The Roots of Entropy

[Squashed]

After reading this site: Quantum Mechanics; the thought occurred to me that the entire universe is built upon a foundation of nonsensical chaos.

The single photon should logically be able to act as an single M&M (from the article) but instead it travels based upon a "probability wave".

Quote: "Quantum mechanical laws generally only have measurable effects when applied to things that are too small to see ..."

So the visible universe is built upon the "things that are too small to see" and these things work on a system of nonsense i.e. random chaos and therefore isn't it logical to realize that entropy is the result of the underlying chaos at the foundation of the universe?

The logical is built upon the illogical.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I was also reading this thread: A free-will vs determinism thread ; elsewhere on this site and someone states that his life is the result of predetermined probabilities but considering the near-infinitely large state of possibilities upon which the universe is built then doesn't that mean that we have free will to determine our own future - so our choices determine our future and not probability?

[satori]

the root of entropy lies in the order of world rather than its chaos.
When you start with a tidy apartment, without the influence of someone cleaning up, things start to get messy.
To keep order in your apartment it takes a able bodied person with free time on her hand. For this person ,to keep able bodied, she must drive to work with a dirty car doing dirty doings at her job. In order to maintain order in her apartment, she must decrease order outside this apartment. If there were allready a perfect chaos in the world (a notion you seem to nourish) then there were NO way ever to rid oneself of all the dirt in one's rooms. Hot Big Bang seems to be the very picture of the total chaos. And yet (as the order in all af the world can only decrease) must there be a huge amount of order somwhere. As my wisdom goes, this order must be in the expansion of space (the perfect cooling mechanism). If you had a billiard table with all the balls in one corner, you would think this to be a somewhat orderd configuration....

[Ken G]

So the visible universe is built upon the "things that are too small to see" and these things work on a system of nonsense i.e. random chaos and therefore isn't it logical to realize that entropy is the result of the underlying chaos at the foundation of the universe?

I'm not sure why you are bothered by our concept of reality being reliant on "nonsensical chaos", because classical physics already had that property, long before quantum mechanics. The molecules in the air around you could never be calculated with any reliable accuracy whatsoever, so their behavior could never be distinguished from chaos. Sure, it was thought that this was just a problem in computational difficulty, but who cares what we thought was the root of the problem? That just gave us a warm fuzzy feeling we understood, the truth is, it was well known that no one would ever, with any technology, be able to determine the locations of the molecules in the air one second from now, so whether or not it was even possible was a scientifically untestable question. So from the perspective of what is science, rather than what is philosophy or religion, we already knew that when you intersect reality with classical physics, the universe had an inherently probabilistic character. All quantum mechanics does is formalize that character, and extend it to simple systems as well.

As for entropy, yes, you're right-- it is based on that underlying chaos, but remember that entropy exists in classical physics as well. The difference is that classically, entropy relates to measuring what you don't know, and in quantum mechanics, it extends to include what you can't know. But whether we can know it or not, the universe still runs on entropy, in either the classical, or quantum, descriptions. It's not as important a difference as it is sold as.

[Squashed]

I'm not sure why you are bothered by our concept of reality being reliant on "nonsensical chaos", ...

I admit I once had the fancy that the universe was inherently logical which I suppose was based upon scientific thoughts of "cause and effect" which deals with classical physics but after looking into various topics, most lately being quantum mechanics, I have come to accept that "order" is just an illusion of a multitude of possibilities.

I feel no sense of distraught at the "nonsensical" (their word not mine) chaos that is underlying the universe - I am not sure how you came to your conclusion regarding my supposed feeling of being "bothered".

[Squashed]

the root of entropy lies in the order of world rather than its chaos.
When you start with a tidy apartment, without the influence of someone cleaning up, things start to get messy.
To keep order in your apartment it takes a able bodied person with free time on her hand. For this person ,to keep able bodied, she must drive to work with a dirty car doing dirty doings at her job. In order to maintain order in her apartment, she must decrease order outside this apartment. If there were allready a perfect chaos in the world (a notion you seem to nourish) then there were NO way ever to rid oneself of all the dirt in one's rooms. Hot Big Bang seems to be the very picture of the total chaos. And yet (as the order in all af the world can only decrease) must there be a huge amount of order somwhere. As my wisdom goes, this order must be in the expansion of space (the perfect cooling mechanism). If you had a billiard table with all the balls in one corner, you would think this to be a somewhat orderd configuration....

I understand your analogy regarding the order of this world: if I clean up one mess then surely the mess is transported to a new realm (the garbage dump) but then I have this question:

Should I fight the encircling chaos or should I let nature take its course and just "give in" - become an anarchist?

[satori]

squashed,
Total disorder, chaos, anarchy, entropy....are only inevitable in the very long run. All living beeings have learned the trick to maintain their highly orderd state by using sources of relative order and taking this low entropy matter to a state of heigh entropy. (Say a kolibri lives on nectar and transforms it into waste). As a living beeing you should find in yourself the instinct to "fight disorder" . To let nature take its course would mean in your case to "not let nature (or entropy) take its course". The sun is an allmost undepletable source of low entropy (steming back from BigBang). We can feel Graced !

[Squashed]

squashed,
Total disorder, chaos, anarchy, entropy....are only inevitable in the very long run. All living beeings have learned the trick to maintain their highly orderd state by using sources of relative order and taking this low entropy matter to a state of heigh entropy. (Say a kolibri lives on nectar and transforms it into waste). As a living beeing you should find in yourself the instinct to "fight disorder" . To let nature take its course would mean in your case to "not let nature (or entropy) take its course". The sun is an allmost undepletable source of low entropy (steming back from BigBang). We can feel Graced !

Truly you write but by living nature "uses" us to create entropy faster than would normally occur if we no longer lived.

Our lives are merely a natural means whereby entropy is increased at a faster rate.

Why should I not help nature along by being anarchist by my actions as well as by my metabolism?

[George]

Our lives are merely a natural means whereby entropy is increased at a faster rate.

Yes, but it is quite small; you should see the entropy increase my son's '79 car generates. Both bodies and cars are working vessels that serve a wonderful purpose.

Why should I not help nature along by being anarchist by my actions as well as by my metabolism?

There is much to said for controlled burns.

[swansont]

The single photon should logically be able to act as an single M&M (from the article) but instead it travels based upon a "probability wave".

When proper logic gives you the wrong answer, it means your deduction was built upon a false premise. The false premise here is that the microscopic world behaves just like the macroscopic one.

[korjik]

After reading this site: Quantum Mechanics; the thought occurred to me that the entire universe is built upon a foundation of nonsensical chaos.

The single photon should logically be able to act as an single M&M (from the article) but instead it travels based upon a "probability wave".

Quote: "Quantum mechanical laws generally only have measurable effects when applied to things that are too small to see ..."

So the visible universe is built upon the "things that are too small to see" and these things work on a system of nonsense i.e. random chaos and therefore isn't it logical to realize that entropy is the result of the underlying chaos at the foundation of the universe?

The logical is built upon the illogical.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I was also reading this thread: A free-will vs determinism thread ; elsewhere on this site and someone states that his life is the result of predetermined probabilities but considering the near-infinitely large state of possibilities upon which the universe is built then doesn't that mean that we have free will to determine our own future - so our choices determine our future and not probability?

The logic is still there even at the smallest levels. Quantum mechanics may put in uncertainty, but the logic is still there.

[satori]

Squashed, (wow, in typing this 3! new posts came in !!!!!!)

What I intended to convey to you, is just the opposite of your suggestion. From the overall increase in entropy must one not conclude that the final "entropy death" of the universe was its proper "end"( in the sense of meaning ).
As a human I would see the existence of us humans more to the center of what the universe is all about. As a human you should pursue the maintainance of yourself as a creature of nature. As entropy is unavoideble anyway, there would seem to me little sense in helping nature along that way. I am very sure that you and I are of grater importance to Nature than "pure entropic" (that is to say lifeless) matter. But such a notion of course you won't find in a physics book. Maybe you should look out for some other stuff of interest....

[Squashed]

...

There is much to said for controlled burns.

I love the smell of a good grass (not marijuana) fire!!!

When proper logic gives you the wrong answer, it means your deduction was built upon a false premise. The false premise here is that the microscopic world behaves just like the macroscopic one.

Yes, the article goes into that and then the extension of the microscopic is the macroscopic which is just the combined probabilities of many single probabilities.

The logic is still there even at the smallest levels. Quantum mechanics may put in uncertainty, but the logic is still there.

To be logical the mechanism must be understood but if the mechanism is just random chance then there is no logic but instead only probability.

Squashed, (wow, in typing this 3! new posts came in !!!!!!)

What I intended to convey to you, is just the opposite of your suggestion. From the overall increase in entropy must one not conclude that the final "entropy death" of the universe was its proper "end"( in the sense of meaning ).
As a human I would see the existence of us humans more to the center of what the universe is all about. As a human you should pursue the maintainance of yourself as a creature of nature. As entropy is unavoideble anyway, there would seem to me little sense in helping nature along that way. I am very sure that you and I are of grater importance to Nature than "pure entropic" (that is to say lifeless) matter. But such a notion of course you won't find in a physics book. Maybe you should look out for some other stuff of interest....

Are you suggesting a "higher" calling to one's existence?

If nature wants us to survive then the only reason I can see for this is to increase the rate of entropic accumulation - similar to the structure we witness in a huricane, for the huricane disipates energy quicker than just normal airflow will allow.

Look at the boiling of water for a similar mechanism whereby entropy is increased through the use of temporary order.

btw: The sun will continue to shine whether the earth is inhabited or a barren rock - we can not influence its rate of entropic increase.

To find meaning to life - is that the call of religion?

[satori]

Squashed,
I don't know what to make of you.
I have given all my sweat to enlighten you.
(Have I ever hinted to such a foolish notion as to artificialy increase the entropy of Sol)
I smell the odor of grass....

[Cougar]

Should I fight the encircling chaos or should I let nature take its course and just "give in" - become an anarchist?

Rage, rage against the dying of the light
Do not go gentle into that good night.

-- Dylan Thomas

[George]

I love the smell of a good grass (not marijuana) fire!!!

I rarely do, because usually that means I made a mistake.

Yes, the article goes into that and then the extension of the microscopic is the macroscopic which is just the combined probabilities of many single probabilities.

That seems probable.

To be logical the mechanism must be understood but if the mechanism is just random chance then there is no logic but instead only probability.

But even probability offers some limited understanding that may be useful.

If nature wants us to survive then the only reason I can see for this is to increase the rate of entropic accumulation - similar to the structure we witness in a huricane, for the huricane disipates energy quicker than just normal airflow will allow.

We are a little too delicate and, besides, we represent negative entropy (at the greater expense of additional entropy). Give us negative entropy to enhance our survival; I'll take the frig, you can have the oven.

Look at the boiling of water for a similar mechanism whereby entropy is increased through the use of temporary order.

It's good for cooking eggs and hot dogs, both requie negative entropy to make, though I am not too sure on the hot dogs.

The sun will continue to shine whether the earth is inhabited or a barren rock - we can not influence its rate of entropic increase.

Give us a little more time with this one; we can mess up anvils, you know.

[Squashed]

Squashed,
I don't know what to make of you.
I have given all my sweat to enlighten you.
(Have I ever hinted to such a foolish notion as to artificialy increase the entropy of Sol)
I smell the odor of grass....

Aye, both you and Cougar are the only ones that make sense!!

My reference to Sol merely points out that although you point to the optimism of the sun's longevity it matters not a wit to Sol whether we live or die.

The sweat of your endeavors is appreciated but alas, in the end, your efforts have only increased the misery from the entropic beast.

When I first learned of entropy it was a depressing revelation which I pushed into the corner of my mind ...

I tried to search through science for an escape from this beast - for order must arise from order, should it not?

But once again I find myself staring into the eyes of said beast - because it was only probable.

I spend my life building ... only for fools to tear down.

But in the end both the fool and I have reached towards the same goal: increased entropy.

[Ken G]

It sounds to me like you are looking for a philosophical principle to arise from the concept of entropy. So be it, of course any such principle will be subjective, but here's my take. The opposite of entropy is specialness, so the thermodynamics is, random actions tend to remove specialness. That's clear, because what is special is also what is rare. So "fighting entropy" translates into trying to be special, even though random events will always try to remove specialness. So what? This doesn't mean you shouldn't continue to try to be special, it just means that often such efforts will fail. It doesn't mean that all such efforts do-- but it does mean that if you don't try a bit harder than most, you will likely be among the failures!

Also note that thermodynamics treats all systems with the same broad brush, but you are a human system, which means that you are already incredibly special. Thermodynamics is not meant for humans, it's meant for closed systems comprised of essentially indistinguishable subcomponents, so the laws of statistics rule. That's a poor description of humanity, we have far greater potential for specialness than a piston filled with gas. So use it or lose it, because when our atoms are no longer in a human system, our shot at specialness is vastly reduced.

[George]

Yes, he's right Squashed; you are special. Consider all the entropy expended to make you. Is not heat used to make steam that makes electricity of a lower entropy state? Entropy serves a greater purpose. The greatest being you, me, and all humanity.

[Squashed]

Yes, he's right Squashed; you are special. Consider all the entropy expended to make you. Is not heat used to make steam that makes electricity of a lower entropy state? Entropy serves a greater purpose. The greatest being you, me, and all humanity.

Thanks, George, I appreciate your comments.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

My Journey:

My whole time here has been a spiritual quest because, through random circumstance, I got in touch with one of my ol' high school buddies on another forum. It was then I found out that he was an atheist. Well, I decided to see if it is possible to find God through His creation as He states:

Psalms 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.

I can see God's hand in a lot of things but I also can see the flip side (atheist view) in the same situations - there ain't no requirement in creation that anyone has to believe in God.

My intuition drove me to believe that there must be a fundamental order at the very foundation of the universe but guess what? The more intently I searched and the more finer the detail the more that random chance appeared to be the rule ... but it was not until I read the article on Quantum Mechanics that I realized that this is the way the universe must be ... in order for mortals to have a true free-will choice.

Theologically I have no qualms with the destination that my intellectual journey has brought me to but as a human it has always distressed me when I thought about entropy because it is such a limiting quality of the universe (just like the absolute speed limit: the speed of light).

I know more now than when I first arrived - that's a good thing, too.

[George]

Theologically I have no qualms with the destination that my intellectual journey has brought me to but as a human it has always distressed me when I thought about entropy because it is such a limiting quality of the universe (just like the absolute speed limit: the speed of light).

Entropy is a very powerful concept that says much about our universe and the "arrow of time". It can have strong impacts on philosophical and religious views. I vaguely recall a Russian physicst becoming a believer of God because of his understanding of entropy. The original order of the universe necessary to allow for entropy to increase is beyond mind bending. Of course, I won't get into further religious views here due to the board's good rules.

I know more now than when I first arrived - that's a good thing, too.

Me too, but that was a given. You're among great folks around here, IMO.

[eburacum45]

btw: The sun will continue to shine whether the earth is inhabited or a barren rock - we can not influence its rate of entropic increase.

Some people like Freeman Dyson and David Criswell have had other ideas.

Consider the light emitted by the Sun, Of that light, a mere billionth falls upon the Earth, and of that billionth, a fraction is used to maintain life on our worlds. A few more billionths are absorbed by the other planets of our solar system and drive various more or less chaotic processes.

All the rest is lost into deeps space; because of the expansion of the universe , almost all the light which is not absorbed by interstellar dust will travel forever, never reaching a limit or edge of the universe as that limit recedes before it. The greatest fraction of the Sun's light is lost, uselessly, forever.

Freeman Dyson had a scheme to capture a much greater proportion of that light, by expending a lot of energy to build a so-called Dyson Sphere, (actually a swarm) the loss of energy could be reduced significantly.


Consider the composition of the Sun. It contains massive amounts of hydrogen, a large proportion of which never gets involved in fusion but instead is expelled during the red giant phase, and becomes part of the interstellar medium. Eventually some of this hydrogen will become new stars, but this is a long and chaotic process.

Amonst others, David Criswell has suggested that some of the energy emitted by the Sun could be used to deliberately remove material from our star for use in a controled fashion; the material could be used in fusion reactors, for instance, or to fuel interstellar spacecraft or a number of other possible uses. This is the Starlifting concept; in effect the lossy, inefficient process of stellar fusion could be controlled and regulated.

In the best case scenario the lifetime of the Sun could be extended by billions of years by using a fraction of the Sun's total luminosity over its lifetime, while removing vast quantities of usable mass. In theory, a star which is starlifted extensively will never go red giant, so will avoid losing all that mass at the end of its life.

So perhaps entropy can't be beaten, but the energy produced by stellar objects can be used (and produced) in a much more efficient manner.

[Squashed]

Entropy is a very powerful concept that says much about our universe and the "arrow of time". It can have strong impacts on philosophical and religious views. I vaguely recall a Russian physicst becoming a believer of God because of his understanding of entropy. The original order of the universe necessary to allow for entropy to increase is beyond mind bending. Of course, I won't get into further religious views here due to the board's good rules.

Me too, but that was a given. You're among great folks around here, IMO.

Yes, there are a lot of good chaps around here!!!

Your account of the Russian is illuminating and so I will philosophize a little further:

One could argue that, indeed, the universe is built upon random chance but how does that make free will possible?

The answer lies with Schrodinger's cat because the fate of the cat's life is uncertain and, dare I say, not even real ... until we make a decision.

What is the decision?

The decision is: to look in the box.

Before I learnt of this my answer to the question of:

If I were God how could I guarantee freewill for my creation?

My answer would have been:

It is impossible not to influence the lives of my creation and therefore I must build my universe upon logic right on down to the very core of its being - controlled at every step - but now I see that it is possible to guarantee free will.

So we do have a choice.

A choice to do good and a choice to do evil.

A choice to be a bum and a choice to excel.

A choice to believe and a choice to disbelieve.

If I may be so bold: God made the universe for both the theist and the atheist.

[George]

One could argue that, indeed, the universe is built upon random chance but how does that make free will possible?

If you are an electron, you're hurtin' for certain. Yet the quantum world serves a greater good, as does the flow of entropy. If there were no randomness in the subatomic fabric, would we be here?

The answer lies with Schrodinger's cat because the fate of the cat's life is uncertain and, dare I say, not even real ... until we make a decision.

That's another reason I am more of a dog lover. I like what Hawking has said, "When I hear of Schrödinger's cat, I reach for my gun". He thinks the observer's role is overstated. But, this is a lengthy topic, of course.

... but now I see that it is possible to guarantee free will.

So we do have a choice.

A choice to do good and a choice to do evil.

A choice to be a bum and a choice to excel.

A choice to believe and a choice to disbelieve.

Yes and when heat comes upon you, make electricity; or, restated, you can't make lemonade without lemons. A little effort with increasing entropy can produce some things with negative entropy. This can be rewarding and it improves our chances of making love a verb, both for others and ourself.

[Squashed]

I realize now that entropy can be both good and bad because without it there would be no difference and difference is the driver of every mechanical construct.

The voltage difference between the two prongs of the power cord causes my light to work.

The gravitational potential of water in a mountain stream generates electricity.

We must have a low: entropy; for the high: energy; to do work ... in the end we just increase entropy but also receive benefit at this cost.

The entropy bank is a near unlimited resource which is what satori alluded to in satori's reference to the sun (eburacum45 also showed teaser technologies to attempt to tap the "bank".)

The beast, in my mind, has been tamed.

All is well.

[George]

All is well.

Great, and the well will not run dry.

[mugaliens]

The single photon should logically be able to act as an single M&M (from the article) but instead it travels based upon a "probability wave".

Ahhh... probability waves.

I seem to recall that concept being raise by a rather adept member of this board before being bashed to smithereens as so much nonsense.

Yet here it is again, and this time from a more reputable source...

[Ken G]

I'm not sure the objection, photons do "ride" on probability waves, although to be accurate, they should be called probability amplitude waves (amplitudes may be summed, and then squared to get relative probabilities). These waves do indeed "tell" all particles where to go, including photons, in a statistical sense. There are few more seemingly fundamental truths about our understanding of how the universe works.

[Squashed]

Ahhh... probability waves.

I seem to recall that concept being raise by a rather adept member of this board before being bashed to smithereens as so much nonsense.

Yet here it is again, and this time from a more reputable source...

Thanks for the reply.

Could you post a link to the relevant topic/posts so that I might read the discussion of said "concept"?

[Bogie]

I realize now that entropy can be both good and bad because without it there would be no difference and difference is the driver of every mechanical construct.

The voltage difference between the two prongs of the power cord causes my light to work.

The gravitational potential of water in a mountain stream generates electricity.

We must have a low: entropy; for the high: energy; to do work ... in the end we just increase entropy but also receive benefit at this cost.

The entropy bank is a near unlimited resource which is what satori alluded to in satori's reference to the sun (eburacum45 also showed teaser technologies to attempt to tap the "bank".)

The beast, in my mind, has been tamed.

All is well.

Well, we have taken some lattitude on this thread so I am going to submit that the statement in the OP, "The logical is built upon the illogical" need not be true when it comes to entropy.

Though it is somewhat comforting to hear, "The entropy bank is a near unlimited resource which is what satori alluded to in satori's reference to the sun (eburacum45 also showed teaser technologies to attempt to tap the "bank".)", I would prefer that entropy be defeated.

Maybe it is just a compromise to suggest that if we try, we can imagine that the entropy problem doesn't actually exist, it only appears to exist. Think big; think we may be only a tiny patch of a greater universe that solves entropy for us out there in the beyond.

[RussT]

Forgetting for a moment Big Bang Theory dependent "closed system" considerations, why, since Einstein knew absolutely nothing about the existence of SMBH's, do Susskind, Hawking, Penrose, Thorne, Preskill and all of mainstream think that it is "absolutely impossible" that matter could be going 'through' MBH's and being lost to our universe.

Certainly the universe's accelerating expansion and the eventual loss of all energy is globally okay, so why couldn't matter going 'through' all the MBH's collectively be considered "Globally"?