The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Non Life Sciences
  3. Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology
  4. Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?

  • 8 Replies
  • 7016 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline peppercorn (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1466
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
    • solar
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« on: 07/03/2011 15:57:21 »
If the law of entropy means the any system is likely to become more disordered over time.
A low entropy system has far fewer permutations of ordering than a high entropy system - Taking this to its conclusion, does the first moment of the universe represent THE lowest state of entropy possible?  - Ie, it's level of overall order could only become less with time, thus it would be unimaginably nuanced and complex.
Logged
Quasi-critical-thinker
 



Online yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 51619
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 171 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« Reply #1 on: 08/03/2011 23:04:58 »
Our world is open ended. In it all objects are losing energy, when all 'things' reach their lowest states of energy and no more 'work' can be done, then I expect us to have reached our entropic end-station.

"All spontaneous happenings in the material world (those that continue without outside help, except perhaps for an initial start) are examples of the second law because they involve energy dispersing. Energy that is in the rapidly moving, ceaselessly colliding minute particles of matter (including that which is made more available by chemical reactions such as gasoline with oxygen, that contain higher-energy bonds within them than their possible products) will diffuse, disperse, spread out if there is some way for that to occur without hindrance."

So instead of looking at as a 'ordered/unordered system it might be better to consider the 'energy'. Then I believe that since the Big Bang we've been 'cooling off' :) and the ultimate blandness are awaiting us at the end of the universe
Logged
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."
 

Offline Bill S

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3633
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 113 times
    • View Profile
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« Reply #2 on: 09/03/2011 15:49:55 »
Quote from: peppercorn
THE lowest state of entropy possible?

I assume you mean the lowest state possible for this Universe.  If there is anything beyond, there could, conceivably, be a lower entropy state that our Universe could not achieve.
Logged
There never was nothing.
 

Offline peppercorn (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1466
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
    • solar
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« Reply #3 on: 09/03/2011 17:05:46 »
Quote from: Bill S on 09/03/2011 15:49:55
I assume you mean the lowest state possible for this Universe.

You assume correctly. Do you agree?
Or am I stretching the idea of entropy too far?
Logged
Quasi-critical-thinker
 

Offline Bill S

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3633
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 113 times
    • View Profile
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« Reply #4 on: 09/03/2011 22:04:42 »
Quote from: peppercorn
am I stretching the idea of entropy too far?

I think that if the 2nd law of thermodynamics is to be believed, which it seems to be, then entropy increase has to hold good throughout.  There may be a point, at one extreme or the other, at which it breaks down, but I believe we would have to have some pretty strong evidence before we could seriously suggest it.
Logged
There never was nothing.
 



Offline Soul Surfer

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3389
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« Reply #5 on: 09/03/2011 23:18:40 »
The shape is usually described as an even linear expansion of uniform material from a geometric point that is everything moves along a line from the origin outwards at exactly the same speed and with the same relative rate of expansion.  however this may only be a local effect and there my be an underlying shape that we (and no other point in the total universe)  can never see because it most of the structure lies outside our light cone.  This is because inflation hides most of the universe from every point in the universe. 

If asked to guess a shape I would suggest that the most likely is a toroid
Logged
Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!
 

Offline peppercorn (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1466
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
    • solar
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« Reply #6 on: 10/03/2011 13:25:42 »
Quote from: Soul Surfer on 09/03/2011 23:18:40
If asked to guess a shape I would suggest that the most likely is a toroid

Because?

Also, I'd argue that a 'point' is not a shape as such.
Logged
Quasi-critical-thinker
 

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3389
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« Reply #7 on: 10/03/2011 17:46:37 »
To explain this fully would take us into "new theories".  I have some postings there that could help if you are really interested.

My feeling is that our universe most probably originated inside of a (reasonably "normal" sized for this universe) black hole and I am working on a good theoretical model and some measurements that may support this.

I agree that a mathematical point is not a shape but it is the best that current theoreticians are prepared to offer and is clearly inadequate.
Logged
Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!
 

Offline peppercorn (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1466
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
    • solar
Was the 'shape' of the universe @T=0 the shape with the lowest entropy possible?
« Reply #8 on: 10/03/2011 21:13:28 »

Quote from: Soul Surfer on 10/03/2011 17:46:37
To explain this fully would take us into "new theories".  I have some postings there that could help if you are really interested.
Fair enough. It's not really an answer to what I was questioning anyway, but I appreciate there may be a link of sorts.

Quote from: Soul Surfer on 10/03/2011 17:46:37
My feeling is that our universe most probably originated inside of a (reasonably "normal" sized for this universe) black hole and I am working on a good theoretical model and some measurements that may support this.
This may explain why we appear to have complex 'initial conditions', however the model only shifts the responsibility to some other unknown.  In this way it appears no better than religion.

Quote from: Soul Surfer on 10/03/2011 17:46:37
I agree that a mathematical point is not a shape but it is the best that current theoreticians are prepared to offer and is clearly inadequate.
I could suggest that it could equally be an unimaginably high energy 'string', but, of couse, I can not prove that either!
Logged
Quasi-critical-thinker
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 

Similar topics (5)

How do we know the Universe is expanding, and expanding into nothing?

Started by guest39538Board Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 43
Views: 27521
Last post 22/07/2020 05:10:15
by CPT ArkAngel
If the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into?

Started by Tornado220Board Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 14
Views: 9594
Last post 06/07/2017 10:35:51
by paulggriffiths
Where is the "edge" of the Universe?

Started by paul.frBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 25
Views: 26022
Last post 01/04/2020 06:01:21
by hamdani yusuf
If the Universe is expanding, does this mean that space is expanding?

Started by EthosBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 14
Views: 16066
Last post 27/03/2020 21:05:55
by yor_on
How do we "know" that the universe is expanding?

Started by PmbPhyBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 12
Views: 8345
Last post 10/01/2019 10:20:39
by Bored chemist
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.181 seconds with 54 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.