View Single Post
Old 05-13-2007   #11 (permalink)
jasonlfunk
Commentator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 57
Default Re: some of your physics not really right

Quote:
Originally Posted by hairy_Palms View Post
you only assume its put there by someone because its out of place, in a man made environment, if you see a rock on a beach you dont think "someone MUST have put that there", you just assume that the tide bought it in naturally, its physically impossible short of a hurricane or tidal wave for a rock to appear in someones house without interaction from somewhere, so i contend that your arguement would be the one built on shaky ground.
But you conceded my very point. To overview what you are disputing (in case you didn't actually read what I wrote) is that the law of causality. That things do not come into existence uncaused. A cause does not necessarily have to be a "someone" as you seem to be caught up on. You say that the tide brought it naturally. The tide is the cause. I think you are over thinking what I am saying. This is the very foundation of all your thoughts and all of science. When something happens, we ask why? Not shrug and say it just happened, caused by nothing. That is all I am saying for that


Quote:
Originally Posted by hairy_Palms View Post
wrong, the very second law of thermodynamics you quote says this CAN happen, in a closed system the amount of energy does not change, meaning it doesn't decrease over time, and hence can go on forever in a big bang big crunch cycle,
That is not what the second law of thermodynamics says. It says that closed systems tend towards equilibrium. That everything in a closed system will eventually balance out. The fact that we haven't yet balanced out shows us that the universe has a finite age - it hasn't been around forever otherwise it would have balanced out already.

To quickly address some of the other points:
@jasper As far as I know and understand physics,the expansion of the universe does not increase the energy of the universe. But I will look into this more, or if you have sources that would be nice too. By the way, you got Maxwell's demon wrong.

@josh The frictionless spring example is the very thing that the 2nd law rejects is possible. In physics class you can create idealized systems of no friction to learn about springs. In reality you cannot. A spring in real life will eventually stop. As must a universe. Also gravity cannot account for the supposed "big crunch" as well. The universe is expanding and accelerating. Gravity is the weakest force in nature. It cannot account for the crunch. In fact, to my knowledge there exists no known mechanism to undo the bang. Not my cosmologists actually hold to this model to my knowledge.
jasonlfunk is offline   Reply With Quote