Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Self Winding Universe?

Self Winding Universe?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csscomalgorithmsquestionlounge
57 Posts 27 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • V VE2

    Virtual particles etc are in the realm of quantum physics, which no one as yet seems to fully understand! I recommend the book "What is real" by Adam Becker as some sort of a guide to that world. I do not pretend to understand such things but I think someday, just as relativity altered our view of Newtonian physics, our view of what the universe is all about will change as well.

    73

    W Offline
    W Offline
    W Balboos GHB
    wrote on last edited by
    #31

    So I looked up the guy and his book (in the Google universe). What is Real? | Not Even Wrong[^] - This popped up near the top of the list. It seems to me that it is, in rather simple terms, a disagreement as to the basis set to be correctly used to describe the universe. (there is an author's reply down the page). What is real - not obviously a part of what I used when starting this. Whatever is real, it does tend towards disorder as the result of any action that can be considered spontaneous. Spontaneous meaning, in this context, what will happen to something's state if it were to change to a "more relaxed and natural state" - for example - you'd be more stable if you fell down flat than if you were to remain standing. I'm thus considering what happens when everything everywhere has fallen. Is that state, itself, a contradiction? Be a bit more a philosopher.

    Ravings en masse^

    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

    "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

    V 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • M MKJCP

      A good read. Your page worked as intended. Nice planning.

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Mark_Wallace
      wrote on last edited by
      #32

      I always wanted to go on Mastermind and do the Monty Python thing: Magnus: Your specialist subject? Me: The Bleeding Obvious. It's easy to give credence what people say in magazines and blogs, but it's usually better to spend a few moments working it out for yourself.

      M 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • S Slow Eddie

        Who cares? :zzz: Your atoms and my atoms will all have been recycled too may times to count.

        Fight entropy with enthalpy.

        V Offline
        V Offline
        VE2
        wrote on last edited by
        #33

        Nah, I intend to live forever. So far so good.

        73

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • W W Balboos GHB

          I always wondered what those guys wearing robes and carrying signs did when they went home at night. At least one of them posts his theories online. "The End is (Not?) Near!"

          Ravings en masse^

          "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

          "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

          M Offline
          M Offline
          Mark_Wallace
          wrote on last edited by
          #34

          Well, the end of the world is one thing; but the universe ends at Milton Keynes.

          I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • M Mark_Wallace

            I always wanted to go on Mastermind and do the Monty Python thing: Magnus: Your specialist subject? Me: The Bleeding Obvious. It's easy to give credence what people say in magazines and blogs, but it's usually better to spend a few moments working it out for yourself.

            M Offline
            M Offline
            MKJCP
            wrote on last edited by
            #35

            True. But do not assume all have the same capability to work it out for themselves. In leiu of that and with a desire to play the intellectual game, the path of least resistance is to accept what seems right, or worse, what appeals emotionally. Many minds of mush out there.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • W W Balboos GHB

              So I looked up the guy and his book (in the Google universe). What is Real? | Not Even Wrong[^] - This popped up near the top of the list. It seems to me that it is, in rather simple terms, a disagreement as to the basis set to be correctly used to describe the universe. (there is an author's reply down the page). What is real - not obviously a part of what I used when starting this. Whatever is real, it does tend towards disorder as the result of any action that can be considered spontaneous. Spontaneous meaning, in this context, what will happen to something's state if it were to change to a "more relaxed and natural state" - for example - you'd be more stable if you fell down flat than if you were to remain standing. I'm thus considering what happens when everything everywhere has fallen. Is that state, itself, a contradiction? Be a bit more a philosopher.

              Ravings en masse^

              "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

              "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

              V Offline
              V Offline
              VE2
              wrote on last edited by
              #36

              "When everything everywhere has fallen" may be a contradiction. Fallen implies it fell somewhere, to some gravitational attractor, like a star. When a star loses energy, gravity may completely take over, resulting in a massive explosion, which may eject matter and start anew, or a black hole. I guess what I'm trying to say is that, speculate as we may about the true nature of this universe (or multiverses or whatever) we do not (and may never) know what is real.

              73

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • W W Balboos GHB

                Just a thought, still in process of being processed, but I was considering the possibility that the universe cannot "run down" - i.e., be completely consumed by entropy. Here's the basic thought:   one could divide the universe into two types of regions: the 'void' and regions of content randomly dispersed throughout the void.   Now, let's consider all of the regions of content. If all of them (i.e., all of existence) reached a final state of chaos then the whole of it would no longer have random content between the void - and thus their very existence in a state of total chaos is a contradiction.   It would be incumbent upon existence to essentially become less chaotic in arbitrary local regions in order for the whole of existence to remain truly chaotic:   it must not have the content of all places 'with stuff' be the same and thus, in a form of homogeneity. Now I'm not set on fully believing in this, yet, but it would essentially require that the universe's tendency towards chaos requires it to create local order (rewind) in order to become chaotic (contradiction, again?).   A possible mechanism to undo chaos may be a reversal of local time, but that's somewhat shooting form the hip based on a conjecture and hand waving.

                Ravings en masse^

                "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

                "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

                O Offline
                O Offline
                obermd
                wrote on last edited by
                #37

                The problem with your argument is that on a large scale thermodynamics moves energy from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration. Voids are low concentrations of energy whereas stars have high concentrations of energy around them. This means that the energy produced by stars, and thus galaxies and galaxy clusters will eventually move into the Voids. The gravitational energy will of course continue to pull stars into an ever tighter matter as the weak and strong nuclear forces decay, so the probability of the universe ever being completely homogenous at the quantum level is zero.

                W 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • W W Balboos GHB

                  Just a thought, still in process of being processed, but I was considering the possibility that the universe cannot "run down" - i.e., be completely consumed by entropy. Here's the basic thought:   one could divide the universe into two types of regions: the 'void' and regions of content randomly dispersed throughout the void.   Now, let's consider all of the regions of content. If all of them (i.e., all of existence) reached a final state of chaos then the whole of it would no longer have random content between the void - and thus their very existence in a state of total chaos is a contradiction.   It would be incumbent upon existence to essentially become less chaotic in arbitrary local regions in order for the whole of existence to remain truly chaotic:   it must not have the content of all places 'with stuff' be the same and thus, in a form of homogeneity. Now I'm not set on fully believing in this, yet, but it would essentially require that the universe's tendency towards chaos requires it to create local order (rewind) in order to become chaotic (contradiction, again?).   A possible mechanism to undo chaos may be a reversal of local time, but that's somewhat shooting form the hip based on a conjecture and hand waving.

                  Ravings en masse^

                  "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

                  "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

                  B Offline
                  B Offline
                  Bruce Patin
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #38

                  The formation of planets and rise of intelligent life seems to me to be a violation of entropy.

                  W 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • B Bruce Patin

                    The formation of planets and rise of intelligent life seems to me to be a violation of entropy.

                    W Offline
                    W Offline
                    W Balboos GHB
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #39

                    Any thing can happen in a truly chaotic path - local order is, in fact, required for a truly chaotic system.* Hence - planets, life, &etc. * at least along the way to wherever it's headed.

                    Ravings en masse^

                    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

                    "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • O obermd

                      The problem with your argument is that on a large scale thermodynamics moves energy from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration. Voids are low concentrations of energy whereas stars have high concentrations of energy around them. This means that the energy produced by stars, and thus galaxies and galaxy clusters will eventually move into the Voids. The gravitational energy will of course continue to pull stars into an ever tighter matter as the weak and strong nuclear forces decay, so the probability of the universe ever being completely homogenous at the quantum level is zero.

                      W Offline
                      W Offline
                      W Balboos GHB
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #40

                      obermd wrote:

                      The problem with your argument is that on a large scale thermodynamics moves energy from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration.

                      Thermodynamics tends to move things from higher energy states to lower energy states. Concentration (of stuff), although a factor, is not the only consideration - and may not even be one. The Gibbs Free Energy, which is basically the traffic controller for thermodynamic (which way does something go) includes both thermal and entropy components. They can pull together or in opposing directions for a given event. Expand your view to the surroundings and the entropy has increased and that is a dispersive phenomenon. Gravity is magic!   but, I'd conjecture that energy is emitted when two object coalesce do to gravitational forces.   Isn't there something to that effect when an object crosses the event horizon of a black hole? Also, don't black holes emit Hawkings radiation (per an earlier post) and they eventually wither away into total dispersion as energy?

                      Ravings en masse^

                      "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

                      "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • W W Balboos GHB

                        Just a thought, still in process of being processed, but I was considering the possibility that the universe cannot "run down" - i.e., be completely consumed by entropy. Here's the basic thought:   one could divide the universe into two types of regions: the 'void' and regions of content randomly dispersed throughout the void.   Now, let's consider all of the regions of content. If all of them (i.e., all of existence) reached a final state of chaos then the whole of it would no longer have random content between the void - and thus their very existence in a state of total chaos is a contradiction.   It would be incumbent upon existence to essentially become less chaotic in arbitrary local regions in order for the whole of existence to remain truly chaotic:   it must not have the content of all places 'with stuff' be the same and thus, in a form of homogeneity. Now I'm not set on fully believing in this, yet, but it would essentially require that the universe's tendency towards chaos requires it to create local order (rewind) in order to become chaotic (contradiction, again?).   A possible mechanism to undo chaos may be a reversal of local time, but that's somewhat shooting form the hip based on a conjecture and hand waving.

                        Ravings en masse^

                        "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

                        "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        SeattleC
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #41

                        Sorry, the universe could approach total chaos as a limit. Areas of orgnization could evaporate. Or the expansion of space-time could grow exponentially, causing the universe to pop like a soap bubble, also causing the universe to approach chaos as a limit.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • OriginalGriffO OriginalGriff

                          That works surprisingly well: you can't tell if the milk is OK or off until you pour it into the tea or coffee...

                          Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!

                          O Offline
                          O Offline
                          Overtkill
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #42

                          I use the classic sniff test. :)

                          OriginalGriffO 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • F Forogar

                            If you believe that energy and matter cannot be destroyed (or created), only changed in form then what does entropy do with it all? Does it have a big attic somewhere to put all this stuff? If so, does it get the stuff out again once it is full and that's where the cyclical universe theory comes from? ;P

                            - I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.

                            O Offline
                            O Offline
                            Overtkill
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #43

                            Well, like a good author who once wrote: “Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.” My guess is that somewhere between that, and being put away by "top men.(tm)" :)

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • O Overtkill

                              I use the classic sniff test. :)

                              OriginalGriffO Offline
                              OriginalGriffO Offline
                              OriginalGriff
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #44

                              Doesn't always work. There is a point at which it's almost off but doesn't smell - putting it in tea or coffee will instantly "curdle" it and form "needles" which means the cup has to be poured down the sink and restarted. Schrodinger's Milk!

                              Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!

                              "I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
                              "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • OriginalGriffO OriginalGriff

                                That works surprisingly well: you can't tell if the milk is OK or off until you pour it into the tea or coffee...

                                Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!

                                G Offline
                                G Offline
                                Gary Wheeler
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #45

                                A better test would be to pour some of it into the cat, since they'll turn their nose up at it if it's the tiniest bit off.

                                Software Zen: delete this;

                                OriginalGriffO 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • G Gary Wheeler

                                  A better test would be to pour some of it into the cat, since they'll turn their nose up at it if it's the tiniest bit off.

                                  Software Zen: delete this;

                                  OriginalGriffO Offline
                                  OriginalGriffO Offline
                                  OriginalGriff
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #46

                                  That's not a good test: like most adults cats he's a bit lactose intolerant (they lose the ability to absorb it when their digestive system changes while weaning). And guess who gets to clean up cat puke?

                                  Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!

                                  "I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
                                  "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt

                                  G 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • OriginalGriffO OriginalGriff

                                    That's not a good test: like most adults cats he's a bit lactose intolerant (they lose the ability to absorb it when their digestive system changes while weaning). And guess who gets to clean up cat puke?

                                    Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!

                                    G Offline
                                    G Offline
                                    Gary Wheeler
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #47

                                    I didn't say it was a particularly tidy test, just an accurate one... :laugh: I have a senior cat who does exactly as you describe. She's also known for producing hair balls of greater size than her own body weight X| .

                                    Software Zen: delete this;

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • W W Balboos GHB

                                      Just a thought, still in process of being processed, but I was considering the possibility that the universe cannot "run down" - i.e., be completely consumed by entropy. Here's the basic thought:   one could divide the universe into two types of regions: the 'void' and regions of content randomly dispersed throughout the void.   Now, let's consider all of the regions of content. If all of them (i.e., all of existence) reached a final state of chaos then the whole of it would no longer have random content between the void - and thus their very existence in a state of total chaos is a contradiction.   It would be incumbent upon existence to essentially become less chaotic in arbitrary local regions in order for the whole of existence to remain truly chaotic:   it must not have the content of all places 'with stuff' be the same and thus, in a form of homogeneity. Now I'm not set on fully believing in this, yet, but it would essentially require that the universe's tendency towards chaos requires it to create local order (rewind) in order to become chaotic (contradiction, again?).   A possible mechanism to undo chaos may be a reversal of local time, but that's somewhat shooting form the hip based on a conjecture and hand waving.

                                      Ravings en masse^

                                      "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

                                      "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

                                      C Offline
                                      C Offline
                                      cmkrnl
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #48

                                      It seems that life is anti-entropy. Whether it's an amoeba or a zebra, its always straining like hell against entropy to organize the physical world to perpetuate itself. It seems that if life figures out how to sweep across the universe faster than entropy, life could theoretically get the upper hand. If entropy winning is an ever expanding universe, getting lonelier and lonelier, what is life winning? Puppies, kittens & everyone singing Kum ba yah? Alas, it seems that either to the exclusion of the other is universal demise. With a universal balance between entropy and life, there could exist simultaneously pockets of chaos and clusters of kittens. Maybe equilibrium between them should be our hope?

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • F Forogar

                                        If you believe that energy and matter cannot be destroyed (or created), only changed in form then what does entropy do with it all? Does it have a big attic somewhere to put all this stuff? If so, does it get the stuff out again once it is full and that's where the cyclical universe theory comes from? ;P

                                        - I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.

                                        R Offline
                                        R Offline
                                        Robert Not The Pirate
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #49

                                        For those of you that are not married, I offer my example of an explanation of entropy and matter being transformed from one state to another. Those of you that are married, regardless of how long, will understand. Entropy occurs when the balance on your credit cards gradually erode, the balances moving ever so close to extinction. The currency, associated with that credit card, is transformed into shoes, dresses, jewelry, etc. Fortunately, the cycle begins over each month. Mr. Einstein would have made this explanation way to complicated. Hopefully, I've simplified it.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • W W Balboos GHB

                                          Just a thought, still in process of being processed, but I was considering the possibility that the universe cannot "run down" - i.e., be completely consumed by entropy. Here's the basic thought:   one could divide the universe into two types of regions: the 'void' and regions of content randomly dispersed throughout the void.   Now, let's consider all of the regions of content. If all of them (i.e., all of existence) reached a final state of chaos then the whole of it would no longer have random content between the void - and thus their very existence in a state of total chaos is a contradiction.   It would be incumbent upon existence to essentially become less chaotic in arbitrary local regions in order for the whole of existence to remain truly chaotic:   it must not have the content of all places 'with stuff' be the same and thus, in a form of homogeneity. Now I'm not set on fully believing in this, yet, but it would essentially require that the universe's tendency towards chaos requires it to create local order (rewind) in order to become chaotic (contradiction, again?).   A possible mechanism to undo chaos may be a reversal of local time, but that's somewhat shooting form the hip based on a conjecture and hand waving.

                                          Ravings en masse^

                                          "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein

                                          "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

                                          J Offline
                                          J Offline
                                          Jim_Snyder
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #50

                                          OK, not at the Universe level, but all the matter speeding from galaxies away from them eventually coalesce to the gravity of nearby influences creating new BIG BANGs. Einstein's greatest personal discovery was that matter and energy cannot be either created or destroyed. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Cthulu discovered that the whole universe was his...

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups