Entropy and the Expanding Universe

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

ac15

Guest
I have a few questions, and if you could take the time, a response would be greatly appreciated. I am a high school stundent and I have studied basic physics, but never any astronomy or cosmology. Independently I have read some Hawking, Greene, and Dyson and a few others.<br /><br />So please forgive me if my questions are bogus, I have not been formally educated in the subject.<br /> <br />My first question is, are stats and galaxies being formed continually by the universe? Is any matter being created? Can matter be created on its own? I have read somewhere that occasionally traces of particles and antiparticles are discovered by physicists on occasion. Is this true? And would this be evidence of an open system universe?<br /> <br />Secondly, I have read that the universe is expanding at a speed greater than light. Even if it is not expanding at light speed, isn't expansion a kind or work? What I am asking is that would it be possible in the distant future for an advanced people to harness this power in some way, this creating more work from nothing (or something), thus delaying heat deat?<br /> <br />Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions.
 
I

igorsboss

Guest
<font color="yellow">My first question is, are stars and galaxies being formed continually by the universe? Is any matter being created? Can matter be created on its own? I have read somewhere that occasionally traces of particles and antiparticles are discovered by physicists on occasion. Is this true? And would this be evidence of an open system universe? </font><br /><br />Yes, stars and galaxies are being formed continually in the universe.<br /><br />No, new matter is not being created. (There are some ultra-rare exceptions to this rule.)<br /><br />No, matter can not be created on its own. (Recall those ultra-rare exceptions? Well, energy can be converted to matter, and vice versa)<br /><br />Yes, physicists study particles and antiparticles. Antimatter is real, but very rare.<br /><br />No, this is not evidence of an open system universe. Let me explain...<br /><br />When we discovered ordinary modern Chemistry, chemists figured out that matter never, ever, appeared or disappeared. They called this "the law of conservation of mass".<br /><br />According to this law, no atoms are created, no atoms are destroyed, and no atom may change from one element into another. Atoms may merely be combined in different ways.<br /><br />In Newtonian Physics, there is a similar law called "the law of conservation of energy", which states that Energy can be neither created nor destroyed, but may only change form.<br /><br />Later, modern atomic physicists discovered (to everyone's immense surprise!) that some atoms sometimes spontaneously violate this rule. They discovered nuclear fission and fusion. Whenever this happens, it is always associated with radioactivity.<br /><br />The physicists discovered that sometimes, matter can be converted to energy, and energy can be converted to matter. They also found that it takes a HUGE quantity of energy to make even the smallest bit of matter, and converting tiny bits of matter releases HUGE quantities of energy. Einstein's famous
 
I

igorsboss

Guest
Here is a question for you to ponder. It is related to your question.<br /><br />Imagine a tiny redwood tree seed, weighing about a gram, that sprouts and grows into a 200 foot tall tree, weighing many tons. Where did the mass come from, to form the big tree?
 
N

newtonian

Guest
ac15 - the big bang may be evidence of an open system universe - creation of matter from energy from outside our universe - as in God.<br /><br />The heat death model assumes God will not sustain our universe.<br /><br />If you built a house would you let entropy return it to the dust, or would you keep it up?<br /><br />And you are correct. Expansion is caused by energy, and the law of conservation of matter and energy shows that there will always be both.<br /><br />Entropy has more than one definition. Thermodynamics involves heat. However, another definition involves order, and still another involves tending towards the most stable state.<br /><br />Which is more stable: matter or energy?<br /><br />Either way, life is characteristically unstable so that death is not easily reversed due to entropy.<br /><br />However, God is alive.<br /><br />Life overcomes the effect of entropy through informational coding or direction.<br /><br />The fine tuning of our universe for life is just one line of evidence running contrary to the heat death model.<br /><br />I might add that the very origin of our universe is opposite to entropy.<br /><br />Consider, please, this reason for the expansion of our universe:<br /><br />(Isaiah 40:22) "22 There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers, the One who is stretching out the heavens just as a fine gauze, who spreads them out like a tent in which to dwell,. . ."
 
G

gfpaladin

Guest
<i> (Isaiah 40:22) "22 There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers, the One who is stretching out the heavens just as a fine gauze, who spreads them out like a tent in which to dwell,. . ." <br /></i><br /><br />Interesting quote. So as to not derail this thread, perhaps a discussion concerning God could be located elsewhere?
 
A

ac15

Guest
(Isaiah 40:22) "22 There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth, the dwellers in which are as grasshoppers, the One who is stretching out the heavens just as a fine gauze, who spreads them out like a tent in which to dwell,. . ." <br /><br />That is a very interesting quote, thanks for bringing that to my attention. I wonder why Newton never picked up on that. I have heard that he held the Bible more dear to him then his science books.<br /><br />DM
 
N

newtonian

Guest
DM - Your welcome.<br /><br />I don't know if Newton picked up on it - the stretching of our heaven like a fine gauze.<br /><br />He did determine the laws of motion and gravity, so it would be logical to assume he realized something must keep the stars from all falling together - although the only quote I have had brought to my attention was that he deduced the stars must be very far apart so as not to fall into each other.<br /><br />Yes, Newton wrote more on his Biblical research than on science.<br /><br />His beliefs were somewhat similar to mine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts