It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by uberarcanist
Well what the hell is that even supposed to mean, Glyph D? .... what is even meant by "running down"?
Before we can figure out whether or not this theory is true or false I think it needs to be clarified what it means.
Originally posted by uberarcanist
I simply don't believe that entropy is a useful or even true theory.
Entropy postulates a movement from complexity to simplicity, order to disorder. But the entire history of the cosmos seems to suggest the exact opposite has happened!
Originally posted by uberarcanist
Well, I found this quote in wikipedia's "entropy and life" article:
"the principle that entropy can only increase or remain constant applies only to a closed system which is adiabatically isolated, meaning no heat can enter or leave."
But where in nature does a true closed system exist? If such a system is nonexistent, is the second law of thermodynamics valid at all?
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
This sounds like all those conditions the teacher always talked about
in Physics, Math and Engineering that I never paid too much attention to.
I just remembered to do things the way teacher wanted them done.
There wound be no math model at all because different conditions
meant a different solution, which no one could figure out.
I am sure the comments in this thread are correct.
Originally posted by uberarcanist
But the entire history of the cosmos seems to suggest the exact opposite has happened!
Originally posted by Glyph_D
running down or "break down" is the process of deterioration. its when tiny minuscule pieces release from the larger whole of an object. where by shape and function are effected by this degrading process.
example>
take an object in your hand.
rubb your finger on that object continuously.
two things you will notice- first the object your rubbing(depending on its durability) has heat and possible visible streaks along your chosen path. second you might notice that skin from your finger has been removed.
this degrading/change is due to friction. all movement creates friction on some level and movement is constant.
it can be theorized that this friction is what enforces the concept of entropy. because friction exist everywhere as a continuous cosmic force it can be said that entropy exists everywhere.
till nothing is left.
Originally posted by Glyph_D
the key word above is "adiabatically".
the statement above through translation is as> in a reverse case scenario, entropy can gain or stabilize.
t is saying the only way to violate entropy is to "violate" entropy. nowhere in nature does this take place, so in other words entropy is not violated anywhere.
its basically saying something like this. 2+2=4, as long as 2=2 and 2+2=4. if the norm can be distorted then the result will be different. if 2 equals the sum of 3, then it is impossible for 2+2=4(as long as 4=4).
now if entropy can be reversed/stabilize, that in and of its self makes it not entropy(much like the numbers).
the 2ndLAW is valid because of this, through our own understandings this has never(yet) been violated.
the exact meaning behind "closed" can be debated.
however look to a star for the example. they form, they grow, they die.
the matter that is discharged is sent out through space, possibly being embedded into a lifeform on some planet(like earth-based life). from that life it is transfered to other life so on and so forth.
this recycle and reuse is where chaos and order come into play, argue all you want on "what came first the chicken or the egg".
the ultimate truth is at some point neither will be able to exist any more, because the matter they are made of will dissipate into pure unusable energy.
Originally posted by StellarX
But the skin will grow back; so much for entropy.
But that friction can also then be said to power the sun that is responsible for life and evolution on this planet. The only scale we can truly claim entropy to be at work at is at a universal level and we don't even know if the universe is a closed system.
Originally posted by Astyanax
Sadly, I don't think belief is an option when it comes to physical laws.
We may believe or disbelieve as we please, but we are still bound by them.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is implacable. Every observed event -- anywhere, anywhen -- bears it out.
If it is wrong, then everything else we know about the universe -- and I mean everything,
not just things we know through scientific observation and experiment but through commonplace, everyday experience -- would also be wrong. It's as basic as that.
There are almost as many formulations of the second law as there have been discussions of it.
Philosopher / Physicist P.W. Bridgman
What you are seeing is local aggregations of order at the expense of greater disorder throughout the system.
It takes energy to make structures of any kind, and energy is invariably dissipated in the process of making them.
That, in a nutshell, is entropy.
Seems a shame, I know. But there really is no getting round it.
Originally posted by StellarX
It supposedly only takes gravity to make a star and unless you wish to explain how gravity is 'dissipated' in stellar formation you should probably go with another example.
Originally posted by Tom Bedlam
The process of regrowing the skin uses energy - that energy is lost as heat. Entropy always wins.
If you have to think of it verbally, try this - a car wears out. That is because it starts at a highly ordered state (perfect function).
Now, as it is used, the parts that are rubbing together can become more ordered (doesn't happen) or less (there you go).
As the process of wear is essentially random, it's possible for the material worn off the bearings to redeposit perfectly so that the bearings "wear back to perfection", but so statistically unlikely that it won't ever happen. It's hugely more likely that the particles will erode and go somewhere bad. Thus the system becomes more random, because the process itself is statistical.
Another - if I throw a bowling ball down the lane and hit the pins, it's possible that they'll tumble around and line back up perfectly like nothing happened. But it never happens. Because lying down in a heap is a lower energy state than standing on end in a nice triangular array.
The pin setter can reverse that entropy, but never without using more power than can be gained from disordering the pins.
But the energy lost as waste heat is larger than that which powers a local reversal of entropy.
It's like a refrigerator. In order to remove 1000 BTU's of heat (random particle motion) from a refrigerator, I have to apply no less than 1000 BTU's of external energy, and reject 2000 as waste heat.
You can thus have local reversal of entropy, but only at a cost greater than that order which is achieved in a limited area.