Bull Ring ding: Does work in physics require motion

[ding]

The heat loss which occurs for every matter to energy conversion or energy to matter conversion reduces the useable energy in the universe.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree.

 

[ding]

Since the universe was created with a finite amount of energy if you do an infinite number of matter to energy conversions and energy to matter conversions the useable energy within the universe will eventually be all used up.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree.

 

[eagle1462010]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

 

[edthecynic]

Matter and energy are equivalent.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree.

Actually it is MASS and energy that are equivalent, but knowing nothing about physics you wouldn't know that.

 

[edthecynic]

You are debating with Ding ??

That's like mudwrestling with a pig.

Ed starts off by intentionally misstating my position while arguing a point that has no bearing to our original discussion - which was cyclical models of the universe don't work because matter to energy and energy to matter exchanges are inefficient and will eventually run out of usable energy as time approaches infinity - and I am the the dirty pig?

You do know that in physics "usable energy" is energy that can do WORK!.

In the conversation of can the universe have existed forever, the only thing that matters is that each exchange between matter and energy and energy and matter reduces the usable energy because the process is not perfectly efficient. Do this enough times and you reach maximum disorder or entropy and there is no more usable energy.

This is the reason cyclical universes have been rejected.

Again you dishonestly substitute universe for energy, which tells me deep down in your gut you know energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but you ate not honest enough to admit it.
Thank you.

Conversions from matter to energy and energy to matter are not 100% efficient.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree.

That implies that entropy cannot equal zero which violates the SLoT.

 

[edthecynic]

Since the universe was created with a finite amount of energy if you do an infinite number of matter to energy conversions and energy to matter conversions the useable energy within the universe will eventually be all used up.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree.

Your rant fell apart when you violated the SLoT.

 

[edthecynic]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

And DYNAMICS requires motion to perform work. Objects at the same temperature can and do move as long as that temperature is not absolute zero, which is a temperature that is not attainable in reality, only in theory.

 

[ding]

Ed starts off by intentionally misstating my position while arguing a point that has no bearing to our original discussion - which was cyclical models of the universe don't work because matter to energy and energy to matter exchanges are inefficient and will eventually run out of usable energy as time approaches infinity - and I am the the dirty pig?

You do know that in physics "usable energy" is energy that can do WORK!.

In the conversation of can the universe have existed forever, the only thing that matters is that each exchange between matter and energy and energy and matter reduces the usable energy because the process is not perfectly efficient. Do this enough times and you reach maximum disorder or entropy and there is no more usable energy.

This is the reason cyclical universes have been rejected.

Again you dishonestly substitute universe for energy, which tells me deep down in your gut you know energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but you ate not honest enough to admit it.
Thank you.

Conversions from matter to energy and energy to matter are not 100% efficient.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree.

That implies that entropy cannot equal zero which violates the SLoT.

I don't believe it does imply that. Entropy was zero at the beginning of time when the universe was perfectly ordered.

It means that there are no perfect conversions. That some heat is lost in the process. Why do you believe it implies that entropy cannot equal zero. Certainly after the universe began expanding and cooling entropy was always greater than zero.

 

[ding]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

And DYNAMICS requires motion to perform work. Objects at the same temperature can and do move as long as that temperature is not absolute zero, which is a temperature that is not attainable in reality, only in theory.

Our conversation was never about work. That is you avoiding the conversation.

 

[ding]

Matter and energy are equivalent.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree.

Actually it is MASS and energy that are equivalent, but knowing nothing about physics you wouldn't know that.

Same difference. Matter is mass.

 

[ding]

Since the universe was created with a finite amount of energy if you do an infinite number of matter to energy conversions and energy to matter conversions the useable energy within the universe will eventually be all used up.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree.

Your rant fell apart when you violated the SLoT.

You never disagreed with anything. I win. Game over.

 

[westwall]

You are debating with Ding ??

That's like mudwrestling with a pig.

Ed starts off by intentionally misstating my position while arguing a point that has no bearing to our original discussion - which was cyclical models of the universe don't work because matter to energy and energy to matter exchanges are inefficient and will eventually run out of usable energy as time approaches infinity - and I am the the dirty pig?

You do know that in physics "usable energy" is energy that can do WORK!.

In the conversation of can the universe have existed forever, the only thing that matters is that each exchange between matter and energy and energy and matter reduces the usable energy because the process is not perfectly efficient. Do this enough times and you reach maximum disorder or entropy and there is no more usable energy.

This is the reason cyclical universes have been rejected.

Again you dishonestly substitute universe for energy, which tells me deep down in your gut you know energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but you ate not honest enough to admit it.
Thank you.

Space and time were created with a finite amount of energy.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree

That depends on which cosmological theory you hold to. I understand you are trying to keep it simple for ed here, but the reality is based on the instrumentation we have, and the observations that we have made your statement is factual, however, as our instruments, processes, and observational abilities improve that theory may no longer be tenable.

 

[ding]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

And when the universe reaches a spatially uniform temperature it has reached a maximum state of disorder and entropy, right?

 

[ding]

Ed starts off by intentionally misstating my position while arguing a point that has no bearing to our original discussion - which was cyclical models of the universe don't work because matter to energy and energy to matter exchanges are inefficient and will eventually run out of usable energy as time approaches infinity - and I am the the dirty pig?

You do know that in physics "usable energy" is energy that can do WORK!.

In the conversation of can the universe have existed forever, the only thing that matters is that each exchange between matter and energy and energy and matter reduces the usable energy because the process is not perfectly efficient. Do this enough times and you reach maximum disorder or entropy and there is no more usable energy.

This is the reason cyclical universes have been rejected.

Again you dishonestly substitute universe for energy, which tells me deep down in your gut you know energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but you ate not honest enough to admit it.
Thank you.

Space and time were created with a finite amount of energy.

Do you agree or disagree?

The correct answer is agree

That depends on which cosmological theory you hold to. I understand you are trying to keep it simple for ed here, but the reality is based on the instrumentation we have, and the observations that we have made your statement is factual, however, as our instruments, processes, and observational abilities improve that theory may no longer be tenable.

Yes, I'm assuming that the universe is a closed/isolated system where no additional energy is added to the system.

Because otherwise we have one more thing we would have to explain. What added the additional energy.

Is there something else I am missing?

 

[ding]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

And DYNAMICS requires motion to perform work. Objects at the same temperature can and do move as long as that temperature is not absolute zero, which is a temperature that is not attainable in reality, only in theory.

They aren't doing any work, Ed. They can't.

Temperature is spatially uniform. No heat is flowing.

Maximum entropy has been reached.

 

[eagle1462010]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

And when the universe reaches a spatially uniform temperature it has reached a maximum state of disorder and entropy, right?

Who would care..............there would be no life in the universe if all the heat in the universe was gone......

I don't see the Sun going away anytime soon...........nor every star in the Universe.......what's the point of it.

 

[ding]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

And when the universe reaches a spatially uniform temperature it has reached a maximum state of disorder and entropy, right?

Who would care..............there would be no life in the universe if all the heat in the universe was gone......

I don't see the Sun going away anytime soon...........nor every star in the Universe.......what's the point of it.

Proving Ed is a dumbshit?

 

[eagle1462010]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

And when the universe reaches a spatially uniform temperature it has reached a maximum state of disorder and entropy, right?

Who would care..............there would be no life in the universe if all the heat in the universe was gone......

I don't see the Sun going away anytime soon...........nor every star in the Universe.......what's the point of it.

Proving Ed is a dumbshit?

It is a hypothesis according to the net............and something that will never happen.......or you could say in our life times......

If the sun goes we are gone anyway.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I like hot dogs!

 

[ding]

When equilibrium is reached.............no more work is being done.........any type of heat or cold induced thermodynamics cause molecules to move..........

At equilibrium no work is being done.........Thermo requires heat or cold to perform the action. 2 objects at the same temperature does no work.

And when the universe reaches a spatially uniform temperature it has reached a maximum state of disorder and entropy, right?

Who would care..............there would be no life in the universe if all the heat in the universe was gone......

I don't see the Sun going away anytime soon...........nor every star in the Universe.......what's the point of it.

Proving Ed is a dumbshit?

It is a hypothesis according to the net............and something that will never happen.......or you could say in our life times......

If the sun goes we are gone anyway.

Long before the sun supernovas our core will go cold. Good bye magnetic field. Hello radiation.

It isn't a hypothesis on the net. It is a consequence of the SLoT. Short of energy being added to the system, you can absolutely count on it.

But yes, we are talking about trillions upon trillions of years.