Moderator: Flannel Jesus
-1- wrote:If matter has existed from infinite past, then entropy is such that it can be reset to a previous state.
If this was not true, the world would be approaching much closer to a fully entropic state than what we experience right now. Or else perhaps we'd be in a fully entropic state.
-1- wrote:If matter has existed from infinite past, then entropy is such that it can be reset to a previous state.
If this was not true, the world would be approaching much closer to a fully entropic state than what we experience right now. Or else perhaps we'd be in a fully entropic state.
James S Saint » Sat Oct 07, 2017 5:37 pm wrote:As the mathematics turns out, even given an infinite eternity of time, the 3D universe could never, ever exactly duplicate itself. Every single instant of time, throughout eternal time, is and will always be unique. The universe has no opportunity to repeat or cycle.
I don't think it becomes zero, not if it's me filling out the envelopes, but I think most people might repeat at a million envelopes. Why not? What stops them? It might be the analogy is a poor one, since we are goal driven creatures with so much memory space, and addresses have only so many letters and spaces.obsrvr524 wrote:If you have 100 envelops and an infinite list of addresses, you cannot accidentally repeat an address because the probability becomes zero.
We would have to know this. I think this would have to mean that in some way the universe is infinite. If it has a finite set of particles, say, then over infinite time it could repeat itself. In fact, it would.If the universe has more possible states to exist in than the timeline has moments in which to exist, the universe might be able to accidentally repeat itself.
Karpel Tunnel wrote:We would have to know this. I think this would have to mean that in some way the universe is infinite. If it has a finite set of particles, say, then over infinite time it could repeat itself. In fact, it would.obsrvr524 wrote:If the universe has more possible states to exist in than the timeline has moments in which to exist, the universe might be able to accidentally repeat itself.
True, but there would have to be an infinite number of positions or whatever. If space is quantized, I think this would again entail infinite size.obsrvr524 wrote:Karpel Tunnel wrote:We would have to know this. I think this would have to mean that in some way the universe is infinite. If it has a finite set of particles, say, then over infinite time it could repeat itself. In fact, it would.obsrvr524 wrote:If the universe has more possible states to exist in than the timeline has moments in which to exist, the universe might be able to accidentally repeat itself.
I think those particles would also have to have only a finite set of locations and a finite set of exact sizes. How many divisions can be applied to a finite line?
The universe doesn't have to be infinite in size for the same logic to apply.
Karpel Tunnel wrote: If space is quantized, I think this would again entail infinite size.
obsrvr524 wrote:Karpel Tunnel wrote: If space is quantized, I think this would again entail infinite size.
So for the logic to not work, we have to believe that the universe has a finite size, any straight line must have only a finite number of segments or locations, and also all particles must be of quantized sizes.
Do we have any actual evidence of any of those premises? All of them must be true to defeat the logic.
There would either have to a source of new energy or differentials, say in temperature. There is a basement where no work can be done and nothing will do anything.Silhouette wrote:This all assumes entropy is not infinite as well as time.
They don't know, which is why I said 'if.'obsrvr524 wrote:I'm no expert, but I don't think that there is anything that says that any of it is actually quantized.
Now you're saying it is infinite. If it is infinite then it doesn't matter if it is quantized or not. And, yeah some people think there must be other exact and then also similar yous out there, if the universe is infinite, not even getting into a multiverse.But slightly related to this is that apparently there is 100% chance ("absolute certainty") that there is an identical you somewhere out there in the infinite expanse.
-1- wrote:If matter has existed from infinite past, then entropy is such that it can be reset to a previous state.
If this was not true, the world would be approaching much closer to a fully entropic state than what we experience right now. Or else perhaps we'd be in a fully entropic state.
obsrvr524 wrote:Well until someone comes up with a believable answer to that question, "What's on the other side of that boundary to everything", I'm going to have to go with an infinite universe. "Nothing" is not an answer.
Same issue with, "What was there before time began?"
Karpel Tunnel wrote:There would either have to a source of new energy or differentials, say in temperature. There is a basement where no work can be done and nothing will do anything.Silhouette wrote:This all assumes entropy is not infinite as well as time.
obsrvr524 wrote:Well until someone comes up with a believable answer to that question, "What's on the other side of that boundary to everything", I'm going to have to go with an infinite universe. "Nothing" is not an answer.
Same issue with, "What was there before time began?"
Silhouette wrote:obsrvr524 wrote:Well until someone comes up with a believable answer to that question, "What's on the other side of that boundary to everything", I'm going to have to go with an infinite universe. "Nothing" is not an answer.
Same issue with, "What was there before time began?"
I think the issue you're encountering here is in the intuitive "everyday" conception of space and time, rather than thinking in terms of relativity where spacetime can curve. If you think about the curvature of spacetime reaching a maximum, that resembles a boundary without being one. And what curves spacetime to a maximum? Gravity, which is at a maximum when mass is at a maximum - say at a singularity where all the mass of the universe is compacted into a point like theorised by the big bang? This is also consistent with time dilation and length contraction being at a maximum closest to the speed of light, which is the kind of speed everything is travelling at with the electromagnetic force maximally overpowering the gravitational force in the closest of quarters, such as in a singularity. Shortest distances with length contraction? Check. Longest durations with time dilation? Also check. So time eases in from a maximum point, maximally slowly - simulating a start to time, without being a beginning. Not really infinite because otherwise it would never start, and not really finite because there is no "line" that presents your problem of "what's on the other side"?
So basically I think your question has already been answered by relativity.
James S Saint » Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm wrote:Creation is on ongoing, eternal process that never began and can never end.
obsrvr524 wrote:ISo I am still quite confident thatJames S Saint » Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm wrote:Creation is on ongoing, eternal process that never began and can never end.
obsrvr524 wrote:I don't think the scale for entropy goes to infinity.
obsrvr524 wrote:But the space bending method doesn't always work because it is really only a metaphorical representation of the reality and thus has limits.
obsrvr524 wrote:When it comes to the entire universe, relativity doesn't seem to actually mean anything. The universe represents an extreme dispersion of mass and gravity, not at all dense. And then "moving relative to what?" The whole relativity bubble pops into nothing but a pocket calculator for nuclear physicists working with extremely tiny things that move extremely fast relative to other things. It doesn't seem to have anything to do with actual physical reality.
obsrvr524 wrote:I think of people having what I cal "bubbles of belief". With that thought I can better understand and predict people's behavior. It is easier than neuroscience. But that doesn't mean that people literally have little bubbles in their brains. It is just a metaphor or analogy for predicting some kinds of behavior.
James S Saint wrote:Creation is on ongoing, eternal process that never began and can never end.
If energy is being added to the system, ok, it could go on infinitely. The this adding energy to the system is negentropic. Since entropy is happening everywhere, an infinitely large universe doesn't allow for infinite time, unless there was infinite energy at every point, which there isn't, or it would hurt a lot. That's why I am saying there is either an end point or reinvigoration. Or ongoing invigoration.Silhouette wrote:It's interesting to think that there is a point at which "no work can be done and nothing will do anything" - suggesting maximum entropy and therefore maximum time: a final limit on both that is "the end of the universe". So in that case, if they are infinite, that infinity stretches out behind that "end" unlimitedly (i.e. there is no beginning of the universe).
Gloominary wrote:But could a single, solitary something or nothingness give rise to entropy and complexity, if it wasn't already entropic and complex in some way to begin with?
Maybe it began absolutely anentropic and simple, but with the potential to become entropic and complex?
Karpel Tunnel wrote:If energy is being added to the system, ok, it could go on infinitely. The this adding energy to the system is negentropic. Since entropy is happening everywhere, an infinitely large universe doesn't allow for infinite time, unless there was infinite energy at every point, which there isn't, or it would hurt a lot. That's why I am saying there is either an end point or reinvigoration. Or ongoing invigoration.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory) wrote:Generally, information entropy is the average amount of information conveyed by an event, when considering all possible outcomes.
www.chem.wisc.edu wrote:DS = q/T (1)
where S represents entropy, DS represents the change in entropy, q represents heat transfer, and T is the temperature. Using this equation it is possible to measure entropy changes using a calorimeter. The units of entropy are J/K.
obsrvr524 wrote:In the thermodynamics world, to get infinite entropy would require that at absolute zero temperature, heat energy is still being transferred. That is an irrational situation considering that zero temperature also means zero heat.
Silhouette wrote:obsrvr524 wrote:In the thermodynamics world, to get infinite entropy would require that at absolute zero temperature, heat energy is still being transferred. That is an irrational situation considering that zero temperature also means zero heat.
I think there's a general misunderstanding or at least misuse of the term "infinity" going on here.
"To get infinite entropy" makes it sound like infinite entropy is a boundary that can be gotten to - you see the contradiction in reaching a finite bound of infinity (no bounds).
You tend towards infinity, you don't get there.
You can't define dealing with infinities, because definition (as you can see it derives from the exact same root of "finitude") contradicts infinities.
Also, have you wondered why heat energy and temperature have different units? As in your quote, heat energy has the units of joules and temperature has the units of kelvin. Yet as you rightly point out, lower temperatures coincide with lower heat energy. But does that mean they are the same thing?
Heat flows from hotter temperatures to lower temperatures. An analogy with grammar, which I think works out, is to consider the temperatures as the "nouns" and energy as the "verbs". Energy is flowing, temperature is the state of things that energy flows from and to. To equate or conflate them might be akin to saying "being" is "becoming", to use an important philosophical distinction as analogy.
The equation ΔS = ∫₀ δQ/T means that change in entropy is less when the temperature states involved are all high (and more when they are low), and change in entropy is higher when there's a lot of heat energy flowing between these states (and lower when there's not much heat energy flowing). Note too that it's change in entropy, not absolute entropy. This is just what happens when you observe things, it's not irrational.
obsrvr524 wrote:The equations don't allow for a value of infinity is what I was saying. I didn't mean to start an argument over it.
obsrvr524 wrote:I don't think this issue is relevant to the thread because the size of the space is infinite and doesn't change. The amount of energy in space is infinite and doesn't change. The timeline is infinite and doesn't change. The total complexity doesn't change. And the resultant entropy value for the entire universe doesn't change. Changes in entropy, like changes in energy, can only happen locally. The average throughout the universe never changes because for every rise there is an equal fall.
So back on the subject of the thread, due to space being infinitely larger than time, the universe can never repeat. And even more, since the entropy value is constant anyway, whether it repeats is irrelevant.
I don't believe that the universe's total entropy is ever changing.
Return to Science, Technology, and Math
Users browsing this forum: No registered users