I Hate That Word Lucky (cont.)

Posted by $ jbrenner 11 years, 9 months ago to Philosophy
15 comments | Share | Flag

We ran out of room on the previous thread. Sorry.

There is a suprising amount of order both in the universe and here on Earth. In most cases, such order is achieved by going to a minimum energy and maximum entropy state.

What is your minimum energy state?
It corresponds to your death.

In the absence of some intelligent power, the universe has existed for long enough that we should have achieved a state of minimum energy and maximum entropy by now.

And yet we haven't. Although I believe in evolution, in many ways it is inconsistent with thermodynamic laws regarding energy and entropy. This is a contradiction that I cannot resolve without considering the possibility that there is more to the universe than we can perceive.


All Comments

  • Posted by dbhalling 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Not all the irrational numbers have been accounted for despite using an infinite number of whole numbers. So it does not follow that all possible states have occurred.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Actually, I understand infinity quite well, as evidenced by my patience with this discussion.

    Definition of a Countable Set (your infinite number of counting numbers): "In mathematics, a countable set is a set with the same cardinality (number of elements) as some subset of the set of natural numbers. A set that is not countable is called uncountable. The term was originated by Georg Cantor. The elements of a countable set can be counted one at a time and although the counting may never finish, every element of the set will eventually be associated with a natural number."

    Since you postulate that you want to match the infinite number of rational numbers between 0 and 1 with the infinite number of counting numbers, that means that all counting numbers that are, ever were, or ever will be have been paired with the infinite rational numbers. Thus, you must transcend time to infinity as well. Which proves my point that in an infinite universe, all existences must exist simultaneously.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 11 years, 9 months ago
    I was not aware the consensus pointed to an unbounded universe,
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That just goes to prove the point. In order for that to be true, all possible formulations must exist simultaneously ad infinitum.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I don't think that follows. There are an infinite number of counting numbers, but there are an infinite number of rational numbers between 0 and 1. I can match one for one every infinite counting number to a rational number between 0 and 1 and still have an infinite number of rational numbers. You argument does not follow.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The universe exists in 4 dimensional space. There was no restriction on any of those 4 dimensions. Thus if the universe is infinite in 3 special dimensions and one time dimension, then my statement holds true from the original premise. If some want now to create restrictions, that violates the original premises provided, and of course, may void the follow on statement.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Not so, Robbie. Consider this: ====== then extend it infinitely in _direction_ while keeping the height (distance between dashes) constant. It is infinite in one dimension, but bounded in another. To complete his equations of general relativity, Einstein needed eleven mathematical dimensions. Maybe there's only so many galaxies...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If one accepts an infinite universe, then I agree that it cannot be migrating to a state of increasing entropy, and it has already achieved that state. See my reply to db below.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If the universe is infinite, then there must be an infinite number of galaxies, with an infinite number of stars, and an infinite number of planets, with an infinite number of possibilities of life forms, and thus an infinite number of sentient life forms, and an infinite number of permutations of events, expanding like fractal geometric shapes. If every possibility exists (as it is with infinity) then everything of the past, present and future also exists. I stand that my statement follows from the premise.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    1) I have to disagree here with those physicists.

    If one accepts the big bang theory of evolution, then it had a finite starting point. The velocity of the universe is known. Consequently one can compute the universe's boundaries, and the universe can be treated as an isolated system. For the second law to be invalid, energy and/or matter would have to be exchanged with an outside universe. If there is an outside universe, then that by definition means that this universe is finite.

    For the universe to be infinite AND the big bang theory to be correct as the physicists contend, the universe would have to be expanding at an infinite velocity. It is not. It is expanding quickly, at the speed of light, but not at infinite velocity.

    Point 2 is correct. The 2nd law does require an isolated system.

    If one believes that the universe has always existed, then one must explain how something so large could come into being in the first place.

    The universe is an isolated system to which the 2nd law of thermodynamics applies. One can draw a boundary around any system, even an ever-expanding one.

    All matter is more organized at a lower energy state. Water is far from the only entity that is true for. Living things require energy to live. At the time that they cease to gather energy from their surroundings, they proceed quickly toward their minimum energy state - death. Long term hibernation is not even a minimum energy state.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If the universe is infinite in its existence, then it must have always existed and will always exist. Thus, all possibilities of what could be or could ever be must have already existed. This is a paradox. Do you have a solution?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 11 years, 9 months ago
    I disagree on several points.

    1) The Universe as understood by most of physicists nowadays is not finite. Thus it is not an isolated system and any attempt to apply the second law of thermodynamics is invalid.

    2) The 2nd law of thermodynamics requires a isolated system and that includes a system in which there is no gravitational field. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolated_sy...

    3) Evolution did not occur in an isolated system and evolution does not necessarily mean a higher energy state. Water is more organized at a lower energy state (frozen). It is not clear to me at least that living things necessarily mean a higher energy state.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo