Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Malamute Lover on 06/07/2020 00:16:34

Title: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 06/07/2020 00:16:34
Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric? 

Why is it that the hot coffee gets cooler instead of hotter or just staying the same? With the exception of SLOT, the laws of Physics are time symmetric. Run the time parameter backward and you will reproduce the past conditions.  Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics uni-directional? Because, we are told, of the Arrow of Time. Things develop in one direction in time. Why is that? Because of the Second … um, what was the question?

Why is SLOT different from other laws of Physics? Why the time asymmetry?

The coffee cools off over time, an obvious fact. How come it was hot in the first place? It got heated on the stove, via some kind of energy, gas or electricity or whatever. Where did that energy come from? Ultimately from the sun, or if it is nuclear then it resulted from a supernova that created the uranium. Why are there stars? Why do they put out energy? Planets, galaxies, dust clouds – where did they come from? None of this came fully formed with the Big Bang.

The answer is Gravity of course. And Gravity is always ‘down’, so to speak. It ‘pulls’ instead of ‘pushing’. The asymmetry is still there if you phrase it in General Relativity theory instead of Newtonian mechanics. The coffee cools because it was made hot by energy that ultimately derives from gravity. Local entropy can decrease such as stars forming and starting to shine or a cup of coffee getting heated as long as overall entropy increases. That is all that SLOT requires.

But why is gravity asymmetric in time? Gravitational force is related to the mass of the gravitating bodies. Which leads to the simple idea that gravity being ‘down’ results from the mass sign being positive. And guess what? If we look around at the universe, we notice that all of the mass is positive. There is no negative mass. All of the other physical properties – charge, spin etc. – exist in positive and negative forms. Why not mass?

If mass had a negative sign, gravity would be ‘up’ instead of ‘down’. Entropy would decrease instead of increasing. Now flip your point of view and you will see that a negative mass universe would work the same as ours just backward in time. Of course the inhabitants of such a universe would think of their SLOT (TOLS?) in terms of entropy increasing just like we do. They would imagine us as the ones going backward in time.

The direction of the Arrow of Time, in which overall entropy increases, appears to be related to all mass in a universe having the same sign. Whether it is labeled positive or negative does not matter, as long as it is all the same. That allows SLOT to be a universal unbreakable law, in terms of overall entropy increasing.

OK but why is mass always the same sign? Perhaps at the origin of the universe, whatever that might be like, both positive and negative mass arose in equal proportions. If the shape of space-time is related to the sign of mass (and isn’t it?) maybe all the positive mass went one way in time and all the negative mass went the other way. In this (very definitely hypothetical) scenario, there would be a pair of universes, mass-positive and mass-negative, both originating from the origin. Notice that the sum of the masses in the two universes is zero. No net excess of mass to explain.


Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Kryptid on 06/07/2020 01:47:23
If mass had a negative sign, gravity would be ‘up’ instead of ‘down’. Entropy would decrease instead of increasing.

I'm skeptical of that. Say that you have a box filled with negative mass particles. The particles all start off in the center of the box clustered together. This cluster is in a state of high gravitational potential energy, and could therefore be used to do useful work if we put some kind of device in it in order to take advantage of it. But as that cluster expands (due to the gravitational repulsion of its components), the particles fill up the box like a gas. Now there is no longer a gravitational potential gradient and the available gravitational potential energy is gone (having been converted into kinetic energy). Now our device can no longer extract as much (or possibly any) useful energy to do work. The expansion of the cluster has caused the entropy in the box to go up.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 06/07/2020 16:13:29
If mass had a negative sign, gravity would be ‘up’ instead of ‘down’. Entropy would decrease instead of increasing.

I'm skeptical of that. Say that you have a box filled with negative mass particles. The particles all start off in the center of the box clustered together. This cluster is in a state of high gravitational potential energy, and could therefore be used to do useful work if we put some kind of device in it in order to take advantage of it. But as that cluster expands (due to the gravitational repulsion of its components), the particles fill up the box like a gas. Now there is no longer a gravitational potential gradient and the available gravitational potential energy is gone (having been converted into kinetic energy). Now our device can no longer extract as much (or possibly any) useful energy to do work. The expansion of the cluster has caused the entropy in the box to go up.

Thank you for the reply!

I assume you mean that this box of negative mass particles is in our positive mass universe, not my hypothetical negative mass universe and that any positive/negative references we make are from our ‘clock goes clockwise’ point of view. Let us ignore the fact that in the real world any such experimental setup would be embedded in a gravitational field from some other source and any other irrelevant intervening variables. The only gravitational (or other) forces that need to be discussed are those related to the particles themselves.

To begin with, gravitational potential energy can only be made useful if it is converted into some other form of energy. An egg held (gently) in the hand will not break unless it is dropped. The gravitational potential energy is converted into kinetic energy, which is expended when the egg hits the floor breaking the shell.  The bigger the drop, the more resulting kinetic energy.

The gravitational potential energy of positive mass particles when such particles not clustered is negative. That is, the gravitational field pulls instead of pushing. (If they are clustered, they cannot fall any further no matter what and the gravitational potential energy is zero.)  The gravitational potential energy of clustered negative mass particles is positive. It pushes instead of pulling. The negative mass particles fly apart instead of sticking together.

The negative mass particles flying apart have negative kinetic energy. An expanding cloud of positive mass particles, maybe blown apart by a firecracker, could be a source of positive energy. Extracting and storing their kinetic energy would slow them down. Their kinetic energy would go in a negative direction. However, negative mass energy particles would have negative kinetic energy. Any method of extracting positive kinetic energy from them, making it go in a negative direction (even if this were possible) would speed them up. Extracting negative kinetic energy, heading up toward zero, would require inputting positive energy.

The gravitational potential energy of a positive mass particle at an arbitrarily great distance from a gravitating source of positive mass is arbitrarily large on the positive side. (The gravitating mass could be the effective center of a cluster of positive mass particles.) It can fall very far and be going really fast when it hits because it is getting pulled more and more.  The greater the distance, the greater the kinetic energy and the more work that could theoretically be done. The local net energy level increases. Decreasing entropy. This is how gravity can create regions of low entropy,


The gravitational potential energy of a negative mass particle at an arbitrarily great distance from a gravitating source of negative mass is arbitrarily large on the negative side. (The gravitating mass could be the effective center of a cluster of negative mass particles.) It continues to be pushed and therefore goes faster, even though the pushing force is decreasing. Less and less work can be done since the kinetic energy of the negative mass particle is getting more negative, the further away it gets. The local net energy decreases. Increased entropy.

When comparable situations are examined, the resulting entropy situations are seen to be opposite when positive mass and negative mass are examined.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Kryptid on 07/07/2020 00:50:17
The negative mass particles flying apart have negative kinetic energy. An expanding cloud of positive mass particles, maybe blown apart by a firecracker, could be a source of positive energy. Extracting and storing their kinetic energy would slow them down. Their kinetic energy would go in a negative direction. However, negative mass energy particles would have negative kinetic energy. Any method of extracting positive kinetic energy from them, making it go in a negative direction (even if this were possible) would speed them up. Extracting negative kinetic energy, heading up toward zero, would require inputting positive energy.

This is a good point. I have often thought about negative mass/energy, but sometimes forget about the nitty gritty of the way it works. I suppose if you define everything from a negative energy standpoint, available energy increases over time as it approaches zero instead of decreasing.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 09/07/2020 21:55:56
Why is it that the hot coffee gets cooler instead of hotter or just staying the same? With the exception of SLOT, the laws of Physics are time symmetric. Run the time parameter backward and you will reproduce the past conditions.  Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics uni-directional? Because, we are told, of the Arrow of Time. Things develop in one direction in time. Why is that? Because of the Second … um, what was the question?

For entropy to increase, it needs to absorb energy. Since the second law states that the entropy of the universe has to net increase, the energy being absorbed into entropy is being made net unusable to the universe.

The energy is conserved within the entropy, but entropy by having to always net increase renders  an ever increasing amount of energy non recyclable and not reusable. 

If we have a mother cell, splitting into two daughter cells, the system entropy has increased; more complex state. This more complex state has absorbed some energy into the higher entropy state, which now cannot be easily reused. The two daughter cells cannot go backwards unless we add extra energy beyond what was needed to go forward.

Energy conservation applies, however the energy that goes into entropy is stuck in limbo, and is no longer a part of the useable energy of the universe; as we go forward in time.

Entropy can be reversed. We can freeze and thaw water and ice. But this requires we add some extra energy to makeup for the loss due to the original entropy increase. I tend too believe the limbo energy, within universal entropy, is what we call dark energy. However, I think we are reversing cause and affect, since most appear to assume only reversible energy, but not the existence of energy, that results in complexity, being stuck in limbo.

If the universe reached a state of infinite entropy, there would be no useable energy in the universe. To an outsider, our universe would appear to have zero energy. However, the blue print of creation; all the entropy states facades, would still theoretically, exist due to energy conservation. The ancients would call this the alpha and the omega.

If you were God, or could play the role of God in the movies, to form a new universe from the zero energy void, you would need to figure out a way to lower entropy to release its hidden energy. One would have to brood over the blue print, in the cold darkness, until light appear from the void.

I use the term blue print because entropy is a state variable, meaning for a given state of matter, the entropy is a fixed value that is alway the same. Water at 25C and one atmosphere has a fixed entropy value that is used as a standard. The facade of matter; states, is like a blue print.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: evan_au on 09/07/2020 23:51:10
Quote from: malamute lover
If mass had a negative sign.... Entropy would decrease instead of increasing.
The problem is that mass has a corresponding energy, and even if the gravitational mass were negative, the equivalent energy would still be positive.

Whether antimatter has a different gravitational attraction than "normal" matter has still not been resolved.
- This is the subject of ongoing experiments at CERN (eg ALPHA)
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_interaction_of_antimatter

Looking to the future, entropy would still increase even with repulsive mass, because the statistical distribution of matter would become more uniform in an (accelerating) expanding universe.

Peering into the past, there is one event that may have caused more differentiation on our universe, and that is the hypothetical splitting of the 4 fundamental forces, as posited by string theory (and others).
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory

Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 10/07/2020 00:52:06
For entropy to increase, it needs to absorb energy. Since the second law states that the entropy of the universe has to net increase, the energy being absorbed into entropy is being made net unusable to the universe.

SLOT actually says that the overall entropy of an isolated system tends to increase over time. There is no physical reason why the combination of forces might not result in all the air molecules in a room to simultaneously be in the lower half of the room, resulting in a temperature increase. It is just outrageously improbable unless some special circumstances were invoked.  (Freezing all the air and having it settle to the floor would be a good start.)

Entropy is a useful mathematical tool, founded on statistics. It is not a physical thing. Usable energy is not absorbed into entropy. The energy goes some place in the physical world.

The energy is conserved within the entropy, but entropy by having to always net increase renders an ever increasing amount of energy non recyclable and not reusable. 

Whether energy is useable depends on circumstances. In the winter a hot cup of coffee can be used to warm your hands. Energy is leaving the coffee and warming your hands (and other areas of the environment such as the air). Entropy in the cup is increasing. Put the cup in a pan of hot water the same temperature as the coffee and there is no net energy flow. Entropy in the cup remains the same. Heat the water more and the entropy in the cup is decreasing as energy flows into it. Take the cup out of the water and it now does an even better job of warning your hands because it has more useable energy than before.

If we have a mother cell, splitting into two daughter cells, the system entropy has increased; more complex state. This more complex state has absorbed some energy into the higher entropy state, which now cannot be easily reused. The two daughter cells cannot go backwards unless we add extra energy beyond what was needed to go forward.

Life can be metaphorically characterized as an entropy exporting system. It depends on external energy sources of the right type to keep increasing entropy at bay and stay alive. In time the feedback systems that keep something alive fail and the organism dies. Left to itself, it will return to the raw components that constitute it. Entropy has increased.

For daughter cells to go back to a single mother cell would require not just an input of energy but a radical and careful restructuring of the feedback systems that resulted in the binary fission in the first place. Since this would involve some kind of chemical processes, presumably it would require energy to accomplish. But for the daughter cells to keep on doing what they normally do also requires energy input. All we are saying here is that life requires useable energy.

Energy conservation applies, however the energy that goes into entropy is stuck in limbo, and is no longer a part of the useable energy of the universe; as we go forward in time.

Entropy can be reversed. We can freeze and thaw water and ice. But this requires we add some extra energy to make up for the loss due to the original entropy increase. I tend to believe the limbo energy, within universal entropy, is what we call dark energy. However, I think we are reversing cause and effect, since most appear to assume only reversible energy, but not the existence of energy, that results in complexity, being stuck in limbo.

First, a note on terms. Entropy is a calculable value that can increase of decrease in the local system of interest depending on circumstances. The value of entropy can be changed one way or the other. But entropy is not a physical thing.

As I noted earlier, energy does not go into limbo. In most circumstances, it is merely dispersed into less useable forms. Entropy is statistical and abstract, not physical and real.  Energy that is not useable in one circumstance might become useable in another circumstance. Hot coffee in a thermos is in thermodynamic equilibrium. High entropy. It cannot be used for anything as long as it remains in the thermos. Pour it into a cup and it can warm your hands and your insides. Low entropy but increasing.

Dark energy is the hypothetical entity that is partly responsible for the expansion of the universe. It is doing work. It cannot be in a state of maximum entropy.

If the universe reached a state of infinite entropy, there would be no useable energy in the universe. To an outsider, our universe would appear to have zero energy. However, the blue print of creation; all the entropy states facades, would still theoretically, exist due to energy conservation. The ancients would call this the alpha and the omega.

A better phrase would be ‘maximum entropy’. The term ‘infinite’ can be confusing. Zero useable energy is not the same as zero energy. Mass is equivalent to energy and as long as matter exists there will be energy. Not just in the abstract but in reality. Gravitating bodies will still exert pressure inside them being resisted by electron shell repulsion. Once in equilibrium the energy will no longer be useable but it is still there as long as there is gravity.

If you were God, or could play the role of God in the movies, to form a new universe from the zero energy void, you would need to figure out a way to lower entropy to release its hidden energy. One would have to brood over the blue print, in the cold darkness, until light appear from the void.

I use the term blue print because entropy is a state variable, meaning for a given state of matter, the entropy is a fixed value that is alway the same. Water at 25C and one atmosphere has a fixed entropy value that is used as a standard. The facade of matter; states, is like a blue print.

If I were playing God in a movie :D I would make the universe two-sided, one side with positive mass and the other side with negative mass. No net mass to have to invent.  The entropy related arrow of time would arise naturally.

The ‘fixed entropy value’ is arbitrary for convenience. It is not any sort of absolute value. And unless you are talking about fundamental particles, entropy is always a ratio, not an absolute value. Entropy was originally defined in this manner because nobody knew just how big or small the hypothetical atoms were.

BTW Water at 0.01° C at 1 atm is the standard, not 25° C. In engineering related to the thermodynamics of water (e.g., heating systems), this is the arbitrary zero value of entropy by definition because it is very handy mathematically to do it that way. 0C would be a problem because water can exist in solid or liquid state at that temperature, which would require talking about enthalpy. In this type of engineering, entropy is only defined up to just under 374° C because that is the limit of superheating, above which water will become steam regardless of pressure because the strength of the hydrogen bonds will be overcome.

I refuse to discuss enthalpy because (a) although I learned about it in school, I never used it in real life and it is now as opaque to me as the Latin I learned, and (b) I do not want engineering students asking me their homework questions. I understand someone pulled that stunt a while back. No replies naturally.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 10/07/2020 03:17:37
Quote from: malamute lover
If mass had a negative sign.... Entropy would decrease instead of increasing.
The problem is that mass has a corresponding energy, and even if the gravitational mass were negative, the equivalent energy would still be positive.

Whether antimatter has a different gravitational attraction than "normal" matter has still not been resolved.
- This is the subject of ongoing experiments at CERN (eg ALPHA)
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_interaction_of_antimatter

Looking to the future, entropy would still increase even with repulsive mass, because the statistical distribution of matter would become more uniform in an (accelerating) expanding universe.

Peering into the past, there is one event that may have caused more differentiation on our universe, and that is the hypothetical splitting of the 4 fundamental forces, as posited by string theory (and others).
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory

E = mc^2
If m is negative, energy is negative

Since the shape of spacetime is determined by mass-energy and since antimatter definitely has positive mass – otherwise the mass energy balances in collider events would be out of whack – I see no reason to imagine that antimatter would fall ‘up’.  But experimental physicists with big expensive toys gotta play. And sometimes with surprising results.

The only ‘experimental’ evidence so far is the essentially simultaneous arrival of neutrinos and antineutrinos from the 1987 supernova. Considering the distance that they traveled (164,000 light years) there should have been some difference in arrival times if they experienced different gravitational interactions, and therefore different paths, along the way.

The further apart positive mass objects are, the higher (more positive) the gravitational potential energy. As discussed earlier in this thread, the further apart negative mass objects are, the lower (more negative) the gravitational potential energy.

In addition, the heat death of the universe would not result from the dispersion of material by expansion but from using up sources of available energy such as in stars. This would be the case even if the universe were not expanding. Stars form and operate because positive masses attract. The excess binding energy in atoms lighter than iron is gradually used up as heavier and heavier elements are formed in the stars, increasing entropy. Recall that a black hole, the ultimate fate a star might achieve, is in a state of maximum possible entropy for its size.

By not shedding the excess binding energy in the fusion furnaces of stars, the entropy of negative mass matter remains low.








Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 10/07/2020 11:54:47
SLOT actually says that the overall entropy of an isolated system tends to increase over time. There is no physical reason why the combination of forces might not result in all the air molecules in a room to simultaneously be in the lower half of the room, resulting in a temperature increase. It is just outrageously improbable unless some special circumstances were invoked.  (Freezing all the air and having it settle to the floor would be a good start.)

This is true, but since there is no such thing as perpetual motion, this very action will net increase entropy, even though we have reversed entropy somewhere else. There is always a net loss of useable energy, via the second law, from the universe.

Matter or antimatter both stem from and contain energy, while gravity and anti-gravity are both part of energy conservation with neither having full access to the energy that is lost to entropy. When gravity acts entropy can reverse but they extra energy came from the potential energy within the gravitational potential. As gravity gets stronger due to less size, work cause heat energy, which then starts to increase entropy again to form other states of matter.

The term entropy was originally coined by engineers who were developing the first steam engines. They would measure the energy into and the work and energy out of their engines, and noticed that they could not close the energy balance. There was missing energy. This loss of energy was measurable and repeatable, Entropy was mathematically defined as the difference. The statistical explanation for the how and why of entropy came later, when statistics came into vogue. It does not explain the missing energy. Missing energy loads the dice.

In terms of modern chemistry, entropy is considered a state variable, meaning for any given state of matter, such as a one liter of water at 25C and 1 atmosphere, it has a specific amount of entropy. This is repeatable and can be achieved by any path to the final state.

The relationship between any given state; specific set of conditions for matter, and the fixed amount of entropy, makes entropy connected to the facades or blue prints of materials. Whether it be matter or antimatter, both are types of facade, and each defines a given amount of entropy, along with other forms of internal energy; enthalpy.

Our universe is mostly matter with a minor amount of antimatter. There is a time asymmetry here also.  We currently assume this is based on randomness; roll the dice. Or we might  assume this is due to each state having different amounts of entropy; energy in limbo. Both can have the same free energy; equal and opposite, but differences in entropy facade would create differences in enthalpy so free energy is the same. Antimatter appears to contain more enthalpy, to make it more active in the world of available energy. Matter does better in the world of unavailable energy and facades.

An interesting application of entropy is the living state. There is no other state in the universe with as many layers of facade, at all levels. Life is high in entropy and full of limbo energy that can be reverse as needed, since we constantly eat and metabolize to create the extra energy needed to satisfy the second law, while being able to reverse states.

The foundation of the entropy of life is within water and hydrogen bonding. The hydrogen bond has both polar and covalent bonding character. A hydrogen bond can form and then can go both ways with only a minimal change in free energy. The polar state has higher measurable entropy while the covalent state has lower entropy. Water and hydrogen bonds can switch back and forth since there is available thermal and metabolic energy, to make up the difference imposed by the second law.

The DNA, also uses hydrogen bonding as part of its template activity. The second law will drive evolution on the template, by altering polar and covalent patterns in previous states. Higher entropy means a more complex facade and more limbo energy. Evolution is not random but is based on the second law. Life will not spontaneous; reform the dinosaurs. Humans may do this in the lab, but it will have a large energy cost to recreate a lower entropy state.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 10/07/2020 16:25:41
SLOT actually says that the overall entropy of an isolated system tends to increase over time. There is no physical reason why the combination of forces might not result in all the air molecules in a room to simultaneously be in the lower half of the room, resulting in a temperature increase. It is just outrageously improbable unless some special circumstances were invoked.  (Freezing all the air and having it settle to the floor would be a good start.)

This is true, but since there is no such thing as perpetual motion, this very action will net increase entropy, even though we have reversed entropy somewhere else. There is always a net loss of useable energy, via the second law, from the universe.

My point was that SLOT is based on statistical considerations. The fewer the particles that are involved, the less absolute SLOT becomes. In everyday circumstances, the number of particles involved is always so enormously high that minor exceptions to a strict application of the law are not going to get noticed. Consider a dozen or so particles somewhere within a cup of coffee. The combination of external kinetic forces acting on this small cluster of particles could result in them very briefly reaching a temperature equal to that of the surface of the sun even if ice cold a split instant before. In fact, statistics tells us that things like this probably happen all the time somewhere within the cup. On the large scale, in a system that is hotter than its environment, heat energy is ‘always’ being lost to the environment, the odds against anything else happening being so preposterously high. 

Matter or antimatter both stem from and contain energy, while gravity and anti-gravity are both part of energy conservation with neither having full access to the energy that is lost to entropy. When gravity acts entropy can reverse but they extra energy came from the potential energy within the gravitational potential. As gravity gets stronger due to less size, work cause heat energy, which then starts to increase entropy again to form other states of matter.

Anti-gravity? Antimatter has positive mass just like normal matter, as confirmed by innumerable particle collider data points. There is no reason to think that anti-gravity is involved.  My discussions on hypothetical negative mass matter did not involve antimatter.

While the kinetic energy of gravitational collapse is what kickstarts stars into shining, it is the release of excess binding energy in less massive atoms that keeps them going. The high temperature and density at the core facilitate atomic fusion, liberating energy. If it were not for the untapped binding energy, stars would slowly cool and compress to their maximum density and it would be a much more boring universe.

The term entropy was originally coined by engineers who were developing the first steam engines. They would measure the energy into and the work and energy out of their engines, and noticed that they could not close the energy balance. There was missing energy. This loss of energy was measurable and repeatable, Entropy was mathematically defined as the difference. The statistical explanation for the how and why of entropy came later, when statistics came into vogue. It does not explain the missing energy. Missing energy loads the dice.

Carnot first stated the principles that would eventually lead to SLOT but dealt only with the concept of heat without consideration of any possible ensemble of particles. His work concerned the maximum efficiency of heat powered engines, recognizing that there will always be lost energy. Clausius made the idea of heat more rigorous and moved further toward SLOT but still without involving particles. It was Clausius who invented the term ‘entropy’ to represent the loss of useable energy in a system. Boltzmann introduced the particle notion and the statistical approach to thermodynamics, despite the idea of atoms not being widely accepted at the time.  (1) Lots of other names between and after that point.

There is no missing energy, Energy does not disappear. It can change to different forms not all of which are useful to us. The exhaust from a car engine is (just about) useless for propelling the car but it is still hot. Energy is conserved. BTW to understand why that is always the case, one need not go beyond the two-hundred-year old Carnot Cycle model.

(1) Ernst Mach, brilliant 19th century physicist but radical logical positivist, insisted that no one should even be allowed to talk about atoms because it would never be possible to observe them directly. Anything that could not in principle be observed did not exist. Mach was something of a mentor to Einstein but ironically Einstein’s work on the statistical basis of Brownian motion led to a more rigorous theory of atoms and a substantial proof that they really existed. The year I was born an atom (carbon) was visualized for the first time via X-ray interferometry. I was a practicing professional before some clever engineers at a large corporation spelled out IBM with atoms, visible through an electron microscope. I recall reading years back (but cannot recall all the details) about raising a single atom to a sufficient excitation state that it could be seen glowing with the naked eye. It was never a question of size but of brightness, just like with stars.

In terms of modern chemistry, entropy is considered a state variable, meaning for any given state of matter, such as a one liter of water at 25C and 1 atmosphere, it has a specific amount of entropy. This is repeatable and can be achieved by any path to the final state.

I have no idea what you mean by “This is repeatable and can be achieved by any path to the final state.”

I see that 25 ° C (‘room temperature’) is the reference point in chemistry for entropy values of different substances. Thermodynamic engineering involving water uses the 0.01° C standard. The two values are not comparable even when using the same dimensional terms. Entropy is powerful conceptual entity, but not a physical one.

The relationship between any given state; specific set of conditions for matter, and the fixed amount of entropy, makes entropy connected to the facades or blue prints of materials. Whether it be matter or antimatter, both are types of facade, and each defines a given amount of entropy, along with other forms of internal energy; enthalpy.

Entropy is not energy. Enthalpy involves energy of specific types, although it is not identical to energy, as you said.

Otherwise, I do not understand what you are saying.

Our universe is mostly matter with a minor amount of antimatter. There is a time asymmetry here also.  We currently assume this is based on randomness; roll the dice. Or we might assume this is due to each state having different amounts of entropy; energy in limbo. Both can have the same free energy; equal and opposite, but differences in entropy facade would create differences in enthalpy so free energy is the same. Antimatter appears to contain more enthalpy, to make it more active in the world of available energy. Matter does better in the world of unavailable energy and facades.

My proposal put forth in my original post is that the time asymmetry we observe in physical processes is due to the universe being composed of positive mass. Matter and antimatter are not really related to this. I imagine that negative mass matter would also have normal matter and antimatter states, each appearing in equal proportions in high (negative) energy interactions. Whether the unexpected preponderance of normal matter over antimatter is somehow related to my double universe idea I could not say. However, CPT violations may give a clue, an idea I have yet to wrap my mind around.

But going back to what you said – why should antimatter have greater enthalpy?

An interesting application of entropy is the living state. There is no other state in the universe with as many layers of facade, at all levels. Life is high in entropy and full of limbo energy that can be reverse as needed, since we constantly eat and metabolize to create the extra energy needed to satisfy the second law, while being able to reverse states.

Life exists because it maintains a state of low entropy, maintaining organization and energy level differential with the environment.  High entropy would mean low values for useable energy. That describes a rock, not a living entity.

The foundation of the entropy of life is within water and hydrogen bonding. The hydrogen bond has both polar and covalent bonding character. A hydrogen bond can form and then can go both ways with only a minimal change in free energy. The polar state has higher measurable entropy while the covalent state has lower entropy. Water and hydrogen bonds can switch back and forth since there is available thermal and metabolic energy, to make up the difference imposed by the second law.

While water is important to life because if its ability to dissolve, suspend and transport, the real hero is carbon. It’s enormous capability for making compounds, including extremely large and complex ones, and the large energy potentials that these compounds can contain is what makes complicated life forms possible. A rarely appreciated characteristic of carbon is that the byproduct of energy producing reactions (carbon dioxide) is a gas, allowing ready disposal. By contrast, carbon’s only competitor – silicon – has less compound forming capability, less energy potentials and its byproduct, silicon dioxide, is an inconvenient solid.

But we are getting outside the bounds of this sub-forum.

The DNA, also uses hydrogen bonding as part of its template activity. The second law will drive evolution on the template, by altering polar and covalent patterns in previous states. Higher entropy means a more complex facade and more limbo energy. Evolution is not random but is based on the second law. Life will not spontaneous; reform the dinosaurs. Humans may do this in the lab, but it will have a large energy cost to recreate a lower entropy state.

The ultra-complexity of DNA is due to its heritage, billions of years of energy input in an environment favorable to trial and error, combined with a titanic amount of that trial and error over the ages. The entropy increase in the universe at large that was involved in all that is truly colossal compared to the even the mind-boggling organization level of DNA.

But again, wrong place
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 11/07/2020 17:35:19
While water is important to life because if its ability to dissolve, suspend and transport, the real hero is carbon. It’s enormous capability for making compounds, including extremely large and complex ones, and the large energy potentials that these compounds can contain is what makes complicated life forms possible. A rarely appreciated characteristic of carbon is that the byproduct of energy producing reactions (carbon dioxide) is a gas, allowing ready disposal. By contrast, carbon’s only competitor – silicon – has less compound forming capability, less energy potentials and its byproduct, silicon dioxide, is an inconvenient solid.

Experiments were done where cells were dehydrated and then the water was replaced by a wide range of other solvents, to see what would happen to the organic compounds of life. This was connected to the theory life can appear in other solvents.

The results were, nothing worked properly, in any other solvent, down to individual enzymes. The carbon compounds became lifeless and lacked useful function without water. Wheh water was added everything worked and life appeared. What is often attributed in life, to statistics, is actually logically explained by the co-partnership with water.

Life, as we know it, evolved in water. Water was/is the micro environment for natural selection at the nanoscale from day one. If we placed life in the Arctic region or the Amazon Jungles, each environment will set parameters that life will need to meet. Life will need to stay warm in the Arctic and say cool in the Amazon; environmental pressures that have a predetermine result. Water had potential needs and life has to conform.

The DNA was selected by the water environment. DNA would not have been selected in any other solvent. If life had evolved in alcohols or any other solvent, which there is no proof it can, other organic or silicon chemicals would need to selected, since the experiments shows that the organic chemicals selected by water, for life, do not work in these solvents.

Entropy is connected to free energy by the equation G=H-TS, where G is the Gibbs free energy, H is enthalpy, T is temperature and S is entropy.

The second laws says that the S of the universe has to increase. The increase in S lowers the free energy G due to the minus sign in the equation. As universal entropy net increases, to obey the second law, the free energy of the universe gets less and less. There is less net free energy, that is usable to the universe, as time moves forward.

The universe was originally very hot so the T term or temperature was extreme. The early universe was making free energy unusable at a very high rate. Stars and fusion and extreme heat continue this tradition. There is less universal free energy, in play today, than there was yesterday.

What we call time, moves in the direction of diminishing useable free energy. Entropy and time share the feature of moving in one net direction; forward. Entropy has to increase and time has to move forward. The net loss of useable energy creates a moving target in time.

What has screwed up science, are the clocks that we use to measure time. Clocks cycle which is not how time behaves. This is how energy and waves behave, but not time. Clocks are the wrong analogy for time since they model time as a waves even though time only moves in one direction.

This is like using a thermometer to measure length. It can be done with some ingenuity; expansivity, However, this will  perpetuate a practical misconception that time is somehow connected to energy waves.  Free energy is TS and S does not cycle. Clocks do a better measuring TS,  since TS is a measure of energy.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 11/07/2020 23:36:36
Experiments were done where cells were dehydrated and then the water was replaced by a wide range of other solvents, to see what would happen to the organic compounds of life. This was connected to the theory life can appear in other solvents.

The results were, nothing worked properly, in any other solvent, down to individual enzymes. The carbon compounds became lifeless and lacked useful function without water. Wheh water was added everything worked and life appeared. What is often attributed in life, to statistics, is actually logically explained by the co-partnership with water.

Life, as we know it, evolved in water. Water was/is the micro environment for natural selection at the nanoscale from day one. If we placed life in the Arctic region or the Amazon Jungles, each environment will set parameters that life will need to meet. Life will need to stay warm in the Arctic and say cool in the Amazon; environmental pressures that have a predetermine result. Water had potential needs and life has to conform.

The DNA was selected by the water environment. DNA would not have been selected in any other solvent. If life had evolved in alcohols or any other solvent, which there is no proof it can, other organic or silicon chemicals would need to selected, since the experiments shows that the organic chemicals selected by water, for life, do not work in these solvents.

The experiment did not demonstrate that life cannot appear in solvents other than water. Putting diesel fuel in a gasoline energy will stop it dead. Flushing it out with gasoline brings it back to life. That does not prove that diesel engines cannot exist.

Life on earth arose in a water environment. It is dependent on the specific details of the chemical reactions that take place in water or involving water. The only other polar protic solvents around with non-trivial dielectric constants happen to interfere with the life-sustaining chemical reactions that exist in earthly cells. These solvents include ammonia, propanol, ethanol and methanol.  Injecting any of these into a cell will kill it because it will interfere with the life processes that developed in a water environment.  If the oceans had consisted of methanol and not water, it is impossible for life to have arisen using that solvent and carrier medium instead of water?

BTW was there any attempt to flush out the other solvents with water to see if the cell came back to life? Or is it only the dehydrated and not otherwise contaminated cells that came back to life with water?

Entropy is connected to free energy by the equation G=H-TS, where G is the Gibbs free energy, H is enthalpy, T is temperature and S is entropy.

The second laws says that the S of the universe has to increase. The increase in S lowers the free energy G due to the minus sign in the equation. As universal entropy net increases, to obey the second law, the free energy of the universe gets less and less. There is less net free energy, that is usable to the universe, as time moves forward.

SLOT does not say that S has to increase. It says that S will tend to increase until equilibrium is reached. Hot coffee poured into a hypothetical perfect thermos will reach thermodynamic equilibrium at a certain temperature after it has heated the inner wall of the container. S of the system will remain constant. Notice that there will be local fluctuations. The average kinetic energy of the molecules (temperature) will remain fairly high and they will bounce off each other with random redistributions of that kinetic energy.  But because the kinetic energy has no place to go, S remains constant.

It is the conditions that pertain in the universe that will lead to an overall increase in entropy (S) with as close to statistical certainty as should satisfy any nitpickers and then some. :D  But notice that local entropy reductions will remain possible as long as there is gravity. Local fluctuations in mass distribution due to random movements of gravitationally bound dust clouds and the like can still lead to star formation/reactivation with large entropy reduction in the neighborhood. SLOT is statistical, not a force in itself.

The universe was originally very hot so the T term or temperature was extreme. The early universe was making free energy unusable at a very high rate. Stars and fusion and extreme heat continue this tradition. There is less universal free energy, in play today, than there was yesterday.

The cooling of the universe was due to its expansion, not SLOT. If the universe did not expand, the high temperature would remain just like in the coffee in the perfect thermos.  But even if the universe did not expand, there would still be local fluctuations and regional gravitational collapses. If conditions were suitable, star formation and resulting fusion reactions or something comparable could still occur. Why? Because all mass in the universe has a positive sign and therefore gravity is always ‘down’. That is the reason that we still notice SLOT after 13+ billion years. There are pockets of low entropy today because of positive mass leading to gravity.

What we call time, moves in the direction of diminishing useable free energy. Entropy and time share the feature of moving in one net direction; forward. Entropy has to increase and time has to move forward. The net loss of useable energy creates a moving target in time.

In the equations of science (except SLOT) time does not move. The time value can be set at some arbitrary point and the system trajectory observed before and after that point. The perceived arrow of time, the fact that we notice certain kinds of differences between past and future, is due to positive mass leading to unidirectional gravity and SLOT.

What has screwed up science, are the clocks that we use to measure time. Clocks cycle which is not how time behaves. This is how energy and waves behave, but not time. Clocks are the wrong analogy for time since they model time as a waves even though time only moves in one direction.

This is like using a thermometer to measure length. It can be done with some ingenuity; expansivity, However, this will perpetuate a practical misconception that time is somehow connected to energy waves.  Free energy is TS and S does not cycle. Clocks do a better measuring TS, since TS is a measure of energy.

Time is not energy waves. It is a dimension along which development occurs. I am not familiar with any model that treats time as waves.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 12/07/2020 16:24:22
Time is not energy waves. It is a dimension along which development occurs. I am not familiar with any model that treats time as waves.

There is a difference between the propagation of time, and the clocks we use to measure time. My clock will repeat the same hours each day, even though time moves in one direction to the future and never repeats itself.

Time is 1-D but clock actually model a type of wave phenomena, where the period of the wave is either 24 or 12 hours. Clock time or rather wave time is used throughput physics and science to approximate a 1-D phenomena that is linear and does not repeat.

Time is not like energy, It is not 2-D like a wave, but the clock represents it as such, whether consciously or unconsciously bu long standing traditions. This is why if we are stuck with clocks which time represent time by a wave, the TS term in the free enemy equation i what we are expressing, since that term is a measure of energy. Entropy is 1-D, just like clock time, the TS makes it 2-D like the clock.

Entropy is reversible, but since perpetual motion does not exist, we will need to add more energy, for the local reversal of entropy, than was needed for the forward acton. This is because we need to compensate for the limbo energy that was part of the energy balance for the forward action.. We need to restore the limbo energy to get back to where we began.

I have tried to use the term net energy lost to entropy since some entropy can reverse, but the net affect is ever increasing entropy within the universe, with more and more limbo energy being added. This is how time is related entropy, with both being 1-D.

An example of an entropy clock would be the dead fish clock. We buy a fresh dead fish from the fish market and place it on the kitchen counter in its  time keeper case. The unit of time is when the dead fish  starts to stink. When the clock starts , entropy will taken over and we cannot un-stink the fish due to the second law. Like time it moves only in one direction.

Like in relativity, this clock;s time unit  is dependent on reference. The hotter it is in the kitchen, the faster the unit of time will lapse; spoil faster, and the cooler it is the slower time will lapse relative to a regular wave clock. This is connected to the TS variable, where temperate T will increase the loss of free energy, for any fixed amount of entropy.

Both time and entropy might also be expressed in 3-D, as a spiral moving up a z-axis. From above where the z-axis is not seen, we see a clock on an (x.y) plan. The clock appears to return to 12 noon each day. However, if we also see the z-axis, but it is also moving up the z-axis, so this new 12 noon has more limbo energy.

We as humans perceive time through changes of state, with increasing limbo energy assuring new changes, since what can reverse becomes more and more limited with time.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 12/07/2020 17:25:26
Another consideration is there are three states of matter: solid, liquid and gas. A gas can be placed under pressure but not tension. If we try to stretch a gas, all we do is lower the pressure. Solids can be  placed under pressure and tension but not both at the same time and achieve a steady state. If we push and pull a wagon it will move. Frictions adds a third variable.

Liquids are different in that they can be place under tension and pressure and reach steady state. For example, a glass of water open to the atmosphere will have atmospheric pressure. It will also display surface tension at steady state.

Liquid state physics, has different entropy and even time characteristics, than solid and gas states. Gravity is more often about solid and gas state in terms of modeling analogies. Liquid allows for some added things which could help physics models. A glass of water today and 1 billion year ago has not really aged. We will measure the same things the same amount. The rocks of the mountain will weather and sun will grow smaller.

In a liquid, for example, since tension and pressure can both exist at steady state, entropy and entropy reversal can also both exist at the same time at steady state. Entropy benefits by tension; spreading out,  and the reversible of entropy benefits by pressure; compaction. A solid state material, can have a defect locked into place. This added energy pocket assures change. Liquids can adjust for all temporary defects at steady state. This is why entropy is a state variable when it comes to liquids; final equilibrium state that is repeatable. Water is the same now as it was 1 billion year ago.

Water is also a wild card liquid. Water forms hydrogen bonds and hydrogen bonds have both polar and covalent bonding character Each of these two bonding states have different amount of entropy. Water can simply change from one to the other, without breaking the hydrogen bonding and tweak the local entropy in either direction. Water ages slowly.

The added paradox of liquid water is, as we add pressure we push the hydrogen bonds toward the polar side, water defines higher entropy. As we reduce the pressure or add tension. we get the covalent state which, ironically, has lower entropy. This is backwards. The net affect of the paradox of water entropy, is the fine tuning of entropy needed for life. 

This also makes liquid water the most anomalous substance in the known universe, with over 70 known anomalies. Water is the universe's swiss army knife.

Water is not a good time keeper, since its control of entropy makes it timeless. In life, where liquid water meets organic surfaces, timeless and temporal will meet. Water does not change, so the organics have to do it, for the team.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Kryptid on 12/07/2020 17:31:12
Solids can be  placed under pressure and tension but not both at the same time and achieve a steady state.

Yes you can. You can pull a rod from both ends at the same time that you squeeze it in the middle.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 12/07/2020 19:53:16
Time is not energy waves. It is a dimension along which development occurs. I am not familiar with any model that treats time as waves.

There is a difference between the propagation of time, and the clocks we use to measure time. My clock will repeat the same hours each day, even though time moves in one direction to the future and never repeats itself.

Time is 1-D but clock actually model a type of wave phenomena, where the period of the wave is either 24 or 12 hours. Clock time or rather wave time is used throughput physics and science to approximate a 1-D phenomena that is linear and does not repeat.

Time is not like energy, It is not 2-D like a wave, but the clock represents it as such, whether consciously or unconsciously bu long standing traditions. This is why if we are stuck with clocks which time represent time by a wave, the TS term in the free enemy equation i what we are expressing, since that term is a measure of energy. Entropy is 1-D, just like clock time, the TS makes it 2-D like the clock.

Time measurement in scientific experiments is typically by something that works like a stopwatch, from the real thing to an atomic clock. It is the duration of the event that is measured as an absolute value and not related to the day night cycle. In any case, most people do not think of the clock as a smooth wave but more like square waves that segment the day into discrete sections – get ready for work, be at work, be home, sleep. Old retired folk like me do not worry about the clock very much.

Entropy is reversible, but since perpetual motion does not exist, we will need to add more energy, for the local reversal of entropy, than was needed for the forward acton. This is because we need to compensate for the limbo energy that was part of the energy balance for the forward action.. We need to restore the limbo energy to get back to where we began.

I have tried to use the term net energy lost to entropy since some entropy can reverse, but the net affect is ever increasing entropy within the universe, with more and more limbo energy being added. This is how time is related entropy, with both being 1-D.

If the universe were not expanding and if gravity driven energy sources like stars did not exist, maximum entropy would have been achieved long ago. The universe would be very hot. If the universe were expanding (as it is) but the atomic processes that drive stars did not exist, the universe would have achieved a state of very high and very slowly increasing entropy long ago. In either of these cases, there would be some random fluctuations here and there above and below the overall entropy level. To a hypothetical observer in the former case, SLOT would not exist. In the latter case, SLOT would be barely noticeable, overwhelmed by random fluctuations.

If you factor the CMB into your calculations, the overall entropy of the universe is very high already. The reason SLOT is so obvious is that pockets of low entropy continue to be created and sustained by gravity and the existence of the atomic processes that drive stars. SLOT is not an inexorable force in itself. It is a result of circumstances.

An example of an entropy clock would be the dead fish clock. We buy a fresh dead fish from the fish market and place it on the kitchen counter in its  time keeper case. The unit of time is when the dead fish  starts to stink. When the clock starts , entropy will taken over and we cannot un-stink the fish due to the second law. Like time it moves only in one direction.

Like in relativity, this clock;s time unit  is dependent on reference. The hotter it is in the kitchen, the faster the unit of time will lapse; spoil faster, and the cooler it is the slower time will lapse relative to a regular wave clock. This is connected to the TS variable, where temperate T will increase the loss of free energy, for any fixed amount of entropy.

Why should such a low entropy like a fish exist in the first place? It certainly did not come fully formed out of the Big Bang. It came about by a large decrease in local entropy caused by gravity and nuclear processes. Thermodynamics typically does not take gravity into consideration unless one is talking about really large objects.

The fish clock does not work very well. The rate of flow of time is too variable based on external factors. Leave it on the table in the summer and the clock runs fast. Put it in the refrigerator and it runs slower. Even slower in the freezer.  Cook it and can it and later make a tuna sandwich and it can even result in lower entropy in someone’s body. SLOT as a timekeeper does not work because it is statistical and subject to local variations. It is not universal as time is.

Both time and entropy might also be expressed in 3-D, as a spiral moving up a z-axis. From above where the z-axis is not seen, we see a clock on an (x.y) plan. The clock appears to return to 12 noon each day. However, if we also see the z-axis, but it is also moving up the z-axis, so this new 12 noon has more limbo energy.

We as humans perceive time through changes of state, with increasing limbo energy assuring new changes, since what can reverse becomes more and more limited with time.

You are using the image of a cyclical clock to represent actual time when that is just an image you came up with that does not appear to be represented in the real physical world. 

And SLOT is not the cause of time. In a non-expanding universe that had achieved overall thermal equilibrium and there were no stars or other sources of energy, a cesium atom would still go vibrating away at a constant rate regardless of how global or local entropy is changing.


Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 13/07/2020 09:59:18
"Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric? "
Because the Universe is time asymmetric. It had a beginning, and will have some sort of "end".
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 13/07/2020 12:25:45
"Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric? "
Because the Universe is time asymmetric. It had a beginning, and will have some sort of "end".

Distinguishing beginning and end is simply building in an assumption of asymmetry. The laws of physics are time symmetric, If we run 'the movie' backward, there is no violation of those laws. All forces balance properly. SLOT is heuristically derived. We notice it happening. Why should SLOT be different?

I have given my reasoning for why SLOT is asymmetric in time - because of a whopping big asymmetry in the makeup of the universe, that all mass has a positive sign. No negative mass around. This approach also leads to explaining why we see lots of pockets of low entropy after 13+ billion years. of expansion. Positive only mass leads to gravity always being 'down' which allows stars to form and operate, supplying the energy to create other low entropy states.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: hamdani yusuf on 13/07/2020 12:27:33
Why is it that the hot coffee gets cooler instead of hotter or just staying the same?
The coffee does get hotter, if it's placed in hotter environment. Or near a strong microwave transmitter.

Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 13/07/2020 13:08:32
The laws of physics are time symmetric
Not all of them, for example, there's the 2nd law of thermodynamics
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 13/07/2020 15:12:22
The laws of physics are time symmetric
Not all of them, for example, there's the 2nd law of thermodynamics

SLOT is heuristically derived. We see it happening. It does not derive from any other laws, all of which are time symmetric. The question is WHY SLOT is asymmetric. Merely saying that it is does not answer that question.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 13/07/2020 15:21:51
Why is it that the hot coffee gets cooler instead of hotter or just staying the same?
The coffee does get hotter, if it's placed in hotter environment. Or near a strong microwave transmitter.

Exactly. How did the coffee get hot in the first place? It did not come out of the Big Bang that way. Energy was supplied to heat it up. Where did that energy come from? Ultimately from the sun for most power sources - natural gas, coal, oil etc. - or from supernovae if the source was nuclear. Stars did not come out of the Big Bang either.

Why are there pockets of low entropy this long after the Big Bang? Because all of them ultimately depend on gravity being time asymmetric, i,e., always being 'down'. This is how stars form and start nuclear fusion, And that fact about gravity is due to all mass-energy, which is what creates gravity, is always positive. That is my proposed answer.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 14/07/2020 15:08:42
The fish clock does not work very well. The rate of flow of time is too variable based on external factors. Leave it on the table in the summer and the clock runs fast. Put it in the refrigerator and it runs slower. Even slower in the freezer.  Cook it and can it and later make a tuna sandwich and it can even result in lower entropy in someone’s body. SLOT as a timekeeper does not work because it is statistical and subject to local variations. It is not universal as time is.

Mass via General Relativity cause clocks and time to slow down or speed up based on how much mass the reference has. The fish clock does this with heat, while a regular clock does this with mass and GR.

In both cases, the arrow of time always moves forward, but at differing rates based on mass or thermal energy and the type of clock one uses. Mass and gravity slows the rate at which time moves forward but does it not control the forward movement. A black hole may almost stop time for all practical purposes, but time still moves forward. Time is driven by entropy and the creation of limbo energy. The constant loss of useable energy from the universe does not allow time to cycle like a wave.

Consider this scenario. We have two factories that each make widgets. Both factories are identical and each makes 1 defect per thousand widgets. The defect is connected to entropy. We throw these away defects, since it takes too much energy to reverse the defects entropy increase. it can be done but it is not cost effective. 

I will take one factory and place it on a massive planet so its clock time slows due to GR. The other factory will be moved to a reference where time speeds up. In a side by side comparison, from a neutral reference, the factory with the faster time reference will make more defects per unit of third reference time. Less mass allows for more entropy to be expressed compared to extra mass. The expansion of the universe is increasing the rate of entropy; tim speeds up, to make up for the slowing and reversal of entropy by gravity and mass.

Since gravity is a force, when it lowers potential, it should give off energy. This is based on energy conservation. When gravity reverses entropy, that also gives off energy. The reversal of entropy  puts limbo energy back into play, locally. While the exothermic output from gravity, apart from entropy increases entropy elsewhere; expansion. Cold appears in the expansion due to limbo energy creation.

Entropy and limbo energy is useful to life and enzyme catalysis. Rather than push a reaction up an energy hill, entropy create a type of energy vacuum, that pulls the reactants up the hill in hopes of getting its energy in the future. Normally, we add energy to push things up and over the energy hill, but entropy can be used to pull things up the hill, so in the future, the energy release becomes available for entropy. Cause and affect can appear to be reversed in time.

As an easier to see example, say we expand a Nobel gas like Helium, so we can treat it as an ideal gas. We start with a compressed cylinder of gas at 20,000 PSI and open the valve. The gas and cylinder will get very cold as the gas expands due to the entropy increase. The increasing entropy is sucking up the local thermal energy. It can get so cold, nearby, we start to feel the air puling heat from out of our bodies. Entropic catalysis works this way. The creation of limbo energy makes this change unable to reverse. There is no extra heat left to balance this off, so equilibrium  will try to find it from secondary sources nearby.
 


Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 14/07/2020 16:15:03
The laws of physics are time symmetric
Not all of them, for example, there's the 2nd law of thermodynamics

SLOT is heuristically derived. We see it happening. It does not derive from any other laws, all of which are time symmetric. The question is WHY SLOT is asymmetric. Merely saying that it is does not answer that question.
We derived our laws of physics from experimental observations.
We observed that dropped eggs don't hop back up onto tables and rebuild themselves.
And thus it is the behaviour of the universe that drives the definition of our "laws".

If time didn't flow as it does, the 2nd law wouldn't exist as it does.

The universe generates the rules, not the other way round.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 14/07/2020 16:25:38
Consider this scenario. We have two factories that each make widgets. Both factories are identical and each makes 1 defect per thousand widgets. The defect is connected to entropy. We throw these away defects, since it takes too much energy to reverse the defects entropy increase. it can be done but it is not cost effective. 

I will take one factory and place it on a massive planet so its clock time slows due to GR. The other factory will be moved to a reference where time speeds up. In a side by side comparison, from a neutral reference, the factory with the faster time reference will make more defects per unit of third reference time. Less mass allows for more entropy to be expressed compared to extra mass. The expansion of the universe is increasing the rate of entropy; tim speeds up, to make up for the slowing and reversal of entropy by gravity and mass.
The entropy associated with "1 fault in 1000" is not rate dependent.
So your example makes no sense.

Since gravity is a force
Not really, it's a field.


Since gravity is a force, when it lowers potential, it should give off energy.
Even if gravity was a force there's no reason for it to give off energy
If I put a rubber band round a rock the band exerts a force on the rock (and vice versa) but it doesn't give off energy.


As an easier to see example, say we expand a Nobel gas like Helium, so we can treat it as an ideal gas. We start with a compressed cylinder of gas at 20,000 PSI and open the valve. The gas and cylinder will get very cold as the gas expands due to the entropy increase.
The word is "noble"
The effect is nothing to do with helium being a noble gas.
And, most importantly, you are simply wrong.

Helium is one of the few gases (at normal temperatures) which gets hot when it expands.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule%E2%80%93Thomson_effect

You really don't know what you are talking about; why not stop?
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 14/07/2020 19:52:47
The laws of physics are time symmetric
Not all of them, for example, there's the 2nd law of thermodynamics

SLOT is heuristically derived. We see it happening. It does not derive from any other laws, all of which are time symmetric. The question is WHY SLOT is asymmetric. Merely saying that it is does not answer that question.
We derived our laws of physics from experimental observations.
We observed that dropped eggs don't hop back up onto tables and rebuild themselves.
And thus it is the behaviour of the universe that drives the definition of our "laws".

If time didn't flow as it does, the 2nd law wouldn't exist as it does.

The universe generates the rules, not the other way round.

What is the cause of this unidirectional flow of time? All laws of physics, except SLOT, are symmetric in time. But they exist in this same supposed unidirectional flow of time. Why aren't they time asymmetric like SLOT? Also, entropy can decrease locally. We would not be here if that were not the case. Does that mean that time can flow backwards locally?

Obviously it is not as simple as that.

Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 15/07/2020 00:06:27
The fish clock does not work very well. The rate of flow of time is too variable based on external factors. Leave it on the table in the summer and the clock runs fast. Put it in the refrigerator and it runs slower. Even slower in the freezer.  Cook it and can it and later make a tuna sandwich and it can even result in lower entropy in someone’s body. SLOT as a timekeeper does not work because it is statistical and subject to local variations. It is not universal as time is.

Mass via General Relativity cause clocks and time to slow down or speed up based on how much mass the reference has. The fish clock does this with heat, while a regular clock does this with mass and GR.

In both cases, the arrow of time always moves forward, but at differing rates based on mass or thermal energy and the type of clock one uses. Mass and gravity slows the rate at which time moves forward but does it not control the forward movement. A black hole may almost stop time for all practical purposes, but time still moves forward. Time is driven by entropy and the creation of limbo energy. The constant loss of useable energy from the universe does not allow time to cycle like a wave.

Time is not driven by entropy. If entropy is decreased locally – and if it were not there would be no eggs to break – does that mean that time flowed backward? Does that mean that when entropy increases quickly, time flows faster? If you heat up a cup of coffee and drop an egg at the same time, what is happening to time? Is it going backward in the coffee pot? If you held onto the egg, would time not flow as fast?

Consider this scenario. We have two factories that each make widgets. Both factories are identical and each makes 1 defect per thousand widgets. The defect is connected to entropy. We throw these away defects, since it takes too much energy to reverse the defects entropy increase. it can be done but it is not cost effective. 

I will take one factory and place it on a massive planet so its clock time slows due to GR. The other factory will be moved to a reference where time speeds up. In a side by side comparison, from a neutral reference, the factory with the faster time reference will make more defects per unit of third reference time. Less mass allows for more entropy to be expressed compared to extra mass. The expansion of the universe is increasing the rate of entropy; tim speeds up, to make up for the slowing and reversal of entropy by gravity and mass.

The entropy level would be the same in the output of the two factories, one defect per 1000 units. Entropy is relative, not absolute. It is not a thing, only a measure.

Consider this scenario. A gas cloud in space that has been hanging around for millions of years gets nudged by starlight in such a way that it begins to collapse into a compact mass, due to gravity. As the gas cloud collapses, the local gravitational field gets stronger and time slows, as per GR. Eventually, because of the increased temperature and density, it starts fusing hydrogen into helium liberating lots of energy. The star gets hotter and heats up anything else nearby.  There has been a local reduction in entropy. But because energy that was previously locked up in atomic binding forces is now being flung out into the universe, global entropy increases. 

Gravity resulted in decreased local entropy and increased global entropy. The rate of time flow does not seem to have had much to do with anything.

Since gravity is a force, when it lowers potential, it should give off energy. This is based on energy conservation. When gravity reverses entropy, that also gives off energy. The reversal of entropy puts limbo energy back into play, locally. While the exothermic output from gravity, apart from entropy increases entropy elsewhere; expansion. Cold appears in the expansion due to limbo energy creation.

When potential energy becomes kinetic energy in a gravitational field, e.g., when a rock is dropped, the addition of positive energy to the rock is compensated by the addition of negative energy to the gravitational field. Recall that a gravitational field has negative energy, it ‘pulls’ instead of ‘pushing’. The plus energy applied to the rock is balanced by the minus energy added to the gravitational field, making it more negative and therefore stronger.

Why should the gravitational field get stronger and pull more? Because the mass of the rock is now closer to the center of the earth. The mass-energy density is a little higher, the gravitational gradient is a little steeper. The gravitation of the rock, by it being closer to the earth, is pulling the earth a little stronger and vice versa.

In General Relativity, this is expressed as the rock following a geodesic in curved spacetime. (A geodesic is the shortest distance between two points on a curved surface.) Some of going forward in time has been bent into going down into the gravity well.

Gravity does not itself reverse entropy. In the case of stars, the existence of gravity allows stored energy to be released. The high density and temperature at the core of a star make hydrogen undergo fusion into helium, which has less binging energy. The liberated energy is what makes the star shine, that is, send energy into the universe. But for most stars, there will come a time when there is not enough hydrogen left in the core to sustain fusion. The core is mostly helium, which has a greater mass than hydrogen. The local gravitational gradient in the core is higher than ever but there is no ‘fuel’ left to be ‘burned’. It is not gravity that caused the local entropy to decrease as much as it did.  Gravity was only the trigger. Without the excess binding energy tied up in hydrogen, stars would not shine as they do.

It is true that as the gas particles from which a star was formed will convert potential energy into kinetic energy when they hit the ‘bottom’ and the star being formed gets quite hot as a result. But if there were no fusion process, once the in-fall ceased or got too light to notice, no more heat would be generated and the star will cool over time.  All the energy sources that heat our coffee or get eggs formed and bring SLOT to our attention are due not to gravity alone, but to what gravity can cause to happen, nuclear fusion in stars.

Entropy and limbo energy is useful to life and enzyme catalysis. Rather than push a reaction up an energy hill, entropy create a type of energy vacuum, that pulls the reactants up the hill in hopes of getting its energy in the future. Normally, we add energy to push things up and over the energy hill, but entropy can be used to pull things up the hill, so in the future, the energy release becomes available for entropy. Cause and affect can appear to be reversed in time.

By entropy I presume you mean entropy increase. The term itself merely refers to a current value, not a direction over time. It is the fact that an external source, mainly the Sun, has provided useable energy that life can function. An entropy increase does not push a reaction up a hill. An entropy increase would mean less energy available for use and the reaction would slide down the hill.

As an easier to see example, say we expand a Nobel gas like Helium, so we can treat it as an ideal gas. We start with a compressed cylinder of gas at 20,000 PSI and open the valve. The gas and cylinder will get very cold as the gas expands due to the entropy increase. The increasing entropy is sucking up the local thermal energy. It can get so cold, nearby, we start to feel the air puling heat from out of our bodies. Entropic catalysis works this way. The creation of limbo energy makes this change unable to reverse. There is no extra heat left to balance this off, so equilibrium  will try to find it from secondary sources nearby.

When I was a kid, we used to buy little metal bottles containing pressurized CO2. There were little cars and boats that you could mount them in. There was a tool that would puncture the soft metal seal at one end, allowing the pressurized gas to escape and push the little car or boat at a pretty good clip.  Touch the spent bottle and it would be cold like it had been in the refrigerator.

Why? A gas in thermal equilibrium in a container consists of particles bouncing around all sorts of ways, some fast, some medium speed, some slow. They are constantly exchanging energy. Temperature is the average kinetic energy of the particles, but it says nothing about any individual particle.

When a little opening is made in the CO2 bottle, the particles that are moving fastest are typically the ones that will find their way out first. The average kinetic energy of the particles drops fast.  The temperature drops.

If instead of a small opening, a very large opening was made, just about all of the pressurized CO2 would come out at once. There would be much less differential selection of particle escape times based on speed. There would be much less temperature change in the container because it would have been exposed to the cold gas for much less time.

The difference in the resulting temperatures of the container in these two scenarios is due to exploiting the kinetic energy (temperature) differences between the different gas particles by controlling the size of the escape hole. In the case of the CO2 bottle with a small puncture as per normal use, the gas that comes out at the beginning is rather warm, as I know from personal experience.  Standing near a large container of pressurized gas exiting through a small valve would feel cold. Try standing in front of the valve and tell me how it feels at the start.


Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 15/07/2020 13:55:14
Time is not driven by entropy. If entropy is decreased locally – and if it were not there would be no eggs to break – does that mean that time flowed backward? Does that mean that when entropy increases quickly, time flows faster? If you heat up a cup of coffee and drop an egg at the same time, what is happening to time? Is it going backward in the coffee pot? If you held onto the egg, would time not flow as fast?

If you consider mass and gravity, which can lower entropy, locally, mass causes time to slow; GR. Along with time slowing this is also where entropy is decreasing due to pressure. However, since there is no such thing as perpetual motion, the lowering entropy will create some new entropy; not 100% efficient, therefore, time continues to propagate, albeit slower, to the future. This is based on regular clocks.

With the entropy clock; dead fish clock, time is dependent on temperature. In this case, cold decreases the energy that is available for entropy. This will make the time cycle of the dead fish get longer; refrigeration, so time appears to slow. Time is based on the relative behavior of clocks, whereas entropy is a physical thing that can alter the energy balance. 

The entropy level would be the same in the output of the two factories, one defect per 1000 units. Entropy is relative, not absolute. It is not a thing, only a measure.

Like in the twin paradox, one twin factory is aging faster. Part of that faster aging involves entropy, which is being expressed as more defects per unit of time in the middle reference. Where space-time is more open and time is moving faster, entropy (twin) will propagate faster. The expansion of the universe more than compensates for the lowering of entropy caused by gravity, so the second law remains in affect.

What this used to bring to mind was an affect similar to an expanding gas affect. Picture if we had a cylinder of compressed water, heated above ts critical point. Water above its critical point is a dense fluid that is neither gas or liquid, but is both. I use this to make water a compressed gas in a cylinder and not a liquid. 

I open the value and release the pressure, causing the expanding water vapor to cool, as entropy increases and absorbs the energy. Since the expansion is cooling the water, some of the water starts to condense into droplets of liquid water. This lowers entropy, locally. These drops give off heat of fusion as the local entropy lowers. This way the entropy of the main expansion is providing itself a secondary energy source, for the larger entropy picture of things. The model that was developed was the entropy expansion of space-time causes gravity. Gravity is not the first or second law, but has a role further down the chain of command. This theory put the two big dogs of of science first.

This was one way to explain how galaxies could have formed so early in the universe and why there is so much open space-time between galaxies. The red shift would also be impacted by the local needs of the second law between the galaxies. The expansion also induces the stars to give off energy; nuclear fusion, to feed the universal entropy, thereby red shifting in places where there is not enough secondary energy output.

It has not been easy for science to characterize gravity as a force like the EM, weak and strong nuclear forces, since we cannot seem to find the energy output quanta that the rest of the forces give off, as they lower potential. Instead a new potential is created within the gravitational field, that slow the production of defects in widget factories.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 15/07/2020 14:31:02
The CO2 in those little bottles is liquid.
The cooling is largely due to heat of vaporization. Nothing to do with entropy per se.
It's another of Puppypower's irrelevant rambles..
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 15/07/2020 17:47:22
The CO2 in those little bottles is liquid.
The cooling is largely due to heat of vaporization. Nothing to do with entropy per se.
It's another of Puppypower's irrelevant rambles..

Yes, the CO2 in a cartridge is liquid, which has the benefit of a rather constant pressure being maintained at the exit as the liquid evaporates until the pressure inside the cartridge drops below a critical value. But I did not want to make things too complicated. My 'fast' particles are the ones that evaporate from the liquid first, which are indeed the fast particles.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 15/07/2020 18:09:32
Most of the cooling occurs due to the requirement to break the attraction between the molecules of the liquid.
It's not an entropy thing as such.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 15/07/2020 22:22:55
Time is not driven by entropy. If entropy is decreased locally – and if it were not there would be no eggs to break – does that mean that time flowed backward? Does that mean that when entropy increases quickly, time flows faster? If you heat up a cup of coffee and drop an egg at the same time, what is happening to time? Is it going backward in the coffee pot? If you held onto the egg, would time not flow as fast?

If you consider mass and gravity, which can lower entropy, locally, mass causes time to slow; GR. Along with time slowing this is also where entropy is decreasing due to pressure. However, since there is no such thing as perpetual motion, the lowering entropy will create some new entropy; not 100% efficient, therefore, time continues to propagate, albeit slower, to the future. This is based on regular clocks.

Imagine a clock near an active star. It is being bombarded with photons, allowing solar panels to charge batteries, thereby reducing local entropy.  Now imagine a clock the same distance from a dead star of the same mass. No photons, no batteries being charged. Are you saying that the clock near the active star will run slower than the clock near the dead star? Remember, same distance from same amount of mass. No GR difference.

With the entropy clock; dead fish clock, time is dependent on temperature. In this case, cold decreases the energy that is available for entropy. This will make the time cycle of the dead fish get longer; refrigeration, so time appears to slow. Time is based on the relative behavior of clocks, whereas entropy is a physical thing that can alter the energy balance. 

Cook the fish and can it and you have greatly slowed entropy increase much better than refrigerating it. Temperature is not the determining factor here. It is all about details. And it has nothing to do with the rate of time flow. A cesium driven atomic clock is going to keep the same time on the table, in the refrigerator or in the frying pan. (It’s a heat resistant model.)

The entropy level would be the same in the output of the two factories, one defect per 1000 units. Entropy is relative, not absolute. It is not a thing, only a measure.

Like in the twin paradox, one twin factory is aging faster. Part of that faster aging involves entropy, which is being expressed as more defects per unit of time in the middle reference. Where space-time is more open and time is moving faster, entropy (twin) will propagate faster.

The factory that is producing more units is not just producing more defects, it is producing more order. The ratio is constant: 999 to 1. No entropy difference. Entropy is not a thing. It is a measure of disorder.

The expansion of the universe more than compensates for the lowering of entropy caused by gravity, so the second law remains in affect.

It is not gravity that lowers entropy but what is going on in the details. A collapsing cloud of hydrogen particles of a given mass and original volume will produce heat as it collapses but it can also produce additional energy from nuclear fusion. A collapsing cloud of iron particles of the same total mass and volume will produce the same amount of heat energy. But it will never produce fusion energy. Iron does not do that. Mass, volume, gravity – all the same in both cases. But the hydrogen scenario will produce fusion energy and the iron scenario will not.

The expansion of the universe has nothing to do with it. If the universe were in fact contracting at the same rate it is currently expanding, it would have no noticeable effect on what stars are currently doing. Mass-energy would still be positive. Gravity would still point ‘down’. Fusion would still happen in stars.

What this used to bring to mind was an affect similar to an expanding gas affect. Picture if we had a cylinder of compressed water, heated above ts critical point. Water above its critical point is a dense fluid that is neither gas or liquid, but is both. I use this to make water a compressed gas in a cylinder and not a liquid. 

I open the value and release the pressure, causing the expanding water vapor to cool, as entropy increases and absorbs the energy. Since the expansion is cooling the water, some of the water starts to condense into droplets of liquid water. This lowers entropy, locally. These drops give off heat of fusion as the local entropy lowers. This way the entropy of the main expansion is providing itself a secondary energy source, for the larger entropy picture of things. The model that was developed was the entropy expansion of space-time causes gravity. Gravity is not the first or second law, but has a role further down the chain of command. This theory put the two big dogs of science first.

This was one way to explain how galaxies could have formed so early in the universe and why there is so much open space-time between galaxies. The red shift would also be impacted by the local needs of the second law between the galaxies. The expansion also induces the stars to give off energy; nuclear fusion, to feed the universal entropy, thereby red shifting in places where there is not enough secondary energy output.

Gravity is always unidirectional in time at all levels from very small to very large. Entropy changes can be in either direction over a considerable range of scale. How can galaxy superclusters be so organized if SLOT is the big dog? Gravity results from mass-energy, not entropy changes. Gravity and factors related to the composition of matter are the cause of the continued pockets of low entropy without which SLOT would be virtually unnoticeable and would be only a small puppy.

Also, the First Law of Thermodynamics is that energy is conserved, which is generalized to mass-energy being conserved. This does not make anything happen, so it is not any kind of big dog. It is only a statement about how results must balance but gives no indication of the details of the balance. (BTW what’s wrong with the Third Law of Thermodynamics? And the Zeroth Law?)

As I said earlier, if the universe were in fact contracting at the same rate it is now expanding, there would be no change in how stars act. Mass-energy would still be positive, the physics of fusion would still be the same. The expansion of the universe is irrelevant.


It has not been easy for science to characterize gravity as a force like the EM, weak and strong nuclear forces, since we cannot seem to find the energy output quanta that the rest of the forces give off, as they lower potential. Instead a new potential is created within the gravitational field, that slow the production of defects in widget factories.

The mechanisms of the electromagnetic force were well understood in the 19th century. The force carrier particles were not rigorously identified until the 1930s. The strong and weak nuclear forces were known to be forces since the 1930s.  Mesons were discovered later and quarks were not well understood until the 1970s. It is not necessary to know the details of the force carrier particle to understood that a force is a force. Gravity has been known to be a force ever since Og dropped his club on his big toe. A still very useful quantitative description of how it works has been around since the 17th century.

And once more, all of your widget factories have the same entropy level – one high entropy defective widget versus 999 low entropy successful widgets.  Entropy is not a thing. It is a measure and a relative one at that.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 15/07/2020 22:28:25
Most of the cooling occurs due to the requirement to break the attraction between the molecules of the liquid.
It's not an entropy thing as such.

That is an entropy increase, the gas having less energy than the liquid. The cooling is because existing heat energy was used to break the bounds in the liquid. I am starting to be sorry I picked CO2 as an example. :)
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 15/07/2020 23:15:52
Most of the cooling occurs due to the requirement to break the attraction between the molecules of the liquid.
It's not an entropy thing as such.

That is an entropy increase, the gas having less energy than the liquid. The cooling is because existing heat energy was used to break the bounds in the liquid. I am starting to be sorry I picked CO2 as an example. :)
It's still a better example than helium.
But that's par for the course with PuppyPower.
He doesn't actually know what he's on about
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 16/07/2020 12:04:45
The factory that is producing more units is not just producing more defects, it is producing more order. The ratio is constant: 999 to 1. No entropy difference. Entropy is not a thing. It is a measure of disorder.

In the twin paradox, which is a similar scenario to the twin factories, the twin aging faster expresses more entropy.. Entropy is a state variable and aging faster reaches a more complicated state; old age, faster. Mass, via GR, can adjust the rate of local entropy by altering the local space-time reference. Once a star forms, larger stars process entropy faster and reach more complex states sooner. The expanding universe is speeding up time and the rate of entropy. This is compensating for the slowing of time due to mass and gravity.

But gravity is a short term entropy lowering affect, since once a star or planet is formed, the entropy starts to increase again into more complicated states. The star begins fusion and then the   formation of higher atomic states, which can then lead to molecules, etc.

The universe did not always expand at the same rate as today, nor did star formation always have the same rate. Expansion speeds up entropy while gravity slows the rate of entropy. However, entropy will continue to move forward and take away usable energy from the universe.

Entropy can locally go forward or reverse, but there is always an energy balance consideration. Whether you go forward or backwards, energy is being made net unavailable to the universe. In other words, to reverse entropy to a previous state, takes more energy than you will get back, This is connected to perpetual motion not being possible.

Gravity and mass is reversible. There is no energy made unavailable. I can take a large rock, lift it against gravity and then place it on a shelf. I can then reverse this, by pushing it off the shelf, to   get back all the energy. There is no lost energy, unless entropy is involved. Entropy and lost energy makes time asymmetric even for gravity and mass. Stars will age to a more complicated state even with mass present. In the end they explode to increase entropy, again. 

If you look at a star's core, this is the place where space-time is most contacted and time runs the slowest according to GR. This is the bottom of the star's space-time well. Ironically, the core of the star is also the place of fusion, highest heat; and fastest material transitions. There is a second lawyer of time; highest frequency core zone, due to pressure, that goes the opposite of the GR time affect of the core. The core is the faster place not the slowest as implied by GR.

Acceleration is one part distance and two parts time or a=d/t/t. Gravity has two time vectors; macro and micro. each going in opposite directions. The slow GR reference clock and a faster core gamma frequency based clock. As gravity  increases both become stronger bit in opposite directions. This does not happen with distance, since both space in space-time and space in fusion move in the same direction. It is one part distance and two parts time.

Time is not a thing but a perception of change of state that cannot fully reverse. Tomorrow will be different from today since time does not cycle or repeat like a clock. Lost energy assures that the arrow of time needs to go forward, since the previous state of time had more energy in play and we cannot recreate that or we will be violating perpetual motion.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 16/07/2020 12:15:25
Since gravity is a force, when it lowers potential, it should give off energy.

Even if gravity was a force there's no reason for it to give off energy
If I put a rubber band round a rock the band exerts a force on the rock (and vice versa) but it doesn't give off energy.

There is no energy made unavailable. I can take a large rock, lift it against gravity and then place it on a shelf. I can then reverse this, by pushing it off the shelf, to   get back all the energy.

So, does that mean you realise you were wrong?
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 16/07/2020 19:04:01
The factory that is producing more units is not just producing more defects, it is producing more order. The ratio is constant: 999 to 1. No entropy difference. Entropy is not a thing. It is a measure of disorder.

In the twin paradox, which is a similar scenario to the twin factories, the twin aging faster expresses more entropy. Entropy is a state variable and aging faster reaches a more complicated state; old age, faster.

That is not the Twin Paradox. The Twin Paradox was an argument used against Special Relativity. Two twins, one goes on a space ship journey at near light speed for many years, the other stays home. When the one who went traveling comes home, because of relativistic time dilation he is much younger than the one who stayed home. But in SR, motion is relative. Each would have seen the other moving at near light speed and undergoing the time dilation. Why should the traveler be younger than the stay at home?

In SR each would in fact see the other aging slower than himself because as the distance between them increased, the light waves from each one would reach the other spaced further apart than if there was no relative motion. Imagine each one taking a selfie every day and holding it up to the window for the other to see. (Assume excellent eyesight.) The near light speed rate of separation would cause the images to be spread apart by much more than a day. Each would see the other aging slowly. There is no paradox in SR.

Determining which was older would require that they be side by side with no relative speed. That requires a change in speed – acceleration. This is no longer a simple SR situation. General Relativity is needed. Most explanations simply drop the subject there. Although a proper mathematical explanation would get hairy (in GR nothing is easy) the basic idea is quite simple. The twin who went on the trip underwent acceleration to get up near light speed. This is not merely from the viewpoint of another observer. It is something that the traveler would really experience. The acceleration results in the time dimension getting dilated – stretched out – so that clocks on the spaceship really do run slower to an inertial frame outside observer, not just seem that way.

The twin at home experienced no acceleration and no time dilation. He would have aged faster than the traveling twin as judged by a later side by side comparison. There is no paradox in GR.

Similarly clocks in a gravity well really do run slower. But that is irrelevant to your argument. The stay at home twin got older, hair and teeth fell out, entropy really did a job on him. But your factory higher up in the gravity well does not age that way. It still turns out 1000 widgets a week or whatever (by its local calendar) and on average one of them is no good. The stay at home twin experienced a change in entropy. The higher up factory does not. It keeps producing order (999 widgets) and disorder (1 bad widget) at the same rate. No entropy change.

Mass, via GR, can adjust the rate of local entropy by altering the local space-time reference. Once a star forms, larger stars process entropy faster and reach more complex states sooner. The expanding universe is speeding up time and the rate of entropy. This is compensating for the slowing of time due to mass and gravity.

The direction and rate of entropy change is determined entirely by local circumstances. A large star produces more energy than a small star because it has more mass density and therefore more gravity, resulting in greater density and temperature in the interior.  That same mass spread over space would not produce nuclear fusion and energy. It is all in the details, not some global entropy force.

But gravity is a short term entropy lowering affect, since once a star or planet is formed, the entropy starts to increase again into more complicated states. The star begins fusion and then the formation of higher atomic states, which can then lead to molecules, etc.

At the same time a star lowers local entropy in the neighborhood, it increases global entropy. This is all due to gravity always being ‘down’ and that is due to real mass-energy always being positive. There is no entropy ‘force’. If you think there is, describe its workings in as much detail as other forces can be described.

A star undergoing nuclear fusion in its interior is decreasing local entropy in the surrounding neighborhood by supplying it with energy. (Actually in the entire universe but the useable energy gradient is higher close in. But in the interior of the star, there is actually an increase in entropy as bound energy in atoms gets unbound. The interior gets hotter and expands, reducing the rate of fusion. But would not the reduced strength of the gravitational field due to decreased density cause the clock to run faster and speed up that entropy increase process?

The clock related effects that you are talking about are negligible compared to what is really going on, gravity operating one-way due to the sign of all real mass-energy being positive, and the details of the processes that fundamental particles can carry out. Entropy is not a force. Overall increase in entropy is an effect, not a cause.

The universe did not always expand at the same rate as today, nor did star formation always have the same rate. Expansion speeds up entropy while gravity slows the rate of entropy. However, entropy will continue to move forward and take away usable energy from the universe.

I presume by ’expansion speeds up entropy’ you are referring to time running slower in a strong gravitational field and speeding up as the field strength decreases. For example, a clock on the surface of the earth runs a bit slower than one halfway to the Moon. The universe has expanded and the mass is now spread out further. The reduced mass density means a weaker gravitational field and therefore a faster clock. One must look at this carefully. Since there is no outside observer of the universe, and rate of expansion is essentially uniform everywhere, at least on the large scale, we can only compare the rate of time flow by looking at different times not different places.

In the past, the universe was denser and the universal gravitational field stronger. Clocks therefore ran slower. Yet we see the largest increases of entropy in the past. Temperature dropped rapidly in the early universe as density dropped. The Cosmic Microwave Background lost a lot of energy but is only doing so today at a negligible rate. Should not today’s low gravitational field strength and faster clocks result in a more rapid change in entropy?

BTW if the lower strength of the universal gravitational field cause clocks to run faster today than in the past, would that not imply that the CMB frequency increased over time rathe than decreasing? If that were the case you would need to (a) come up with a different cause for the CMB that explained a low frequency origin and (b) explain where the increase in CMB energy is coming from? And is that not a decrease in entropy? Think carefully about this one.

Entropy can locally go forward or reverse, but there is always an energy balance consideration. Whether you go forward or backwards, energy is being made net unavailable to the universe. In other words, to reverse entropy to a previous state, takes more energy than you will get back, This is connected to perpetual motion not being possible.

Perpetual motion machines of oldtime pseudo-science were supposed to produce excess energy from nowhere. That is a violation of mass-energy conservation. A machine that keeps running forever (perpetual motion) but without supplying excess energy is a violation of SLOT. Why? Because simply by being in the world, it will necessarily interact with the rest of the world and have its energy randomized, no longer being preserved in regular motion. (But again why does it have low entropy energy to begin with? Where did that come from?)

Gravity and mass is reversible. There is no energy made unavailable. I can take a large rock, lift it against gravity and then place it on a shelf. I can then reverse this, by pushing it off the shelf, to   get back all the energy. There is no lost energy, unless entropy is involved. Entropy and lost energy makes time asymmetric even for gravity and mass. Stars will age to a more complicated state even with mass present. In the end they explode to increase entropy, again. 

If you drop a rock, its potential energy due to gravity will become kinetic energy as it accelerates. When it hits the ground, that energy will be expended in some fashion, the rock will get hotter and maybe break (and maybe get less magnetized), the ground will be compressed and get hotter, shrapnel may fly, sonic and seismic waves will spread out.  The kinetic energy does not disappear. It just gets transformed.

The laws of Physics, except SLOT, are time reversible. If all of the energy that was dispersed when the rock hit came back together in just the right way, that is, in exact reversal, the rock would come back together and go back into your hand. There is no violation of any laws here, except SLOT.

The question is, if entropy is always supposed to increase, how come there are gravitating planets and rocks to drop onto them? How come there are sources of energy that arose since the Big Bang that facilitate local reductions in entropy?  How come there are stars, galaxies, superclusters, all increases in organization? The answer is that gravity is time asymmetric. It is always ‘down’.  Why? Because all mass-energy in the universe has a positive sign.

Gravity and mass are not reversible. If you pick that rock up again, you need to input energy to restore the potential energy so it can drop again. If you let it go, it falls by itself. For the rock to jump up on its own without energy input would require ‘running the movie backward’. That would mean antigravity and that would imply a negative mass-energy universe. The reason for SLOT is that all the mass-energy in the universe has the same sign and gravity always ‘pulls’. There is a built-in time asymmetry in the universe.

Entropy is not a thing. It is a result

If you look at a star's core, this is the place where space-time is most contacted and time runs the slowest according to GR. This is the bottom of the star's space-time well. Ironically, the core of the star is also the place of fusion, highest heat; and fastest material transitions. There is a second lawyer of time; highest frequency core zone, due to pressure, that goes the opposite of the GR time affect of the core. The core is the faster place not the slowest as implied by GR.

You have just negated your own argument.

The truth is that the effects of changes in clock rate are negligible compared to the other forces involved.

Acceleration is one part distance and two parts time or a=d/t/t. Gravity has two time vectors; macro and micro. each going in opposite directions. The slow GR reference clock and a faster core gamma frequency based clock. As gravity  increases both become stronger bit in opposite directions. This does not happen with distance, since both space in space-time and space in fusion move in the same direction. It is one part distance and two parts time.

Gravity is unidirectional in time. It does not go back and forth. Recall my prior example, a cloud of hydrogen of a given mass and volume and a cloud of iron atoms of the same mass and volume that collapse into compact bodies under gravitational attraction.

Assuming sufficient mass, the collapsed hydrogen would begin fusion, increasing immediately local entropy by freeing bound energy, and reducing nearby neighborhood entropy levels by sending out that energy. The iron mass will not begin fusion and the large increase in local entropy and decrease in nearby entropy will not happen. Yet because the two bodies have the same mass, they will have the same gravitational forces in effect and the same clock rates.

The effect of gravity on clock rates typically has negligible influence on entropy changes. You have to get near black hole level to talk about that.

Time is not a thing but a perception of change of state that cannot fully reverse. Tomorrow will be different from today since time does not cycle or repeat like a clock. Lost energy assures that the arrow of time needs to go forward, since the previous state of time had more energy in play and we cannot recreate that or we will be violating perpetual motion.

Time is a dimension in 4D spacetime. The types and magnitude of changes do not affect that. A hydrogen bomb reflects a pretty drastic change of state. Yet it has negligible effect on my old-fashioned windup wristwatch a thousand miles away. Did time flow differently ‘there’ and ‘here’? Did the cesium 137 atom floating around in the mushroom cloud oscillate any different than the one on my kitchen table? Will the atomic clocks they are driving show substantially different times?

If the universe consisted entirely of a zero net gain perpetual motion machine and there was only one kind of energy, would there be a SLOT? Imagine a spinning disk with angular momentum, but no other kinds of energy being possible and no other place for energy to go, the disk could spin forever. It is the variety of energy types and the choice of possible locations that allows energy movement. And it is the unidirectionality of gravity and its cause, the universal positive sign of real mass-energy, that result in SLOT.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 17/07/2020 14:40:23
Gravity and mass are not reversible. If you pick that rock up again, you need to input energy to restore the potential energy so it can drop again. If you let it go, it falls by itself. For the rock to jump up on its own without energy input would require ‘running the movie backward’. That would mean antigravity and that would imply a negative mass-energy universe. The reason for SLOT is that all the mass-energy in the universe has the same sign and gravity always ‘pulls’. There is a built-in time asymmetry in the universe.

With the example of the rock and gravity, it takes energy to lift the rock. Once the rock is  released all that energy is restored, due to gravity The energy balance results in all useable energy forward or backwards; energy conservation.

To lower entropy, you also need to add energy, and like gravity, entropy will also reverse itself, but now via the second law. However, some energy will be missing and/or made unusable in both directions. I call it limbo energy. It is still in the universe, but it is no longer in a state, where it can be easily reused, without even further loss of useable energy. The entropy of the universe has to increase to lower the entropic potential implied by the 2nd law. This creates limbo energy only useful to entropy. Entropy does not share, as does gravity.

All other expressions of potential energy, based on mass and gravity and all the forces of nature, need to decrease to lower their potential. They will release energy, which can be reused; energy conservation. Entropy has to increase to lower potential. This adds a twist  where more is less instead of less is less. More is less has an energy cost.

The core of the sun has the most time dilation due to GR. This is the bottom of the space-time well. Our mechanical and atomic clocks will slow there. As gravity gains mass and compresses,  the pressure causes the core to heat up. The material and energy frequencies increase due to the heat and pressure. The atomic and energy based clocks, used by the star's core, get faster and faster. These transitional clocks, are not getting slower and slower, as suggested by GR. Rather the choice of natural clock is getting faster and faster; entropy between the margins.

We use atomic clocks; Cesium Fountain, for accuracy. The sun uses nuclear clocks to set the pace for accuracy; gamma and fusion transitional clocks. It needs this fast time speed for marginal entropy. This is a different time vector than that of GR; slowed cesium clock.

The heat of fusion is increasing the entropy once again, as matter changes states and moves within the convection. Solar flares reverse gravity and continue off into space. In the end, mass and gravity helped walk the matter up an energy hill, and once over the hill, entropy begins to accelerate again. It is two steps back and three steps forward. The star cannot use gravity to put the entropy genie back into the bottle, one fusion is lit, since some energy goes to limbo.

If you were a spiritual minded person, who also believes in science, entropy and limbo energy would be good place to find spiritual realms. This limbo energy is predicted by the second law and would be based on a form that cannot be accessed fully from the inertial states. Rather an ever increasing pool of limbo energy, connected to increase ever increasing entropy, would be forming. The lack of full reusability by matter places this energy a different type of dimension.

This all comes together, if we assume the speed of light reference is the ground state or the zero state of the universe. There entropy would be infinite.This is the driver of the second law. Infinite entropy would place all energy into limbo. This would mean there is no useable energy for inertial dynamics so time would stop and then become timeless.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 17/07/2020 14:46:00
To lower entropy, you also need to add energy,
No.
Imagine that I have some water at zero degrees.
If I remove energy it freezes- and this reduces the entropy.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 18/07/2020 02:10:03
With the example of the rock and gravity, it takes energy to lift the rock. Once the rock is released all that energy is restored, due to gravity The energy balance results in all useable energy forward or backwards; energy conservation.
When the rock is dropped, some energy is lost in the form of gravitational waves. These waves have been detected in high energy astronomical events and carry energy. What is happening is that as the rock drops, it is going deeper into the gravity well and its clock is slowing. Although its kinetic energy relative to the ground has increased, it is also moving a little slower as seen by an outside observer and it therefore hits a little softer than that outside observer expected. Where did the missing energy go? Gravitational waves, a consequence of falling in a gravitational field. 

When the rock is picked up, a little extra effort is need to speed up the clock, over and above restoring the potential energy and whatever energy is lost in the effort. In conditions on earth, the energy difference is much too tiny to notice. But when neutron stars revolve around each other, the gravitational wave loss is enough to cause the orbits to noticeably decay.

Energy is conserved of course but not symmetrically. It has different forms before and after the event because gravity is always ‘down’. The reason we notice entropy increasing and formulate SLOT is because of low entropy pockets formed by the effect of gravity.

To lower entropy, you also need to add energy, and like gravity, entropy will also reverse itself, but now via the second law. However, some energy will be missing and/or made unusable in both directions. I call it limbo energy. It is still in the universe, but it is no longer in a state, where it can be easily reused, without even further loss of useable energy. The entropy of the universe has to increase to lower the entropic potential implied by the 2nd law. This creates limbo energy only useful to entropy. Entropy does not share, as does gravity.

Gravity never reverses itself. It is always ‘down’.

Energy in locked up form can be released in large quantities by the input of a much smaller amount of energy.  Plants grew because sunlight energized chemical activities. Under the right conditions, these plants became oil. Gasoline powers cars but it only takes a bit of electrical power to unlock the energy in gasoline. Why is there a sun to enable those plants to grow? Gravity, which caused enough mass to accumulate in the same place to start fusion processes.  By feedback processes in the plants, energy was stored. The total entropy of the universe increased but cars get moved around. Energy moves around a lot. To say energy becomes unusable may or may not be the case depending on circumstances. There is no such thing as entropic potential. Circumstances can change.

Entropy is not a thing. It is a measure and a relative one at that.

All other expressions of potential energy, based on mass and gravity and all the forces of nature, need to decrease to lower their potential. They will release energy, which can be reused; energy conservation. Entropy has to increase to lower potential. This adds a twist  where more is less instead of less is less. More is less has an energy cost.

SLOT applies only to the statistics of the entire universe. If it represented a force, it would act the same everywhere as gravity does and local entropy would never decrease.

The core of the sun has the most time dilation due to GR. This is the bottom of the space-time well. Our mechanical and atomic clocks will slow there. As gravity gains mass and compresses,  the pressure causes the core to heat up. The material and energy frequencies increase due to the heat and pressure. The atomic and energy based clocks, used by the star's core, get faster and faster. These transitional clocks, are not getting slower and slower, as suggested by GR. Rather the choice of natural clock is getting faster and faster; entropy between the margins.

Clocks do not get faster because of heat and pressure. There is no such thing as an energy clock. You want to have two kinds of time but there is only one. Only time dilation can affect atomic clocks. Gravity is one cause of time dilation. If energy had a direct effect on time, it would be obvious in high energy collider events where the energy density is beyond colossal. It does not happen.

The core of the sun is very dense, about 160 times as dense as water. The gravitational force at the surface of the core is very high, something like 600g. But here is the funny thing. Because of its very high temperature, the density of the core does not vary a lot. As one moved into it (hypothetically) the gravitational force would decrease because there is less mass underneath.

At the very center, where it is the hottest, being furthest from the heat sink of the main body, the gravitational force is theoretically zero. All of the mass of the sun is equally distributed around the center. In practice, the center of the sun is still subject to other gravitational fields from planets on up to the galaxy. But the gravitational force at the center will still be very low.

Atomic clocks would run slow at the surface of the core but would increase in speed as one went further down. Would this have any noticeable effect on fusion rates? No. Even in the core of the sun relativistic effects are trivial compared to the energy levels involved.

We use atomic clocks; Cesium Fountain, for accuracy. The sun uses nuclear clocks to set the pace for accuracy; gamma and fusion transitional clocks. It needs this fast time speed for marginal entropy. This is a different time vector than that of GR; slowed cesium clock.

There is only one kind of time. It is affected by acceleration, including gravitation. But there is no nuclear time.

The heat of fusion is increasing the entropy once again, as matter changes states and moves within the convection. Solar flares reverse gravity and continue off into space. In the end, mass and gravity helped walk the matter up an energy hill, and once over the hill, entropy begins to accelerate again. It is two steps back and three steps forward. The star cannot use gravity to put the entropy genie back into the bottle, one fusion is lit, since some energy goes to limbo.

In fusion, bound energy is released, increasing entropy in the immediate vicinity. That energy goes out and lowers entropy in the neighborhood. Not just the immediate neighborhood. The entire universe gets a touch warmer because of those photons. The energy did not go into limbo. It is in a different form that is less organized. But it did things far and wide, maybe nudging a gas cloud and helping it collapse into a star. When the entire universe is considered as a statistical ensemble, one can talk about entropy always increasing. But considered locally, it is clear that there is no entropic force.

If you were a spiritual minded person, who also believes in science, entropy and limbo energy would be good place to find spiritual realms. This limbo energy is predicted by the second law and would be based on a form that cannot be accessed fully from the inertial states. Rather an ever increasing pool of limbo energy, connected to increase ever increasing entropy, would be forming. The lack of full reusability by matter places this energy a different type of dimension.

There is no limbo energy, there is energy changed into different forms which might have surprising effects. It is not in a different dimension. SLOT is a heuristically derived rule of thumb that would barely be relevant to anything if there were no pockets of low entropy resulting from gravity always being ‘down’, a result of mass-energy always being positive.

Even in a state of maximum entropy, there are still statistical fluctuations where things can happen. Energy does not disappear and it can turn up at surprising times. SLOT as a rule of thumb is very useful. SLOT as a universal law only applies to the entire universe.

This all comes together, if we assume the speed of light reference is the ground state or the zero state of the universe. There entropy would be infinite.This is the driver of the second law. Infinite entropy would place all energy into limbo. This would mean there is no useable energy for inertial dynamics so time would stop and then become timeless.

I have no idea what this means.

The speed of light is a specific non-zero quantity. It is not a zero state of anything.  If the speculation is true that its value is determined by virtual particle density, then it is definitely not a ground state.

Entropy is a statistical measure. A gas in a container that is at the same pressure and temperature as its environment cannot be used to do work. But temperature is the average kinetic energy of the particles. In a large tank, it is entirely possible that a dozen molecules get bumped around so that they very briefly come close together an have an average kinetic energy equivalent to the temperature at the surface of the sun and the next split instant get bounced around in such a way that they very briefly have the temperature of liquid nitrogen.

Entropy being at a maximum does not mean there are no statistical fluctuations. In fact, the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics, that there is no Absolute Zero because of quantum fluctuations, guarantees that things will always happen no matter what. There is no such thing as infinite entropy. And because there is change, there will always be time.


Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 18/07/2020 12:17:00
There is no limbo energy, there is energy changed into different forms which might have surprising effects. It is not in a different dimension. SLOT is a heuristically derived rule of thumb that would barely be relevant to anything if there were no pockets of low entropy resulting from gravity always being ‘down’, a result of mass-energy always being positive.

Even in a state of maximum entropy, there are still statistical fluctuations where things can happen. Energy does not disappear and it can turn up at surprising times. SLOT as a rule of thumb is very useful. SLOT as a universal law only applies to the entire universe.

The term entropy was coined during the development of steam engines. The developers notice that the energy inputted into the devices, did not equal the energy that outputted from the device using a standard energy balance. There was always lost energy. This lost energy was called entropy. It is measurable and inferred by what is lost.

This lost energy is something more than statistical variations.Statistical assumptions are misleading since it describes an imaginary world that does not exist. It is an approximation method uses to simplify a complex situation. For example, a six sided dice is manufactured to weigh the same on all side, so it rolls evenly and any side will appear with the same probability. The difference in the sides, has to do wth a facade of dots, 1-6, that have no physical basis or connection to the roll. This is not found in nature.

A hydrogen atom  is not designed this way. It is a 5 sided dice with different energy weights on each of the five sides. Entropy deals in natural dice, which have physical weight difference, and not just subjective decorative weights, that only mean something to humans.

The second law says that the entropy of the universe has to increase, which means there needs to be ever increasing, net lost of energy, in the universe that gets tied up into entropy. The energy is in the form of entropy, which does not net reverse thoughout the universe, therefore there is net increasing energy, that is not net reuseable. Gravity will retrieve some of this limbo energy absorbed into entropy, but not all of it, since the second law states that entropy and its limbo energy equvient, has to increase. 

Using the example for the hydrogen atom dice, with five weighed sides, statistics will assume all sides of the hydrogen dice are equal. This simplification is not the case. Some of the sides use more energy. In the lab, proteins will form both left and right handed helixes when synthesized. In life, only left handed protein helixes form. Life can load the dice via entropy.

Statistically in the lab, this looks like a flip of a coin, with equal weighed sides, but with different subjective decorations; let or right.  In reality, you cannot substitute right handed protein for left handed protein and get the protein to work properly. These are not equal and opposite but each has a different weight in terms of catalysis. This difference on natural sides of dice, is part of he limbo energy that is ignored by statistical assumptions. Left handed protein helixes have a higher entropic potential, even if statistic assumes they weight the same as right handed dice.

Entropyu is a state variable meaning for any given state there is a fixed amount of entropy. The left and right handed helixes are two different states; loaded dice in terms of cells.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 18/07/2020 19:46:26
This lost energy was called entropy.
Not really, because entropy and energy don't even have the same units.
This lost energy is something more than statistical variations.
Nobody said it was.


Statistical assumptions are misleading since it describes an imaginary world that does not exist.
No it doesn't. It describes atoms, for example.
For example, a six sided dice is manufactured to weigh the same on all side, so it rolls evenly and any side will appear with the same probability. The difference in the sides, has to do wth a facade of dots, 1-6, that have no physical basis or connection to the roll. This is not found in nature.
Nature is very good at doing statistical things- like weather, epidemics and population sizes.
A hydrogen atom  is not designed this way. It is a 5 sided dice with different energy weights on each of the five sides.
Wow!
No it's not.
But, even if it was, it wouldn't matter.
Statistics is perfectly capable of dealing with weighted dice.
statistics will assume all sides of the hydrogen dice are equal.
Not if it is used competently.
ever increasing, net lost of energy

Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 19/07/2020 14:52:16
Think of a six sided dice. It is manufactured to be equally weighed on all sides, with the difference on each side connected to different arbitrary and subjective pictures, such as the number of dots. Cards are similar in the sense that each card has the same weight and size, while the potential between different cards is based on subjective pictures and the rules of the game you play. We use imaginary things and claim their activity are the foundation behind natural processes? Card and dice appeared long before science.

In the 1950's statistics reached a cross roads when it was discovered that proteins fold with exact folds. Previously, it was assumed that the thermal vibrations in the water would lead to average folds in protein. However, observational data showed that protein were not subject to as much entropy, as had been assumed by statistics. Even after 60 years there is still no good statistical explanation for this. Life is not about cards and dice but it continues to be modeled that way. Gambling was too addictive to stop.

The repeatable and perfect packing of protein, each time, implies that something is causing the entropy to lower or remain lower.  It is like throwing a dice 1000 times and the same sides keep coming up. The question is, what is loading the dice?

The answer is water and the analogy is the [b water and oil affect[/b]. If we mix water and olive oil and shake, we get an emulsion that might be defined by statistics. It is high in entropy due to the energy we added by shaking. If we let it settle, the odds start to change, bubble get larger and large, until we get only two layers. Order can form from chaos. This same water and oil affect is common to life, allowing life to cheat at cards. Water is not welcome at the science casinos since it can count cards.

Life forms all types of structures with lower entropy, than is predicted by statistics. Instead of proteins folding into an average distribution of shapes, which would be a more complex state; higher entropy, it folds into one specific way each time. There is an entropic potential created, relative to the statistical assumptions. Life makes use of this structural entropic potential to help drive chemical reactions. The reactive site becomes a way to increase entropy for the entire configuration. However, this can never satisfy all the needs of statistics, since water repacks the protein back to step one and resets the potential.

Another example of nature controlling statistics, is the observation of a quantum universe. For example, the hydrogen atom has five quantized energy levels. There is not a random distribution of infinite energy levels but rather there is a specific limit and configuration.  Like the packing of protein, only specific things are allowed.

This controlling of entropy is used to save time. In other words, if we need A and B to react before we can move to the next step, by limiting the options; only certain quanta, things can happen faster. Higher states can appear sooner since you do not have to cycle through as many things. There is more than one form of entropy. Statistics appear to express one type, but not the other type, implicit of the speed toward higher states made possible by a quantum universe.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 19/07/2020 16:02:07
In the 1950's statistics reached a cross roads when it was discovered that proteins fold with exact folds.
That has  little to do with statistics.
Not least because, of course, protein folding  isn't statistical.
There's a small army of chaperones and helpers.

The answer is water
No
The answer is  a small army of chaperones and helpers.

https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/i31/Protein-folding-Much-intricate-thought.html
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 19/07/2020 16:26:51
Think of a six sided dice. It is manufactured to be equally weighed on all sides, with the difference on each side connected to different arbitrary and subjective pictures, such as the number of dots. Cards are similar in the sense that each card has the same weight and size, while the potential between different cards is based on subjective pictures and the rules of the game you play. We use imaginary things and claim their activity are the foundation behind natural processes? Card and dice appeared long before science.

As I have been saying, SLOT is a statistical law relating to isolated systems. There can be very considerable release and reuse of packed up energy on a local basis when conditions are right. To treat entropy as a force or as a thing in itself does not work. “Limbo energy’ does not have to stay in limbo. SLOT is a statistical prediction on a large scale. The Fluctuation Theorem (http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Fluctuation_theorem) deals with the probability of limited entropy increases and stabilized or even decreasing entropy in systems that are far from thermodynamic equilibrium.  SLOT is only statistically true on the large scale.

Note that SLOT deals with the improbability of spontaneous flow of energy from cold to hot regions and similar events. However, in this complicated universe, spontaneity is a rarity. Everything influences everything and substantial energy flow, even though it obeys SLOT, facilitates the appearance of self-sustaining feedback systems.

And as always, what is responsible for substantial energy flows, such as stars, and places for feedback systems to prosper, such as the surface of planets near stars, and the proper materials for building such feedback systems, such as elements heavier than hydrogen and helium? None of these things came out of the Big Bang. What brought them into existence? Gravity, specifically one=way gravity. And why is gravity a one-way force? Because all of the real mass-energy in the universe has a positive sign.

In the 1950's statistics reached a cross roads when it was discovered that proteins fold with exact folds. Previously, it was assumed that the thermal vibrations in the water would lead to average folds in protein. However, observational data showed that protein were not subject to as much entropy, as had been assumed by statistics. Even after 60 years there is still no good statistical explanation for this. Life is not about cards and dice but it continues to be modeled that way. Gambling was too addictive to stop.

The repeatable and perfect packing of protein, each time, implies that something is causing the entropy to lower or remain lower.  It is like throwing a dice 1000 times and the same sides keep coming up. The question is, what is loading the dice?

The answer is water and the analogy is the [b water and oil affect[/b]. If we mix water and olive oil and shake, we get an emulsion that might be defined by statistics. It is high in entropy due to the energy we added by shaking. If we let it settle, the odds start to change, bubble get larger and large, until we get only two layers. Order can form from chaos. This same water and oil affect is common to life, allowing life to cheat at cards. Water is not welcome at the science casinos since it can count cards.

Although this is not my field, Anfisen’s Thermodynamic Hypothesis (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2443096/) seems a pretty good approach to the Protein Folding Problem. “(T)he native structure of a protein is the thermodynamically stable structure; it depends only on the amino acid sequence and on the conditions of solution, and not on the kinetic folding route.”

But I agree, life cheats at cards. Although in the end the house still wins, as long as there is suitable energy flow to exploit, life keeps playing and winning hands. After all, the house does not care who wins or loses, statistically the house always comes out ahead. Entropy is not a force or a thing in itself.  It is a statistical prediction about the entire isolated system, not individual parts, Just like the casino.

Life forms all types of structures with lower entropy, than is predicted by statistics. Instead of proteins folding into an average distribution of shapes, which would be a more complex state; higher entropy, it folds into one specific way each time. There is an entropic potential created, relative to the statistical assumptions. Life makes use of this structural entropic potential to help drive chemical reactions. The reactive site becomes a way to increase entropy for the entire configuration. However, this can never satisfy all the needs of statistics, since water repacks the protein back to step one and resets the potential.

Exactly. Entropy is not a force or a thing in itself. It does not directly influence events. It is only a statistical prediction about the big picture.

Another example of nature controlling statistics, is the observation of a quantum universe. For example, the hydrogen atom has five quantized energy levels. There is not a random distribution of infinite energy levels but rather there is a specific limit and configuration.  Like the packing of protein, only specific things are allowed.

There is a difference between possible energy levels in the hydrogen atom (or atoms in general) and protein folding. In an atom, it is impossible to have any other energy levels due to Planck’s constant being an invariant non-zero value. All sorts of organic chemistry compounds are possible but only some of them can carry out protein-like functions.

In quantum mechanics, the five energy levels associated with the hydrogen atom consist of four orbitals and the ionized state, where the electron cloud (as it is depicted in QM) is so large it is pointless to consider it as associated with the proton nucleus for any practical purpose, such as chemistry. Another electron with a lower energy level can displace it.  In theory the electron can have still higher quantized energy levels without limit.  But in the real world, there would not be a coherent electron cloud associated with a proton, it being swamped by the presence of other atoms.

This controlling of entropy is used to save time. In other words, if we need A and B to react before we can move to the next step, by limiting the options; only certain quanta, things can happen faster. Higher states can appear sooner since you do not have to cycle through as many things. There is more than one form of entropy. Statistics appear to express one type, but not the other type, implicit of the speed toward higher states made possible by a quantum universe.

Because of quantized states being the heart and soul of quantum mechanics, entropy plays very little part. Dissipation of small quantities of energy cannot happen when it only comes in large chunks. Only when the scale gets larger and the quanta relatively smaller do we start to see statistics at work.

Aside: Although it is customary to talk about energy being quantized when not dealing with a strictly technical audience, the actual unit of Planck’s Constant is action, the product of energy and time. The distinction is critical if one wants to understand the mechanism of the Uncertainty Principle in detail. Otherwise, who cares… [/OCD]
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 20/07/2020 12:06:28
The Uncertainty principle is an artifact of having two different reference, while trying to normalize all the observations to just one reference. This creates uncertainty. For example, in the twin paradox, one twin ages faster in their reference relative to the other. If we treated them with one same reference, we would have problems in terms of synchronizing them in position and momentum, since time and distance propagates at different rates.

The atom is the same situation, with electrons moving a fraction of the speed of light, while the nucleus, for all practical purposes, is the stationary twin. Relativity will impact time, space and energy; momentum via mass.

There is an affect in photography, that has around since the 1850's, called motion blur. Motion blue occurs when action of the subject moves faster that the shutter speed of the camera. The camera limits its reference, in space and time based on the the shutter speed, where speed equals d/t. It often puzzled me that Heisenberg never saw this analogy since it was there before his theory.

In the image below, the motion blur occurs where the action is faster than the shutter speed. In this still photo, time os stopped so we can see position of the cat and mouse. However, we cannot determine the momentum of the cat or mouse, since the cat and mouse appear stopped. But in other places in the photo; background;  we sense there is motion and momentum, but we cannot tell the exact position in space, due to the blur.

Many of the mystery concepts of science, like why quanta and why the uncertainty principle, need an upgrade, before other things make more sense. The uncertainty principle appeared as lab proof before we could prove relativity in the lab at that scale.

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/1d/50/82/1d5082d733c8998d53367fcace48b793.jpg)
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 20/07/2020 19:26:13
The Uncertainty principle is an artifact of having two different reference, while trying to normalize all the observations to just one reference. This creates uncertainty. For example, in the twin paradox, one twin ages faster in their reference relative to the other. If we treated them with one same reference, we would have problems in terms of synchronizing them in position and momentum, since time and distance propagates at different rates.

Wrong. The Uncertainty Principle states that there is a minimum uncertainty in determining the position and momentum of a particle. Momentum is a vector quantity that includes direction. What the Principle says is that the more precisely you measure the position of a particle the less certain will be a simultaneous measurement of where it is headed. Likewise, a precise measurement of direction will make the position measurement less certain.

This is a consequence of Planck’s Constant, which explains how energy is related to the frequency of light. There is a minimum chunk of action possible, action being energy multiplied by time.

The Uncertainty Principle is part of Quantum Theory. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Relativity Theory. Having everything in the same inertial frame of reference does not change the Uncertainty Principle.

A feeling for how Uncertainty works might be obtained from this metaphor. And keep in mind that this is just a metaphor. Don’t push it too far.

Imagine a particle as a wave expanding in space as it moves in time. If you look at a very small part of the wave, you get a precise location for it. But you have a very poor idea of where the whole wave is heading. If you look at a large part of the wave you get a better idea of where it is going but you do not have a good idea of where it is.

The atom is the same situation, with electrons moving a fraction of the speed of light, while the nucleus, for all practical purposes, is the stationary twin. Relativity will impact time, space and energy; momentum via mass.

Nothing to do with the Uncertainty Principle, which is unrelated to Relativity.  And the Twin Paradox is not a paradox at all. Nor does it have anything to do with nuclei and electrons which are definitely not twins.

Also, electrons in atomic shells move less than 1% of light speed, not enough to make much difference in terms of relativity.

There is an affect in photography, that has around since the 1850's, called motion blur. Motion blue occurs when action of the subject moves faster that the shutter speed of the camera. The camera limits its reference, in space and time based on the the shutter speed, where speed equals d/t. It often puzzled me that Heisenberg never saw this analogy since it was there before his theory.

Maybe because it has nothing to do with the Uncertainty Principle. If cameras worked in the Heisenberg manner, the faster the shutter speed, the more blurred the moving subject would be.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 21/07/2020 21:16:59
Everything you said about the uncertainty principle can be inferred from motion blur. The shutter speed is an expression of how long the shutter stays open to collect light. If we leave the shutter open for a long time; slow shutter speed, almost any motion will appear to have a blur.

The reason is, the moving object will deposit light onto the film while it moves, as long as the shutter is open.  If I have a camera that is focused on a 100 meter frame, a moving automobile that is 10 meters long can appear to be steak, that extends over the full 100 meter frame, if we leave tr shutter ope ling enough. We do not know where it is by the picture; data, since the blurred image is longer than the car. I suppose we could model it with a probability function.

If we go the other way and use a very fast cameras with very fast shutter speeds; 1/millionth of a second, even fast objects are stopped cold in position. But because it is stopped and we know exactly where it is, we have not clue what the future holds, in terms of its momentum vector and speed. It could be turning or drifting in a straight line.

There is a branch of Chemistry called Relativistic Quantum Chemistry. 

Quote
Relativistic quantum chemistry combines relativistic mechanics with quantum chemistry to explain elemental properties and structure, especially for the heavier elements of the periodic table. A prominent example of such an explanation is the color of gold. It is not silvery like most other metals due to relativistic effects.

Relativistic effects in chemistry can be considered to be perturbations, or small corrections, to the non-relativistic theory of chemistry, which is developed from the solutions of the Schrödinger equation. These corrections affect the electrons differently depending on the electron speed relative to the speed of light. Relativistic effects are more prominent in heavy elements because only in these elements do electrons attain sufficient speeds for the elements to have properties that differ from what non-relativistic chemistry predicts

Gold does not have outer elections that naturally emit yellow light when excited. Instead any incoming light is time/frequency shifted yellow by gold's outer elections. All colors of light will get a yellow time shift when reflected in a gold mirror.

Quantum theory was originally developed without incorporating relativistic affects.  Schrödinger and Heisenberg made their contributions to quantum theory and probability in 1926-27. Relativistic Quantum Chemistry did not appear until the 1970's.

Statistics has a connection to this, Schrödinger and Heisenberg both framed a quantum universe that was full of uncertainty, probability and wave functions. This was a big boost for the new modeling technique called statistics. Technology was either too expensive or not yet there for direct measurements for the science masses. Statistics opened physics and other areas of science to more people. These two men made it possible.  More recently, relativistic affects were added to quantum mechanics and and some of the fuzzy dice where not longer as fuzzy.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 21/07/2020 21:21:52
Gold does not have outer elections that naturally emit yellow light when excited. Instead any incoming light is time/frequency shifted yellow by gold's outer elections. All colors of light will get a yellow time shift when reflected in a gold mirror.

Bollocks.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Malamute Lover on 22/07/2020 01:39:23
Everything you said about the uncertainty principle can be inferred from motion blur. The shutter speed is an expression of how long the shutter stays open to collect light. If we leave the shutter open for a long time; slow shutter speed, almost any motion will appear to have a blur.

The reason is, the moving object will deposit light onto the film while it moves, as long as the shutter is open.  If I have a camera that is focused on a 100 meter frame, a moving automobile that is 10 meters long can appear to be steak, that extends over the full 100 meter frame, if we leave tr shutter ope ling enough. We do not know where it is by the picture; data, since the blurred image is longer than the car. I suppose we could model it with a probability function.

If we go the other way and use a very fast cameras with very fast shutter speeds; 1/millionth of a second, even fast objects are stopped cold in position. But because it is stopped and we know exactly where it is, we have not clue what the future holds, in terms of its momentum vector and speed. It could be turning or drifting in a straight line.

The blur is supposed to represent velocity? I see the analogy now. But Heisenberg would not. The new field of quantum theory did not work like the macro world. Whether the camera shows a precise image or a blur has no effect on what the car is going to do. It only affects the image. In the quantum world, the relative precision of the two measurements has an effect on what the next measurements will show.  The camera taking a picture of a moving car does not affect what the next camera will show.

There is a branch of Chemistry called Relativistic Quantum Chemistry. 

Quote
Relativistic quantum chemistry combines relativistic mechanics with quantum chemistry to explain elemental properties and structure, especially for the heavier elements of the periodic table. A prominent example of such an explanation is the color of gold. It is not silvery like most other metals due to relativistic effects.

Relativistic effects in chemistry can be considered to be perturbations, or small corrections, to the non-relativistic theory of chemistry, which is developed from the solutions of the Schrödinger equation. These corrections affect the electrons differently depending on the electron speed relative to the speed of light. Relativistic effects are more prominent in heavy elements because only in these elements do electrons attain sufficient speeds for the elements to have properties that differ from what non-relativistic chemistry predicts

The Schrödinger equations can be used for any physical system to take quantum effects into consideration. Relativistic speeds are not necessarily involved. It is the application of the Schrödinger equations to atoms that led to the quantification  of orbital level characteristics for example. Treating the electron as a wave leads to the electron cloud concept, which sheds light on what is really happening in covalent bounds for example.

High speeds of the electrons in the N=1 shell (and possibly higher) in elements with high atomic numbers is due to the powerful positive electric field of all those protons. The electrons need to have a higher speed (energy level) to keep from being absorbed into the nucleus.

But most relativistic concerns do not arise until speeds get really high. In the transactinide elements – artificially created elements with atomic numbers of 104 and higher – speeds of 0.8 c have been observed for inner shell electrons. (By comparison, uranium has the highest naturally occurring atomic number at 92.) This amounts to a mass increase of about two thirds. But because these elements have only ever been created in sub-microscopic quantities and the half-lives range from about an hour down to seconds, there has yet to be much research into chemical properties. What little there has been has yet to show relativistic effects.

In less exotic elements, relativistic effects need to be considered in spin-orbit coupling, the interaction between the several electromagnetic fields in play. This can affect fine tuning of energy levels. The speed is not the factor in introducing relativistic concerns here. It is that the concept of spin only arises in the Dirac equation – a merger of Schrödinger’s equations and Heisenberg’s matrices – which is an inherently relativistic entity.

Quantum theory was originally developed without incorporating relativistic affects.  Schrödinger and Heisenberg made their contributions to quantum theory and probability in 1926-27. Relativistic Quantum Chemistry did not appear until the 1970's.

Statistics has a connection to this, Schrödinger and Heisenberg both framed a quantum universe that was full of uncertainty, probability and wave functions. This was a big boost for the new modeling technique called statistics. Technology was either too expensive or not yet there for direct measurements for the science masses. Statistics opened physics and other areas of science to more people. These two men made it possible.  More recently, relativistic affects were added to quantum mechanics and and some of the fuzzy dice where not longer as fuzzy.

Probability as it is used in quantum theory does not have the same meaning as in statistics.

The probabilistic element in quantum mechanics concerns probability amplitude waves, these being represented by complex numbers that are the square root of a probability.  Probability amplitudes come in evolving positive and negative wave forms that can constructively or destructively interfere. The wave function collapse, as it is termed, can take one of multiple possible forms with the probability of each appearing in event ensembles. The term statistics in quantum theory refers to the accumulation of data points, not the use of statistical techniques, although those may be used in testing hypotheses. Otherwise, there is very little connection with the use of statistics in other sciences.

BTW Heisenberg accidentally re-invented the wheel in developing the basics of matrix algebra to deal with what he was seeing. He later was informed that this was already a well-developed field with applications beyond what he needed. Interestingly, matrix algebra is used extensively in statistical analysis and in programming a variety of engineering problems. It is also great for solving simultaneous equations. In physics, matrix algebra is typically used in dealing with vectors and their big brother tensors.

The roots of using matrices to solve simultaneous equations can be found in a mathematical text from ancient China. :)

Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: puppypower on 22/07/2020 12:03:22
An interesting application of wave functions is the hydrogen bond. In water, a hydrogen bonds will form between the hydrogen of one water molecule and the unshared electrons of the oxygen on a  second water molecule.

 Hydrogen bonds show both polar and covalent bonding character. As such, a hydrogen bond can start out as a secondary polar bond between neighbors, and then change into a primary covalent bond with its neighbor, allowing hydrogen to trade places between neighbors. We see this as the pH affect. This transitional ability of the hydrogen bond allows water to help break strong bonds with little energy.

Although liquid water, as a state, is timeless in many ways, the individual water molecules are renewed constantly, with specific hydrogen and oxygen bonds lasting nanoseconds; constantly trading partners.

The polar aspect of the hydrogen bond has higher density, higher entropy and higher enthalpy. While the covalent aspect of hydrogen bonding has lower density, lower entropy and lower enthalpy. The polar aspect is more common in liquid water due to the second law, but entropy can spontaneously reverse via the covalent state of the bond.

If you compare the polar to the covalent aspects of hydrogen bonding, the polar is more about charge potential, while the covenant is more about magnetic; moving charges. The polar bond benefits by closer distances; denser, while a covalent bond often spreads things out; less dense, so it can aligns things in specific ways for better orbital overlap. This is slanted to the magnetic side of the EM force; opposite spin for example. The hydrogen bond can tweak the local EM force and shift it to the E or M side of the EM force, with the M side having lower entropy.

This makes the hydrogen bond the perfect binary switch for information transfer. However, it is more than a simple on-off switch. It is a switch with muscle that can impact its local surrounding, as well as be impacted by the local physical states. Computers have nothing close.

In terms of time, time flies when your are having fun and time slows or drags when you are anticipating something. Consciousness, through the hydrogen bonding matrix, can experience its own version of time dilation by regulating information entropy and free energy.
Title: Re: Why is the Second Law of Thermodynamics (SLOT) time asymmetric?
Post by: Bored chemist on 22/07/2020 13:45:26
The polar aspect of the hydrogen bond has higher density, higher entropy and higher enthalpy. While the covalent aspect of hydrogen bonding has lower density, lower entropy and lower enthalpy.
Bollocks.
It's the same bond.
You can't separate the two aspects like that.
This transitional ability of the hydrogen bond allows water to help break strong bonds with little energy.
Just not true.

If you compare the polar to the covalent aspects of hydrogen bonding, the polar is more about charge potential, while the covenant is more about magnetic; moving charges.
It has nothing to do with magnetism.
, but entropy can spontaneously reverse via the covalent state of the bond.
That doesn't mean enough to be wrong.
The polar bond benefits by closer distances; denser, while a covalent bond often spreads things out; less dense, so it can aligns things in specific ways for better orbital overlap.
Again, this is tosh. There's only 1 bond there.
This is slanted to the magnetic side of the EM force
No it isn't.
The hydrogen bond can tweak the local EM force and shift it to the E or M side of the EM force
That's nonsense.
In terms of time, time flies when your are having fun and time slows or drags when you are anticipating something.
No.
Time ticks steadily on.
Your brains attempt to keep track of it is distorted by other events.
This makes the hydrogen bond the perfect binary switch for information transfer.
Nope, it's a very bad choice for that.
As you pointed out before, it only lasts nanoseconds before it gets scrambled (actually it's picoseconds but...)