I like Ballard's "The Drowned World".
Written in 1962, it depicts a post-apocalyptic future where global warming has rendered most of the Earth's surface uninhabitable.
Written in 1962, it depicts a post-apocalyptic future where global warming has rendered most of the Earth's surface uninhabitable.
That's cool. But maybe my question is deceptively simple. And it's for the benefit of viewers that are inclined to dismiss scientific claims out of hand.
It's a one word answer: gravity. And black holes have very strong gravitational fields, was we both know.
That's because scientific laws are descriptive, not prescriptive. Nothing has changed except our perception and understanding.
In other words, there's no cosmic cop forcing rocks to roll downhill. It is a completely spontaneous and predictable phenomenon.
You asked what overcame the original high entropy of the Universe, yet the entropy of the universe is becoming ever higher due to black holes.
My bad. It's my dyslexia. I'm confusing myself.
And I was hoping one of our science denying posters would address it, but they seem to have left the building.
And I was hoping one of our science denying posters would address it, but they seem to have left the building.
So Fast Eddie, could you reformulate what you meant please?
Gravity is the force which induced big bang that's it?
Gravity is the force which induced big bang that's it?
One reason China's one child policy ultimately failed was because the Chinese value boys much more than girls so there were a lot of selective abortions of girls leading to a serious and acute shortage of women to marry once the kids got old enough.
It has been observed globally that the best way to reduce birth rates is to educate women.
It has been observed globally that the best way to reduce birth rates is to educate women.
No. Gravity is the weak force that caused a disordered universe (after the BB) to form into galaxies, solar systems, planets, stars, etc. This is still happening.
I don't think anyone can claim with authority what induced the BB.
Indeed.
My issue is that when I read about entropy on the Web, the person is almost always misrepresenting it in order to promote their pet woo. Ironically they always allude to "random" events (that aren't at all random) as "proof" that their strawman of entropy proves their pet woo. Of course it's because entropy that these events (typically mundane chemical reactions) are not random but in fact spontaneous and predictable. Example "chlorine plus ammonia always yields ammonium chloride (true) and it's COMPLETELY RANDOM (false) therefore FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER." Just a trtain wreck of logical fallacies and demonstrable falsehoods.
Its just a tick in the books of probability . Life means nothing. Pain receptors make us fear pain. Because probables that couldnot feel pain are extint. So enjoy the ride and watch something better trimp us. Untill then. Oh wait.
Seems all ,models are off, universe is expanding faster and faster, most of everything is still unknown
It is tempting to consider the hot, dense early universe to be 'disordered' or in a 'high entropy' state.
However, every time an energy-emitting event happens, such as the gravitational collapse of a cloud of gas into a star or a planet, the Universe enters a "higher entropy" state.
So, if we were to regard entropy simply in terms of order and disorder, it would be wrong to say that the Universe became more ordered when stars, galaxies etc. formed.
I tried to reluctantly read about entropy and reference was made to the second law of thermodynamics which I studied but I cannot remember ever having to use entropy to answer any Physics questions. What I found is the quotient Q/T where Q is energy into/out of a system and T the absolute temperature. Such a quotient makes more sense in an equation; isolated as it is, is more like vudoo.
You make me feel like I'm muddying the waters, but you're correct.
I've heard it claimed that the net energy of the universe is zero. I understand about polarity but I'm struggling with that concept. Enter quantum physics, which I know enough about to know I don't know anything about it.
I've heard it claimed that the net energy of the universe is zero. I understand about polarity but I'm struggling with that concept. Enter quantum physics, which I know enough about to know I don't know anything about it.
An important aspect of science is to derive technology from it. The simplest example of thermodynamics in action is exothermic reactions; understanding why they happen spontaneously was my "light bulb" moment many moons ago.
Exothermic reactions happen when chemical/s reacts or decompose to go to a lower energy state, like say, explosives. Elementary, Mr Watson.
I am perplexed not because I never heard about entropy, but because of the seemingly undue importance it is given here. I also remember myself solving problems involving the laws of thermodynamics, but I do not remember myself giving so much importance to this concept. Nevertheless, I obtained a grade A in my A-Level Physics.
I am perplexed not because I never heard about entropy, but because of the seemingly undue importance it is given here. I also remember myself solving problems involving the laws of thermodynamics, but I do not remember myself giving so much importance to this concept. Nevertheless, I obtained a grade A in my A-Level Physics.
Last edited:
I suppose, I’ll add my two cents worth to what is an ambitious thread question, so say the least.
One of the answer domains of this question, of course, involves spiritual belief. Where the purpose of life is to, in someway or another, provide the opportunity of experiences which ‘elevate’ the soul. A general concept which all major religions teach, and only occurs through self-sacrifice, self-discipline, even outright suffering. Experiences which, interestingly, are counter to the biologically driven desire to maximize personably pleasurable experiences.I think it’s important to recognize that while all spiritual beliefs may be false, it’s not necessarily so that all are false. False or not, however, existence of the soul is an unprovable thing to the living.
Without belief in the existence of the human soul, I suppose that the meaning of life may reduce to the pursuit of maximizing pleasure, while minimizing displeasure. I do wonder whether individual pursuit of such basic animalistic motivations best contributes toward human advancement (I’m hesitant to say, evolution, because that implies biological). I’m not concluding that it doesn’t, but I feel suspicious that it may not best promote human civilization advancement on the whole. This, however, then starts to lean toward the domain of political ideaology/philosophy. Which still leaves the original thread question authoritatively answered. I suspect that it can’t be.
One of the answer domains of this question, of course, involves spiritual belief. Where the purpose of life is to, in someway or another, provide the opportunity of experiences which ‘elevate’ the soul. A general concept which all major religions teach, and only occurs through self-sacrifice, self-discipline, even outright suffering. Experiences which, interestingly, are counter to the biologically driven desire to maximize personably pleasurable experiences.I think it’s important to recognize that while all spiritual beliefs may be false, it’s not necessarily so that all are false. False or not, however, existence of the soul is an unprovable thing to the living.
Without belief in the existence of the human soul, I suppose that the meaning of life may reduce to the pursuit of maximizing pleasure, while minimizing displeasure. I do wonder whether individual pursuit of such basic animalistic motivations best contributes toward human advancement (I’m hesitant to say, evolution, because that implies biological). I’m not concluding that it doesn’t, but I feel suspicious that it may not best promote human civilization advancement on the whole. This, however, then starts to lean toward the domain of political ideaology/philosophy. Which still leaves the original thread question authoritatively answered. I suspect that it can’t be.
it is already a judgement when you say : "reduce" or "basic", "promote human civilization". For me I just think the opposite : superstitions are hiding things and are basic, reduce and not promote civilization. It is often very egotic and the promotion of own's one culture that is already always limited and run to civil wars cause religion. Antiquity.
I say religion because most often that's what people involve in that "spiritual" word,alas, which is quite reducing... and often it brakes you in a cultural patern in which one can feel good because it is confortable.
I think everyone understood here that the meaning of life as own asking, is a personal thing and journey and is not universel as depending of each own life's experience, culture, experience, believes in tradition or progress, etc. We tried to make it wat's life is and talk of science, but that's an individual story and each has to do with what he has, most of the time his own story and mental jails... Even the word freedom is not the same for everyone ! 🙂
Now it is difficult to answer if the life has a sense cause we are just a limited part of what it is. I remember scientists to have found up to 11 life's form that are not all biological but answers to same definition patern... I never found on Nature or elswhere that paper.
But as far one feels ok in his basketts, all beliefs are respectable as far you do not force others to believe it is your way that is "better" to promote a said high-end thing as if it had any sense. It is just cultural and anthropomorphism still.
I say religion because most often that's what people involve in that "spiritual" word,alas, which is quite reducing... and often it brakes you in a cultural patern in which one can feel good because it is confortable.
I think everyone understood here that the meaning of life as own asking, is a personal thing and journey and is not universel as depending of each own life's experience, culture, experience, believes in tradition or progress, etc. We tried to make it wat's life is and talk of science, but that's an individual story and each has to do with what he has, most of the time his own story and mental jails... Even the word freedom is not the same for everyone ! 🙂
Now it is difficult to answer if the life has a sense cause we are just a limited part of what it is. I remember scientists to have found up to 11 life's form that are not all biological but answers to same definition patern... I never found on Nature or elswhere that paper.
But as far one feels ok in his basketts, all beliefs are respectable as far you do not force others to believe it is your way that is "better" to promote a said high-end thing as if it had any sense. It is just cultural and anthropomorphism still.
Last edited: