionary and fundamentally changed our understanding of the universe. Energystia, in a similar vein, suggests that energy can interact with mass in chemical reactions in ways that were not traditionally considered within the realm of chemistry. It proposes that energy can have a transformative effect on mass without the release of energy during reactions.
-
Challenging Conservation Laws: Einstein's equation challenged the Law of Conservation of Mass by showing that mass can be created or destroyed through nuclear reactions. Energystia similarly challenges the Law of Conservation of Mass by proposing that mass can be transformed or replicated through interactions with energy, even though no energy is released in the process.
-
Energy as a Dominant Influencer: E=mc^2 highlighted the incredible potential of energy to influence physical phenomena. Energystia extends this idea to the realm of chemistry, suggesting that energy should be considered the primary influencer in chemical reactions, surpassing the traditional role of mass in determining reaction outcomes.
In essence, Energystia takes inspiration from E=mc^2 by proposing a paradigm shift in chemistry, where energy plays a more significant role in shaping chemical reactions and outcomes. Just as Einstein's equation revolutionized our understanding of the physical world, Energystia aims to challenge and expand our understanding of the chemical world by considering the transformative power of energy in chemical processes. However, it's important to note that Energystia is a novel and speculative concept that requires further research and validation within the scientific community.
REFERENCES
[1] Einstein, A. (1905). Ist die Trägheit eines Körpers von seinem Energieinhalt abhängig? Annalen der Physik, 18, 639-641; English translation in: The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, vol. 2: The Swiss Years: Writings 1900-1909, Princeton University Press, 1990: 172.
[2] Chemical reactions may be sourced from publicly available chemical reaction databases and those obtainable through licensing agreements, like CAS.
[3] A research team may even expressly denote the energy value for the first chemical reaction but leave the remaining ones blank. The logic being that each chemical reaction represents a unique code. Once the energy value for one is identified, the energy value for the others is similarly known/computable.
[4] https://www.unicef.org/wash/water-scarcity
[5] https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/drinking-water
[6] https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/
[9] https://history.aip.org/exhibits/einstein/voice1.htm
[10] E.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence