Mike Smith Cosmos

I am not so convinced this is the end of the matter. I am not convinced Entropy always increases. Yes in a lot of circumstances the degrees of freedom increase or are more, and yes in those circumstances, yes heat flows away in a thousand directions, china gets smashed into a 1000 pieces and energy flows out the window and through the walls and we face large energy bills. But there is a light on the horizon: nuclear fusion happens, life comes into being, molecules and compounds are sticking together all the time, stars form from dust and molecular clouds, planets appear in accretion rings, the universe is being made before our very eyes. If there is not some order out of chaos going on in a decreasing entropy form , somewhere among that lot "I'll eat my hat. "

Yes ,but with something as fundamental as the laws of physics, and their assumption to be the same in all frames of reference, an which a large section of physics is currently based, deserves some form of explanation as to where they come from , or from where do they spread out from. The more provable one I would have thought is: That they come out , or are intrinsically bound up in the very nature of matter itself. Which is fine if that is the general consensus of scientists ! However I find it somewhat odd that it is seldom discussed ( unless I missed something.) That still leaves the problem of " where matter is scarce or very concentrated " . Are the laws distorted from normal, at these places. ( I would think that was testable, if not already having a little taster proof from the voyager probe, heading out of the solar system. Or , that the laws shine down from some higher Universal Region, which as you say is a little difficult to test. ( but none the less an option ) So which one or yet another do the consensus of scientists hold to.? Hang about I have missed out the Platonic Maths / Geometric shapes, casting shadows out of a cave option. It strikes me as fairly important, as I cannot see a nation of people obeying or being governed by a set of laws that they had no idea where they came from ! So which one are you going for Mr Swansont or anyone else for that matter ?, if I dare to push you slightly

Ok so if fields are out for the reason you say. That leaves by . Laws carried by matter. And as I understand things matter isn't everywhere. or at least very thinly spread in some locations. and yes if matter carries the laws with them, ok but if matter is very thin surely the laws will become thin with them. or distorted. Or the fabric of space time ? If so how, in what form ? Or some form of Universal Law web ? Or is there some form of medium , we currently do not accept, that carries the laws ? . Universal Law Grid If so what is its nature ? .

I can not see yet much of an answer to ... Are the laws spread about by matter,field, or universal right ? * If the laws are spread by Matter then in the absence of matter , say in a void , or intergalactic, then laws may be distorted. * If the laws are spread about by Fields then the laws will go everywhere fields go. * If the laws are universal right then they could be the same everywhere . . Which one , two or all or none ?

Have we established yet whether the laws of Physics are conveyed by Fields, particles, Space, the total of them all or from outside ?

Surely in chemistry , where elements are combining so as to become molecules and compounds. The degrees of freedom are much reduces from freely moving anywhere, to moving only in the direction of molecule and compound production. A similar argument , I would have thought could be argued for nuclear fusion, Rather than atoms, or particles being free to diffuse in multi degrees of freedom , rather combination of particles , right up through the life chain , demonstrates less degrees of freedom , following convergence , thus following a decreasing entropy.

As far as I know it the electron is one of the most common particles, which is very small, very fast, yet approachable. I and many others have and are still making a living out of the manipulation of electrons. The movement of this easily manipulated particle, can produce magnetism , it can produce electro-magnetic waves that hare off at the speed of light into the "ether" and appear thousands of miles away with information. No one seems to have broken it down into smaller particles like the proton into quarks. Our current high tech , industrial world exists by dint of the little electron , yet still we do no fully get to grips with quite what it is and how it behaves , what with spin, probability, wave/particle duality, location, etc etc. You can produce a few in your lap with a battery and a piece of wire, or a balloon and a jumper for that matter. Perhaps, as photosynthesis, utilizes electrons, our future energy requirements may yet be found in a new manipulation of electrons. Also the major part of the earths crust consists of Silicon. What are we doing, the future lays before us in the humble yet prolific 'ELECTRON'

We are so concerned with the forward relentless day and night movement of time . Atomic particles are more involved with ' change ' thats' all that matters to the particle . We call the particle going in the other direction " anti matter " So we might be worried but the particle is occupied more with change, rather than does the sun come out today.

Surely the frames of reference are where ever we wish to do some form of relativistic calculation. and that could surely be anywhere in the entire universe you choose ( namely everywhere ), to make our frame of reference, anywhere you care to choose. How about in the middle of a Galactic void, just outside the Virgo Cluster , where the Galaxies occupy the area as if on a bubble surface, particularly where Galaxies Clump in Groups. Now move sideways into the center of the Bubble of the Void. Form a Frame of reference there ;- Can we really assume the laws of Physics are the same "in the void " as another Frame of reference on the Lab. bench. ? Similarly place a frame of reference in the center of the sun, center of a Galaxy or Black hole, the internal atomic structure ( say in between a neutrons' internal quarks) ? Are we not assuming at little bit too all encompassing ?

I thought that " the laws of physics are the same in all fields of reference " was one of the founding assumptions of Einstein in his approach to relativity. And that if that were not true then his theory would not be true . However I may have got it wrong ! If so I appollogise both to you and Einstein . . I need to see what comments come in. But I have this hunch ( only a hunch) that under certain circumstances or locations or sizes, we are someday going to find out that the laws of physics are not the same in all places but change according to some yet not understood ways. Not in the way that everything falls apart.Or that stability goes out the window. Far from it, changing laws may open up new avenues of Super-science. But I do not know. I was rather hoping others may have some ideas about the issue.

Ok. I have got that. About the degeneracy, and how the Neutron stars form. So in the early fire ball of the big bang, the quarks combined First into Neutrons , then to protons and electrons, plus presumably the Higgs field shot out into the 'blue yonder' before everything else arrived up at that boundary between .....something .... and nothingness ...............Pushing the nothingness forward ahead of itself Then 300 -400 thousand years later the free electrons recombined with the protons to make hydrogen everywhere, at least for a while . Thanks.

Yes but that particular test in 2008 on quasar matter to do with electron- proton mass ratio,only shows that matter laws appear to be very similar if not identical. That's fine , but I would have expected that.otherwise the universe would fall to bits. What I am getting at , is : A ) Are the laws built up as some form of inherent nature of matter, that maintains laws around them in space as they work with each other in reasonable proximity. ? B) Are these laws maintained in some form of universal field ( like Higgs Field , or another field ) , that pervades all of space.? C) Are the laws of physics viewed as the very nature of the universe, beyond Matter and Fields ? D) A-n-other Each of these categories could result in interesting implications IF say ;; The laws only worked in the reasonable proximity of matter, what happens in inter-galactic space.?. What happens in Vast Astronomical structures like VOIDS in Space . What happens at 10 to the minus goggle? If they are the very nature of the universe . Where did they come from? Did they come out with the Big Bang, Just before the big bang, OR what?

As " The Laws of physics are the same everywhere " is one of the fundamental assumptions of relativity, the answer to this question may have some baring on what happens ,where ?

Ok so here is this medium, which I presume you mean " space -time" filled with the Higgs field. And at no further distance 'over there' is 'nothingness'. Fine. but how far out has this "Space-time " containing Higgs field 'gone' (in its initial inflationary Z....i....iipp out?)

Is the Higgs field 'everywhere' . Like everywhere where there is SPACE-TIME, as opposed to the ' Nothingness' which presumably is just over the border of Space-time.

Hi. There is a post Called " Heisenberg Principle " about (7 or 8 down) the list on quantum physics which has a fair bit of discussion on this point. It May help. Then again it may not !

When a lot of hydrogen has converted to deuterium , then doubled to helium, surely useable energy is available all the way up to IRON , where the binding energy graph peaks. Then the star collapses and goes either super nova or red giant depending on its mass compared to our sun. ( Much more Supernova, same or less Red giant ) What I don't know, is if one was representing ENTROPY graphically say in the way that three dimensional space -time can be represented as a 3D lattice with distortions near heavy objects. Whether an Entropy 3D lattice would look like a elongated rectangular cubic form , running in time from left to right , uniformly the grid intensifying as one moved right (forward in time).{ general increase in entropy as the universe ages and cools} BUT when examining the 3D grid closely , one would see small regions where the density of the grid changed to more spread out showing regional lowering of entropy around say nuclear fusion, molecular construction, maybe even life forms ? Yet still generally an increase of entropy as the universe ages and Cools. What say you ? .

Antoine, I have done quite a lot of mechanical vibration experiments, for various reasons. One side issue that came to the surface, was to do with tuning forks. ( musical style. ) . The two halves of the tuning fork oscillate in anti-phase, of necessity , namely the left hand leg would be going exactly out left while the right hand leg would be going out right ( exactly in anti-phase). I believe this could explain the Pauli Exclusion principle with electrons where electrons prefer to be in pairs yet can not be in exactly in the same state. So I presume one electron in a pair will be one direction spin and the other electron the opposite spin ( anti phase ). They would be very happy like the two opposing arms of a tuning fork. With two halves of a tuning fork it is impossible to work in phase. Similarly the electrons cannot ( Pauli exclusion) work in the same state of spin. Rather than some device from outside ( Pauli Exclusion law/rule ) preventing the electrons behaving exactly the same, they require the opposite to work against. Like a couple skating on ice. Try and lean backwards going in a tight circle is impossible, yet with a partner leaning in exactly the opposite direction is shear delight . So the electrons have an absolute requirement for opposite states ( + and - spins ). I think ! Suggest ! Propose ! Does this fit in with your idea ?

Help , Get me out of here !

.But surely after fusion to He nucleus there is more energy to do work with. Starting state Mass before fusion is ( e=mc squared equivalent ) of 2 x P plus 2 X N {4 Particles} plus no Binding energy [ Disordered ] less usable energy Finishing state Mass after fusion is ( e = mc squared equivalent ) of 1 X PPNN plus Binding energy { 1 item only } [ more Ordered ] more usable energy Then there are all the bits and pieces that come off in the process plus some radiation ( disordered ). ?? Not sure where they fit in to the entropy bit .? Other than a source of more mass and energy which is obviously what comes out of the Sun and spreads out across the Universe including Earth.I think this bit is part of the disordered ( more entropy ). They did however come out in between the Start state and the finishing state of the System . .

yes go into edit your post at bottom . delete everything by back space. then save . it should vaporise as there is nothing there.

I will have to take your word for it. I am not sure I am up to the calculation of working out numerically the total entropy before and after the fusion process. Intuitively I feel that all these , and similar constructive processes are opposite to the destructive processes which we define as an increase in entropy. Surely symmetry would indicate a decrease in entropy ? No ?

The mathematicians who explain spin seem to have no requirement for a visual model, claiming that some aspects of the universe are not described in any form we know. I personally don't see why we cant say its a little bit like this , a little bit like that, and mainly the other. Having done some model investigation of atom simulated devices, I have come to the conclusion that the electron does indeed exist fairly near to the nucleus, but so as to absorb some form of rotational energy ( angular momentum) the electron moves in a complex motion , best working against an opposite partner electron having an opposite motion. ( all this working in partial arc motion) Thus to some extent there is probably an oscillatory nature of some sort. This is probably anathema to puritan mathematical atomic physics specialists who would prefer to leave it as a value with no model. I shall probably be hacked to death for ever muttering such non (mathematical only) comments, (primarily due to the Copenhagen agreement ( namely to draw a line under the unknown, and shut up and calculate ). I personally feel we should move on . Whether that helps you with your oscillations , I don't know. ? Keep thinking!

. Surely if we put a line around a possible nuclear fusion say (2 x Hydrogen nucleus ) namely 2 protons to form p-p then decay to p-n then repeat 2x (p-n) = pp-nn (Helium nucleus) . The net result is surely a decrease in entropy by both definition a) an improved order b) increase in energy potential without net inflow of energy. Otherwise surely 'Suns' would not work. Decrease in entropy in this special confined, defined system as per Alpha2cen .? Or have I got it all wrong ?

Not really sure that I understand what you are saying. Could you spell it out in idiot style language. Thanks.