Time yet to reconsider "the arrow of time"?

[ding]

The arrow of time is the "one-way direction" or "asymmetry" of time. The thermodynamic arrow of time is provided by the second law of thermodynamics, which says that in an isolated system, entropy tends to increase with time. Entropy can be thought of as a measure of microscopic disorder; thus the second law implies that time is asymmetrical with respect to the amount of order in an isolated system: as a system advances through time, it becomes more statistically disordered. This asymmetry can be used empirically to distinguish between future and past, though measuring entropy does not accurately measure time. Also, in an open system, entropy can decrease with time.

With that in mind, let's presume here that the "Universe is Not Expanding After All" (or may not be) and that no practical system can be truly "isolated" or "closed" in reality. Does entropy really force time to go one-way? What if the Universe began shrinking?

Every law of physics and even particles, tells us that the universe is bi-directonal.

So, think big bounce versus big bang. Mirror image. The second law is itself a product of an unproven theory.

 

[ding]

The matter and energy came from something

Nobody knows
It’s kind of irrelevant

Actually it didn't. It was a quantum tunneling event.

It isn't possible for matter and energy to be an eternal source because of thermal equilibrium.

Indeed, nobody knows.. except Mr. Know_It_All here.

The SLoT says so. As time approaches infinity all object will equilibrate. There is no getting around this. So matter and energy cannot be an eternal source. Matter and energy must have a beginning and the only way matter and energy can be created is if the net energy of the universe is zero which means the universe must be closed.

So perhaps matter and energy are not "an eternal source." See my thumb? Gee..

Not without reaching thermal equilibrium they aren't. It cannot be avoided.

 

[ding]

Before energy and matter there existed math. That's what people like ding just can't get through their thick heads. There's a fundamental geometry to the Universe that supports everything we observe. A 3D web having an average density and no mass. There are natural limits to everything. Its mathematical properties allow for only certain states to manifest where stuff gets very big or small. From galaxies to quantum states. Countless dipoles constantly form and dissipate. All matter precipitates from the universal coupling of dielectric and magnetic fields. From pulsars to atoms. Perhaps even entire universes now and then.

Yes, the potential for everything existed before space and time. Which is why I say that mind, rather than being a late outgrowth of the evolution of space and time, has always existed as the source or matrix of the physical world. Such that the physical world is made up of mind stuff.

 

[ding]

The matter and energy came from something

Nobody knows
It’s kind of irrelevant

Vilenkin seems essentially correct, Wald a deep thinker, but very circular so self-deluded. It clearly matters greatly to the religious. It matters to me in a sense as well. I too have my theories, but I'd like to know for sure or even just better.

Wald was an atheist, like you.

So?

So your statement it clearly matters to the religious isn't applicable.

What?

Follow the thread.

 

[Grumblenuts]

The matter and energy came from something

Nobody knows
It’s kind of irrelevant

Vilenkin seems essentially correct, Wald a deep thinker, but very circular so self-deluded. It clearly matters greatly to the religious. It matters to me in a sense as well. I too have my theories, but I'd like to know for sure or even just better.

Wald was an atheist, like you.

So?

So your statement it clearly matters to the religious isn't applicable.

What?

Follow the thread.

Try employing logic.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Before energy and matter there existed math. That's what people like ding just can't get through their thick heads. There's a fundamental geometry to the Universe that supports everything we observe. A 3D web having an average density and no mass. There are natural limits to everything. Its mathematical properties allow for only certain states to manifest where stuff gets very big or small. From galaxies to quantum states. Countless dipoles constantly form and dissipate. All matter precipitates from the universal coupling of dielectric and magnetic fields. From pulsars to atoms. Perhaps even entire universes now and then.

Yes, the potential for everything existed before space and time. Which is why I say that mind, rather than being a late outgrowth of the evolution of space and time, has always existed as the source or matrix of the physical world. Such that the physical world is made up of mind stuff.

We continue to discover math just as we discovered fire, rafts, and wheels. Tool use (including math) is available to all animals and demonstrated by many. Your anthropomorphizing the Aether here into "mind stuff" simply to make it fit with the ID'iot narrative is pathetically obvious.

 

[ding]

Before energy and matter there existed math. That's what people like ding just can't get through their thick heads. There's a fundamental geometry to the Universe that supports everything we observe. A 3D web having an average density and no mass. There are natural limits to everything. Its mathematical properties allow for only certain states to manifest where stuff gets very big or small. From galaxies to quantum states. Countless dipoles constantly form and dissipate. All matter precipitates from the universal coupling of dielectric and magnetic fields. From pulsars to atoms. Perhaps even entire universes now and then.

Yes, the potential for everything existed before space and time. Which is why I say that mind, rather than being a late outgrowth of the evolution of space and time, has always existed as the source or matrix of the physical world. Such that the physical world is made up of mind stuff.

We continue to discover math just as we discovered fire, rafts, and wheels. Tool use (including math) is available to all animals and demonstrated by many. Your anthropomorphizing the Aether here into "mind stuff" simply to make it fit with the ID'iot narrative is pathetically obvious.

There is nothing in existence or will be in existence that was not a potential to exist before space and time. That is because mind, rather than being a late outgrowth of the evolution of space and time has always existed as the source or matrix of existence.

 

[ding]

Mind or consciousness without form is the only thing which can be eternal because consciousness without form is not subject to physical laws. Mind is the source of physical laws.

 

[ding]

It is primarily physicists who in recent times have expressed most clearly and forthrightly this pervasive relationship between mind and matter, and indeed at times the primacy of mind. Arthur Eddington in 1928 wrote, “the stuff of the world is mind‑stuff ... The mind‑stuff is not spread in space and time.... Recognizing that the physical world is entirely abstract and without ‘actuality’ apart from its linkage to consciousness, we restore consciousness to the fundamental position . . .”

Von Weizsacker in 1971 states as “a new and, I feel, intelligible interpretation of quantum theory” what he calls his “Identity Hypothesis: Consciousness and matter are different aspects of the same reality.”

I like most of all Wolfgang Pauli’s formulation, from 1952: “To us . . . the only acceptable point of view appears to be the one that recognizes both sides of reality -- the quantitative and the qualitative, the physical and the psychical -- as compatible with each other, and can embrace them simultaneously . . . It would be most satisfactory of all if physis and psyche (i.e., matter and mind) could be seen as complementary aspects of the same reality.”

What this kind of thought means essentially is that one has no more basis for considering the existence of matter without its complementary aspect of mind, than for asking that elementary particles not also be waves.

As for this seeming a strange viewpoint for a scientist -- at least until one gets used to it -- as in so many other instances, what is wanted is not so much an acceptable concept as an acceptable rhetoric. If I say, with Eddington, “the stuff of the world is mind‑stuff,” that has a metaphysical ring. But if I say that ultimate reality is expressed in the solutions of the equations of quantum mechanics, quantum electrodynamics, and quantum field theory -- that sounds like good, modern physics. Yet what are those equations, indeed what is mathematics, but mind‑stuff? -- virtually the ultimate in mind‑stuff and for that reason deeply mysterious.

George Wald: Life and Mind in the Universe

 

[Grumblenuts]

Uh huh, yeah, uh huh, yeah,.. heard you the first time,.. zzzZZZ,.. Snore!

 

[ding]

The matter and energy came from something

Nobody knows
It’s kind of irrelevant

Vilenkin seems essentially correct, Wald a deep thinker, but very circular so self-deluded. It clearly matters greatly to the religious. It matters to me in a sense as well. I too have my theories, but I'd like to know for sure or even just better.

Wald was an atheist, like you.

So?

So your statement it clearly matters to the religious isn't applicable.

What?

Follow the thread.

Try employing logic.

If you had employed logic, you would have recognized that Wald's statement that "it is primarily physicists who in recent times have expressed most clearly and forthrightly this pervasive relationship between mind and matter, and indeed at times the primacy of mind" was based upon statements made by Arthur Eddington, Von Weizsacker and Wolfgang Pauli.

So logic would have prevented you from disparaging Wald by saying his thinking was circular and self deluded. I am curious what makes you believe you know more than Wald, Eddington, Von Weizsacker and Wolfgang Pauli.

 

[ding]

Uh huh, yeah, uh huh, yeah,.. heard you the first time,.. zzzZZZ,.. Snore!

Great. Then hear this. We know the universe began because the SLoT tells us that as time approaches infinity all objects will equilbrate, which we don't see, and because of cosmic background radiation, red shift and Friedmann's solutions to Einsteins field equations. We know that the only way the universe could have began was to be created from nothing because the SLoT tells us that matter and energy cannot be eternal sources because as time approaches infinity all objects will equilbrate. Therefore, the matter and energy that are in our universe were created from nothing. We know that the only way that matter and energy can be created from nothing without violating the FLoT is for the net energy of the universe to be zero. We know that the only way the net energy of the universe can be zero and have matter or energy in it is for the universe to be a closed system when it was created so that the negative energy of the gravity could balance the positive energy of the matter.

Now you can go back to sleep.

 

[ding]

The arrow of time is the "one-way direction" or "asymmetry" of time. The thermodynamic arrow of time is provided by the second law of thermodynamics, which says that in an isolated system, entropy tends to increase with time. Entropy can be thought of as a measure of microscopic disorder; thus the second law implies that time is asymmetrical with respect to the amount of order in an isolated system: as a system advances through time, it becomes more statistically disordered. This asymmetry can be used empirically to distinguish between future and past, though measuring entropy does not accurately measure time. Also, in an open system, entropy can decrease with time.

With that in mind, let's presume here that the "Universe is Not Expanding After All" (or may not be) and that no practical system can be truly "isolated" or "closed" in reality. Does entropy really force time to go one-way? What if the Universe began shrinking?

So getting back to the flawed OP... time doesn't exist as anything other than a mathematical construct we use to reference the expansion of the universe. If the universe were to contract, time would not run backwards. Yes, there is nothing which prevents our models from running backwards in time, but that is a mathematical construct that has no basis in reality.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Bark, bark!.. bark, bark, bark!..

So sayeth Mr. Know-It-All..

 

[ding]

Bark, bark!.. bark, bark, bark!..

So sayeth Mr. Know-It-All..

I don't know it all. Just more than you.

 

[james bond]

Look, open or closed, it can happen and does all the time.

Our universe is a closed system because of SLOT. The second law is demonstrated true by a variety of calculations.

"The Second Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental truth about the tendency towards disorder in the absence of intelligent intervention. This principle correctly predicts that heat will never flow from a cold body to a warmer one, unless forced to do so by a man-made machine. As the self-described atheist scientist Isaac Asimov admitted:

“	Another way of stating the second law then is: The universe is constantly getting more disorderly. Viewed that way, we can see the second law all about us. We have to work to straighten a room, but left to itself it becomes a mess again very quickly and very easily. Even if we never enter it, it becomes dusty and musty. How difficult to maintain houses, and machinery, and our bodies in perfect working order: how easy to let them deteriorate. In fact, all we have to do is nothing, and everything deteriorates, collapses, breaks down, wears out, all by itself -- and that is what the second law is all about.	”
—Isaac Asimov, Smithsonian Institute Journal, June 1970, p. 6, emphasis added

The Second Law of Thermodynamics is the result of the intrinsic uncertainty in nature, manifest in quantum mechanics, which is overcome only by intelligent intervention. As explained in the Hebrews 1:10, the universe shall "wear out" like a "garment", i.e., entropy is always increasing."

Second Law of Thermodynamics - Conservapedia."

BTW, the difference between ding and I is he practices the science of atheism while I'm the Bible isn't a science book, but science backs up the Bible. IOW, I use the Bible literally in Genesis and adhere to creation science, i.e. no long time and no macroevolution. Especially no Darwinism nor ToE.

ding has stated he will never believe a literal interpretation of Genesis. I think this means he will go through Tribulation as he will be misled.

 

[ding]

BTW, the difference between @ding and I is he practices the science of atheism

 

[ding]

@ding has stated he will never believe a literal interpretation of Genesis. I think this means he will go through Tribulation as he will be misled.

Another difference between us is that I would never presume to know the ultimate fate of anyone or condemn anyone to hell or make a judgement about their ultimate fate.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Look, open or closed, it can happen and does all the time.

Our universe is a closed system because of SLOT. The second law is demonstrated true by a variety of calculations.

"The Second Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental truth about the tendency towards disorder in the absence of intelligent intervention. This principle correctly predicts that heat will never flow from a cold body to a warmer one, unless forced to do so by a man-made machine. As the self-described atheist scientist Isaac Asimov admitted:

“	Another way of stating the second law then is: The universe is constantly getting more disorderly. Viewed that way, we can see the second law all about us. We have to work to straighten a room, but left to itself it becomes a mess again very quickly and very easily. Even if we never enter it, it becomes dusty and musty. How difficult to maintain houses, and machinery, and our bodies in perfect working order: how easy to let them deteriorate. In fact, all we have to do is nothing, and everything deteriorates, collapses, breaks down, wears out, all by itself -- and that is what the second law is all about.	”
—Isaac Asimov, Smithsonian Institute Journal, June 1970, p. 6, emphasis added

The Second Law of Thermodynamics is the result of the intrinsic uncertainty in nature, manifest in quantum mechanics, which is overcome only by intelligent intervention. As explained in the Hebrews 1:10, the universe shall "wear out" like a "garment", i.e., entropy is always increasing."

Second Law of Thermodynamics - Conservapedia."

BTW, the difference between ding and I is he practices the science of atheism while I'm the Bible isn't a science book, but science backs up the Bible. IOW, I use the Bible literally in Genesis and adhere to creation science, i.e. no long time and no macroevolution. Especially no Darwinism nor ToE.

ding has stated he will never believe a literal interpretation of Genesis. I think this means he will go through Tribulation as he will be misled.

Thanks for clarifying how you differ from ding. Asimov was a great writer. Unfortunately, he was snowed along with most everyone else of his period. Not his fault any more than anyone else's necessarily. We've all been taught a lot of stupid physics and to defend its doctrines at times as though our lives depended upon it. I was clearly just built different than most. While I was drawn to study physics and remained constantly fascinated, many parts struck me as profoundly wrong from the git-go. Aspects bothered me so much I often grew physically ill and spent long periods trying to figure out why and what might make far more sense. Many decades have passed and, with help from many like minded skeptics, I'm still working on it.. but I've figured out a thing or three.

 

[Grumblenuts]

{Quoting Asimov -}
Another way of stating the second law then is: The universe is constantly getting more disorderly. Viewed that way, we can see the second law all about us.

Truth is we simply don't know whether or not it's "getting more disorderly." That was certainly the consensus view when Asimov was writing. Not so much anymore. In any case, trying to make it "all about us" is simply ridiculous. If one thinks the Earth is "more disorderly" now than all the hot dust and crap spinning around the solar system from which it formed, then they need their head examined. Your ilk begs everyone to view the magnificent beauty and intricacy of our current Earth with awe and as evidence of intelligence. The previous dust as sloppy "disorder."

We have to work to straighten a room, but left to itself it becomes a mess again very quickly and very easily.

Sorry you can't have it both ways. We've had nothing to do with Earth's "disorder" until very, very recently and our solar system, galaxy, universe.. appears to have only grown clearer, simpler, neater, more orderly.. with time.