Time yet to reconsider "the arrow of time"?

[Grumblenuts]

It appears that you believe

See? That's you in a nutshell. Dishonest is as dishonest does.

 

[ding]

It appears that you believe

See? That's you in a nutshell. Dishonest is as dishonest does.

No. There was nothing dishonest at all. You claimed there are 100% efficient processes and that there is no perpetual motion. Those statements are mutually exclusive.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You - Entropy and thermodynamics have to do with heat flow causing energy transfer. This is due to temperature differences in parts of the universe.

I don't recall making that statement.

Can you link to where you read that?

It's right there - expand

 

[ding]

You - Entropy and thermodynamics have to do with heat flow causing energy transfer. This is due to temperature differences in parts of the universe.

I don't recall making that statement.

Can you link to where you read that?

So that's a no, Grumblenuts ?

You can't link to that?

 

[ding]

You - Entropy and thermodynamics have to do with heat flow causing energy transfer. This is due to temperature differences in parts of the universe.

I don't recall making that statement.

Can you link to where you read that?

It right there - expand

I did. It's not there. Show me. Link to it.

 

[Grumblenuts]

It appears that you believe

See? That's you in a nutshell. Dishonest is as dishonest does.

No. There was nothing dishonest at all. You claimed there are 100% efficient processes and that there is no perpetual motion. Those statements are mutually exclusive.

And again you simply accuse and argue with yourself about your claims. Straw man argumentation is simply lying and tedious. 'Bout time you grew up.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Entropy and thermodynamics have to do with heat flow causing energy transfer. This is due to temperature differences in parts of the universe.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Ah, I see. You two are so similar. Lol.
Mea culpa.

 

[ding]

It appears that you believe

See? That's you in a nutshell. Dishonest is as dishonest does.

No. There was nothing dishonest at all. You claimed there are 100% efficient processes and that there is no perpetual motion. Those statements are mutually exclusive.

And again you simply accuse and argue with yourself about your claims. Straw man argumentation is simply lying and tedious. 'Bout time you grew up.

You are accusing me of what you are doing. You literally attributed something to me I never said and when confronted can't show my exact quote.

I on the other hand can show exactly what you wrote. In fact, let me show you.

You wrote:

How can one seriously conclude "that there are no 100% efficient transactions between matter and energy."? It's a never ending exchange. Energy and matter are always being created and destroyed.

Which implies you believe there are 100% efficient processes.

Then you wrote:

If you want to believe in the Tooth Fairy and that perpetual motion is possible.

Which implies that you do not believe in perpetual motion.

Again, those are mutually exclusive beliefs. If there are 100% efficient processes then perpetual motion is possible. So if you believe that perpetual motion is not possible, then you can't believe that there are 100% efficient processes.

 

[Grumblenuts]

It appears that you believe

See? That's you in a nutshell. Dishonest is as dishonest does.

No. There was nothing dishonest at all. You claimed there are 100% efficient processes and that there is no perpetual motion. Those statements are mutually exclusive.

And again you simply accuse and argue with yourself about your claims. Straw man argumentation is simply lying and tedious. 'Bout time you grew up.

You are accusing me of what you are doing. You literally attributed something to me I never said and when confronted can't show my exact quote.

I on the other hand can show exactly what you wrote. In fact, let me show you.

You wrote:

How can one seriously conclude "that there are no 100% efficient transactions between matter and energy."? It's a never ending exchange. Energy and matter are always being created and destroyed.

Which implies you believe there are 100% efficient processes.

Then you wrote:

If you want to believe in the Tooth Fairy and that perpetual motion is possible.

Which implies that you do not believe in perpetual motion.

Again, those are mutually exclusive beliefs. If there are 100% efficient processes then perpetual motion is possible. So if you believe that perpetual motion is not possible, then you can't believe that there are 100% efficient processes.

Heh, heh.. already admitted my mistake. And I do not believe in perpetual motion. Thanks for asking!

 

[Grumblenuts]

if you believe that perpetual motion is not possible, then you can't believe that there are 100% efficient processes.

Wrong. Your error is presuming "efficiency" based on closed system thermodynamics. Best example is to think about a kid flying a kite. The wind ends up doing far more of the lifting work than any kid could manage on their own. The operative term is COP - Coefficient of Performance, not "efficiency." You're welcome.

 

[ding]

Ah, I see. You two are so similar. Lol.
Mea culpa.

Actually we aren't.

 

[ding]

if you believe that perpetual motion is not possible, then you can't believe that there are 100% efficient processes.

Wrong. Your error is presuming "efficiency" based on closed system thermodynamics. Best example is to think about a kid flying a kite. The wind ends up doing far more of the lifting work than any kid could manage on their own. The operative term is COP - Coefficient of Performance, not "efficiency." You're welcome.

No. It has nothing to do with open or closed systems. It has to do with energy to matter or matter to energy exchanges. Nothing else. There are no 100% efficient processes. The SLoT precludes that.

 

[Grumblenuts]

My daughter's here to visit.. back later..

 

[Quasar44]

Thermodynamics deals with relationship of heat and energy

The universe is rapidly expanding due to dark energy

What made the universe expand initially?

Massive quantum fluctuations

I am not a scientist but I read things

 

[Quasar44]

Big Bang was a freak accident
By Quantum fluctuations
May have taken hundreds of billions of years for the quantum particles to settle in some strange order

 

[Quasar44]

I am not a scientist !!

I can only tell you the basics

 

[Grumblenuts]

if you believe that perpetual motion is not possible, then you can't believe that there are 100% efficient processes.

Wrong. Your error is presuming "efficiency" based on closed system thermodynamics. Best example is to think about a kid flying a kite. The wind ends up doing far more of the lifting work than any kid could manage on their own. The operative term is COP - Coefficient of Performance, not "efficiency." You're welcome.

No. It has nothing to do with open or closed systems. It has to do with energy to matter or matter to energy exchanges. Nothing else. There are no 100% efficient processes. The SLoT precludes that.

It has everything to do with open or closed systems:

The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system

Isolated systems are artificial by definition. Ergo your precious SLoT is not generally applicable to reality (open systems). That certainly doesn't render it useless to humans by a long shot. But it's pretty damned useless for this discussion.

"It has to do with energy to matter or matter to energy exchanges. Nothing else."
Admit it. You don't really know anything.

"There are no 100% efficient processes. The SLoT precludes that."
NSS. No one's said otherwise.. but you.. over and over again..

You're welcome.

 

[ding]

Thermodynamics deals with relationship of heat and energy

The universe is rapidly expanding due to dark energy

What made the universe expand initially?

Massive quantum fluctuations

I am not a scientist but I read things

What does that mean exactly? How did the massive quantum fluctuations propel everything outward?

 

[ding]

if you believe that perpetual motion is not possible, then you can't believe that there are 100% efficient processes.

Wrong. Your error is presuming "efficiency" based on closed system thermodynamics. Best example is to think about a kid flying a kite. The wind ends up doing far more of the lifting work than any kid could manage on their own. The operative term is COP - Coefficient of Performance, not "efficiency." You're welcome.

No. It has nothing to do with open or closed systems. It has to do with energy to matter or matter to energy exchanges. Nothing else. There are no 100% efficient processes. The SLoT precludes that.

It has everything to do with open or closed systems:

The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system

Isolated systems are artificial by definition. Ergo your precious SLoT is not generally applicable to reality (open systems). That certainly doesn't render it useless to humans by a long shot. But it's pretty damned useless for this discussion.

"It has to do with energy to matter or matter to energy exchanges. Nothing else."
Admit it. You don't really know anything.

"There are no 100% efficient processes. The SLoT precludes that."
NSS. No one's said otherwise.. but you.. over and over again..

You're welcome.

The formation of our universe says the universe is not an open system.

And it isn't useless for this conversation because if the universe is open then the universe cannot and will not contract. It will continue to accelerate with or without dark matter. So the premise of your opening post is flawed.