Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
- From: variable <7g56f45df@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:42:04 -0700
xx...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 30, 3:20 pm, variable <7g56f4...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
i cant really understand
why a molecule would obied 2nd law of thermonamics,
while an atom should be immune for entropy
what forces only are deteriorate by entropy?
is entropy only a high level related somthin?
xxein: Entropy is a relative thing. If there were only a single
universe, and on that grand scale even with expansion, nothing is lost
(matter or energy). It is only when we create velocity frames that we
divvy up that sense of wholeness.
Even the atom can be viewed as exchanging M and E with others as
molecules --- and in the micro-period of time at that scale, any atom
can be entropic. But what follows is that it is cyclic.
If you accept the BB and a closed universe, it is also cyclic - but on
a greater timescale. Our prejudice is shown by preferring one
timescale over another. The atom appears to be non-entropic and the
universe (if thought to be open) would appear entropic.
Since we are unsure of any process of a beginning (if there needed to
be), and since we can contemplate no end of such existence, it becomes
only a subjective conjecture of what the term entropy means.
On the other hand, there is EM and gravity. Both would appear to
extend beyond the notion of a universe (if closed). But then there is
the BH where different aspects of what we term matter and energy can
each be separated (straddling the event horizon).
It becomes a matter of patterns, also. It is what we call cause and
effect. Which do we recognise by timescale and which do we not yet
put into the timescale. This is how we make a physic. We pick and
choose what we would like to consider out of the vast territory of
things we could consider. We tend to stick closely to a timescale
that we are familiar with. We venture into femtos and eons with no
measuremental idea of what to expect except from the common-second
life and physical existence as we have learned it. We 'bracket'
accordingly. This is the general best we can do.
For that precious diamond ---? Carbon-based life fossils that have
undergone a longtime pressurization. It changed. Let's enter it past
the EH of a BH. As it enters the EH radius, it is stripped of its
integrity. EM can no longer hold its own domain. What was that
domain? Did we understand it? We were certainly part of it. Is that
all we know of the EM domain? Did we view it subjectively or
objectively?
What do we have to base a universal physic upon? This little issue of
the domain of entropism has opened a new door of thinking. I hope we
all use it well.
i am afraid this is too advanced form, but thanks,
i need to read it again
.
- References:
- entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
- From: variable
- Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
- From: xxein
- entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
- Prev by Date: Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- Next by Date: Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
- Previous by thread: Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
- Next by thread: Re: entropy only affects upwards from the molecular level?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
