order and entropy....

[petrushka.googol]

when an object like a car is fabricated atoms are co-related to form components. Altough energy is expended through losses what about the final product - the car. It is in an ordered state and its entropy has decreased (since it is well ordered). How do we explain this overall? Even in the universe entropy is increasing, as we all know. So where does this fit in?

[studiot]

What makes you think any product (including a car) is 'well ordered'.

How do you define this state of bliss?

 

The relationship between order, entropy and statistics is widely misunderstood.

Edited January 23, 2014 by studiot

[davidivad]

cars are man made objects. they are a result of life which goes against entropy. the fact is that we create ordered systems at the expense of our surroundings like you said. in the end, our actions create more entropy than without us. we consume systems that are at maximum entropy. to survive.

[MigL]

To put it extremely simple, if you released any heat during the manufacture of this car, you may have decreased the entropy of the car by making it more ordered, but you increased the entropy of the 'surroundings' by an amount much greater than the car's decreased entropy. This increased entropy of the 'surroundings' is proportional to the heat lost to the surroundings which can no longer be used to do work.

[studiot]

 

...........if you released any heat during the manufacture of this car...................decreased the entropy of the car ..............., but you increased the entropy of the 'surroundings'..............

 

How does this work?

Are you implying that this heat passes from the car to the surroundings during the manufacturing process?

Edited January 24, 2014 by studiot

[MigL]

No, I'm implying that any change in energy ( from one form to another ) involves a release of unuseable energy into the universe. This is for example seen as heat in a generator ( from friction of the bearings ) or in an internal combustion engine. The fact that total entropy of the system ( or universe as we can' t really have an isolated system ) must always increase is a valid argument for the non-existence of perpetual motion machines.

 

This is of course not valid for systems composed of a few particles as processes are then reversible, but it applies to any system ofstatistically significant number of particles ( irreversible ).

 

This is part of the three laws of thermodynamics that are in gambling terms...

You can't win

You can't break even

You can't get out of the game

[studiot]

Whilst I fear the OP has already abandoned this thread, I remain usure of your meaning.

 

 

involves a release of unuseable energy into the universe.

 

Where does this energy come from ?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

I find entropy, like trying to walk forward, while looking back over your shoulder !

 

It always sounds back to front.

If anything increases, you normally think it's something advantageous ,. Like More money is rich. More energy is good I can travel further, get warmer. More this more that (apart from disease) is usually an advantage.

 

With entropy it all sounds back to front More entropy more disorder. Less entropy more order . My mind goes into counter intuitive mode and has to work it out every time entropy is mentioned. Then you have to go into all these degrees of freedom .. I start looking over my shoulder and walk forward into a pit !

 

Mike

[MigL]

Any process involves an exchange or transformation of energy. In a two particle collision you can account for all energies and they are conserved. When you start dealing with statistically large systems of particles, processes become irreversible. Energy is still conserved but a small amount is no longer available to the system.

 

Consider a divided box with gas at high temp on one side and lo temp on the other. you can extract work out of this system by taking advantage of this temperature difference. when you remove the partition the gases mingle and the temperature reaches an equilibrium at medium temp. All the energy can still be accounted for ( theoretically ) but it is not available to do work anymore. The entropy of the system has increased.

 

I did mention in my first post that this was a simplistic explanation so I didn't think I should mention increases or decreases in degrees of freedom.

[studiot]

Any process involves an exchange or transformation of energy. In a two particle collision you can account for all energies and they are conserved. When you start dealing with statistically large systems of particles, processes become irreversible. Energy is still conserved but a small amount is no longer available to the system.

 

Consider a divided box with gas at high temp on one side and lo temp on the other. you can extract work out of this system by taking advantage of this temperature difference. when you remove the partition the gases mingle and the temperature reaches an equilibrium at medium temp. All the energy can still be accounted for ( theoretically ) but it is not available to do work anymore. The entropy of the system has increased.

 

I did mention in my first post that this was a simplistic explanation so I didn't think I should mention increases or decreases in degrees of freedom.

 

 

I don't know if this was a response to my question, but it has still not answered it.

I will try to explain.

 

Very simply you stated that energy was released into the universe. It doesn't matter what sort of energy, my question asks where that energy comes from since 'the universe' includes everything.

Edited January 26, 2014 by studiot

[petrushka.googol]

Maybe the key to understanding this is to take the Universal Set as the known Universe itself.

Dissipation of energy takes place during ideation and work done produces output. So we can produce a tangible object (like a car).

The entropy of the Universe is always increasing, and we can plug this sub-system into the larger whole to arrive at the conclusion that entropy overall has increased.

[MigL]

Sorry studiot, I now understand your question.

It would be a lot clearer to say a portion of the energy involved in any process becomes unuseable and is lost to the universe. It moves the universe one step closet to a final temperature equilibrium.

Edited January 26, 2014 by MigL

[Delta1212]

 

I don't know if this was a response to my question, but it has still not answered it.

I will try to explain.

 

Very simply you stated that energy was released into the universe. It doesn't matter what sort of energy, my question asks where that energy comes from since 'the universe' includes everything.

"Released into the universe" was a simplification. The energy was already present in the universe, but in a useable form. It is "released into the universe" in an unusable form.

[studiot]

 

Maybe the key to understanding this is to take the Universal Set as the known Universe itself.

Dissipation of energy takes place during ideation and work done produces output. So we can produce a tangible object (like a car).

The entropy of the Universe is always increasing, and we can plug this sub-system into the larger whole to arrive at the conclusion that entropy overall has increased

 

Someone has given you +1 for this perceptive statement and I have added another.

 

Yes that is what I was trying to prompt MigL towards.

 

However this is your thread and my original reply offered to discuss your understanding of what makes 'order'

 

It is no small task to show if the entropy of the material that makes up a car is greater than or less after manufacture due to change in 'order'.

 

Consider, you take a bunch of iron atoms that are linked to oxygen atoms as ore and convert them to a bunch of iron atoms linked to other iron atoms.

You also take a bunch of carbon atoms, linked to other carbon atoms as oil and convert them to a bunch of carbon atoms linked to oxygen and carbon atoms as plastic.

Showing this as an increase in order is difficult.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Introducing Just the subject of Increasing and Decreasing entropy .

 

Posted 1 March 2014 - 12:33 AM

A means of objective observation with numbers

: :

. [A] if it has reducing entropy .Moving from a state of disorder to a state of more order. 5 To. 0

. , if it has static or increasing entropy. Moving from a state of order to a state of more disorder. 5 To. 10

 

A means to look at and obtain objective ,numerical proportions of CHANGE and see whether there is in fact PROGRESSIVE CHANGE by reducing entropy, as well as normal increasing entropy , as a proportion.

An Objective test. 100 individual aspects of the Universe across Space and Time From below the surface of the EARTH to:

The Largest Structure in the Observable Universe ( Space ) and The Big Bang ( Time )

.

TESTING FOR THE DIRECTION OF ENTROPY ( INCREASE , STATIC , DECREASE ) with Values .

If you're discussing entropy, why not just discuss entropy? (KISS, remember?) Is the root question why entropy can decrease for parts of a system while it increases overall?

 

Rather than concentrating on the thermodynamics aspect of entropy , with its concentration on useless energy distribution, I wish to concentrate on the opposite concept of useful, patterns of effective and practical systems of order.

The Definition of Entropy that I used was Taken from :-

the COLLINS ENGLISH DICTIONARY Essential edition Pub 2006 under Entropy ( en-trop-ee)

entropy n 1. formal . lack of pattern or organisation 2. physics. a thermodynamic quantity that represents the amount of energy present in a system that cannot be converted into work because it is tied up in the atomic structure of the system. [ Greek word turning towards ]

the Concise Oxford Dictionary adding under entropy ; measure of the degradation or disorganization of the universe

Posted 4 March 2014 - 02:13 PM

What is the graphed function?

This is a Standard Deviation Grid where :-
the x axis is MY Entropy number ( between 0 = order , 10 = disorder ) as defined on post # 129 .
The Y axis is the Sample count , where each sample has a value of 1 unit

Obviously this is only for the first two samples. it would not expect to show any meaningful information apart from trends until between ( 30 - 100 ) samples.

Example only : Bell curve

Quantify of Entropy

As explained this is a self defining scale ranging from Order =0 to Disorder =10

The following list is/will be, used as a discrete value chart : -

0= Order Patterns, alignment, symmetry, compact, ........................beauty (?)

1=

2=

3=

4=

5=

6=

7=

8=

9=

10=Disorder Chaos , Random, fragmented, featureless, spread out,....... Ugly (?)

Ophiolite Said

 

Science requires detail. Detailed observations; detailed hypotheses; detailed experiments; detailed validation. When the detail has been observed, postulated and tested, then - and only then - can it be subsumed into an overarching synthesis.

I have been somewhat surprised nobody has coined another quality of nature, the opposite to formal entropy. Or if they have its not in common useage,. If there were a discipline or word , somebody would have already thrown it back at me saying " what you are talking about , has already been done its called " ugyvyn" I have asked about a bit ? This is a little strange, that the concentration has been on the downward path of entropy , rather than considering, or in addition , an upward path of " ugyvyn" . It's present there in ' natural selection in biology,' and is only just being spoken about at a cosmological scale.. After all Entopy is a movement toward Disorder It seems to me it would be nice if there were a Universal discipline and a description , at least by Word , going in the opposite direction ( reducing entropy is just not good enough . ) It seems to me we are leaving it a bit late in not having already made an investigation into the very subject that I was proposing, looking at the state of the 'antithesis of entropy' [ not yet even giving it a name ] . All this when we are so close to wrecking our planet. {what with endangered specise, pollution, starvation, depleting resources, and goodness knows what }. So my two pennyworth is talking about that opposite direction to ENtropy called " ugyvyn " across the whole universe , starting with the Earth.

 

---------- " Generation " as being the opposite to " Entropy "

...............................................|.........................................................|

 

 

 

Davidivad said Posted 7 March 2014 - 02:53 PM

 

 

mike;

 

your bell curve... are you asking the question of is there something that works against your version of entropy?

 

the answer is a resounding yes.

 

if you place life itself into context with your graph, then it would resemble your bell curve.

 

life is a complex chemical reaction which sustains itself at the expense of the overall order of a system. it is so good at doing this that it can find new systems or resources to consume. while everything must give way to chaos eventually, life has found a way to defeat the trend to disorder by reproducing. note that life does not win completely and must give way to evolution. this evolution, however, ensures its survival.

 

 

Life being a Generative process , goes in the opposite direction to increasing entropy , namely it reduces the value of entropy (disorder ) to more order.

 

This also occurs with Gravitation and Open Systems

 

mike

 

 

I have retired to a quiet place to think. ! ..................................................EUREKA ! ...........................I have it !

 

Edited June 25, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Deepak Kapur]

imo, there are some similarities between the initial state of the universe ( lowest entropy) and the last stage of the universe ( highest entropy) e.g.

 

Particles moved randomly in the initial state and they will also move randomly in the final state....so, lowest and highest entropy seem somewhat similar....

[physica]

Mike your distribution graph is a complete joke. The concept of definite integrals show how wrong this graph is. What it's saying is that it's just as likely to decrease in entropy as it is to increase in entropy. Also there are no conditions stated in this graph. That means your saying that this state applies to all situations. So What your graph is also saying is that the probability of a system becoming less disordered if I heat it up is the same as the system becoming less disordered if I cool it down. Seriously read up on some basic A-level maths at least before you start making stuff up. That graph would fail an A-level maths exam.

Edited June 30, 2014 by physica

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Comments about bell curve ......

 

I wish you had noted my introduction to the bell curve ..... I think then you might not have been ' quite so quick' to criticize

 

 

 

Example only : Bell curve

 

This was intended for new readers, and as a conversational discussion on a speculation forum, where it originated. and as an indication of what could be anticipated , if such an experiment was to be conducted, and if increasing entropy had any competition. The sort of " back of a fag packet, engineers sketch" that could make the focus of a discussion between colleagues. I appreciate this is now in the main forum , but I was trying to rescue aspects of a discussion we were having on Entropy and any decrease in entropy. I have removed the " clever " bit as too many felt this was not for them , but am trying to restore the drive to decrease entropy provided by Gravity, Living things, and open systems.

 

I would accept a minor apology . ( If you are up for that sort of thing ? )

 

I will give my apology to any readers , that I prefer to deal with the concept of an issue , rather than the detail maths of a problem.

I do understand the maths behind these issues, but do not have the frame of mind , now-er-days, or the memory, or the patience to buckle down and do the maths. Sorry .

 

mike

 

PS. If you need a visualisation of the push and pull between increasing and decreasing Entropy

 

see :- http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/82416-art-in-science/page-7#entry808483

 

.

Edited June 30, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

It is interesting that under the influence of immense gravitational forces, namely those present around the event horizon of a Singularity ( Black Hole / Origin of Universe/ Big Bang or whatever ) where gravity is bending light to a standstill ,that :-

If I understand it correctly?

 

ENTROPY approaches ZERO

 

mike

Edited September 2, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

That doesn't sound right. The entropy of a black hole is porportional to its surface area: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_thermodynamics#Black_hole

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

That doesn't sound right. The entropy of a black hole is porportional to its surface area: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_thermodynamics#Black_hole

 

Somewhere around the singularity to just outside the event horizon I have come across the idea that Entropy goes to Zero , I am sure I was not dreaming.

 

( however that is not necessarily impossible ! My dreaming I mean , not the Entropy being Zero ) .

 

There is this thing, however, with Elephants being observed ( by 'Screwed ' and 'Safe ' two observers looking from two different frames of reference , constant velocity and accelerating frames ) falling, or attempting to fall , into a Black Hole Through the Event Horizon that Amanda Gefter has indeed taken up with Stephen Hawkins. !,

 

link :- http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/81748-moving-on-from-the-island-of-human-endevour/page-4#entry824253

 

mike

Edited September 2, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[imatfaal]

Firstly light does not stop at the event horizon - spacetime is curved such that it can no longer escape. Secondly Amanda Gefter is an excellent science journalist and her book is a philosophical memoir and not a scientific reference.

 

And not as a mod - but anyway - please don't link to your own threads as if they are a reference

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Firstly light does not stop at the event horizon - spacetime is curved such that it can no longer escape..........

I take your comments.

 

I think Amanda Gefter has provided a great service to the understanding of the overall view of the universe as a whole. Often the various sections of physics and cosmology have intense research into specific subjects and thus can be blinkered to an overview. By interviewing many of the leading Physicists and Cosmologists worldwide, she has been given glimpses of where " reality " lurks.

 

She was taken by these Gurus of Physics to the External Observer view of the Universe. Here from a hypothetical supersymetric , invariant position BEFORE the first matter broke, she had a peep ( at the view of reality ) at the Universe from outside. Then she was taken to the variant nature of matter and forces after gauge forces and Einsteins Frames of reference , gave the variant broken symmetry we are left with . Here we struggle to rejoin the break of Gravity from quantum and classical Physics. She was privileged to discuss these issues with scientists, that the rest of us would give our eye teeth to do.

 

However she did unearth this issue of Entropy being ZERO somewhere in these nether regions Singularity and Event horizons . Whether this has something to do with 'Wheeler's " The boundary of a boundary is Zero " I am not sure .

 

 

Mike

Edited September 4, 2014 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[hoola]

it seems that gravity and other forces are expressed within the object of mathematics which is wholly derived from the "object of logic". The separate forces may not have "fractured" from each other...but are deeply related by the specific attributes that logic directs math in describing fundamental forces...and may have been expressed sequentially mathematically, only seeming to have been derived from one another, or of some common force...as the BB unraveled from a state of minimum entropy...

Edited September 4, 2014 by hoola

[MigL]

I don't remember who it was that first interpreted entropy statistically, maybe Boltzmann, but this association with order/disorder seems to confuse people more than help.

 

The original thermodynamic interpretation was simply 'an energy which is no longer capable of doing work'.

Consider for example, one of the largest stores of energy in the universe, small in amplitude, but vast in extent as it permeates the whole universe. The Cosmic Microwave Background has no gradient or direction, and hence, no potential. It is an almost scalar energy field and entropic in nature, i.e. it cannot do any work.

Just to detect it, the equipment has to be cooled to near absolute zero, so that there is a potential and 'work' is done on the detector.

 

A black hole on the other hand, still has mass. And since mass is equivalent to energy, that means it can radiate as long as it is small enough that its 'temperature' is higher than 2.7 deg. If it is large such that its temperature is close to absolute zero, then it is actually gaining mass from the CMB.