|
I've decided that, due to boredom, I'm going to start a blog where TL denziens can discuss various problems that don't have any current solutions. Who knows? Something interesting can come out of this.
Our first topic is Entropy. Entropy is a measure of disorder and chaos. We all see entropy in, for instance, our rooms, where they naturally get messy over time. Entropy can also be seen in a game of Starcraft: the 4 workers and lone building eventually grow into a massive base and army.
Entropy is also an account of the amount of energy that has been spent in a situation: for instance, all of the minerals and gas that have been consumed cannot be restored.
Now, does anybody have brainstorming ideas as to perhaps how Entropy could be reversed, or at the very least put into a 1:1 ratio?
 
|
You could just as well discuss time travel and warp speed engines.
|
United States24718 Posts
Chaotic systems deviate more and more from any planned simulation over time. You cannot prevent this without perfect initial conditions which are impossible to provide in real life applications. All you can do is approximate ahead of time how chaotic you expect the system to have become.
|
On December 23 2008 14:00 Caller wrote:
Now, does anybody have brainstorming ideas as to perhaps how Entropy could be reversed, or at the very least put into a 1:1 ratio?
You may be interested in what this man has to say.
http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/GiantNegentropy.pdf
(this will probably be dismissed as pseudo science, although I would like to hear a good explanation as to exactly what is wrong with it.
edit: actually, reading the article, you probably won't understand what that man is talking about unless you do some background reading.
What he is saying is that charges are constantly spewing out virtual photons and ordering (polarizing) the vacuum continuously.)
|
On December 23 2008 14:13 Klockan3 wrote:
You could just as well discuss time travel and warp speed engines.
i plan to ^^^^
|
My biggest "concern" with it is that he's justifying everything with words, no supporting math. I noticed in one section he is talking about "spin" in degrees, when spin isn't measured in degrees.
Seems like a bad article that hasn't undergone peer review (by definition it can't be science if it hasn't), and would hardly stand up if it did... as there is no experimentation, no formal proof... no reason to believe any of it is anything *but* bullshit.
|
Here's a little theology for the discussion.
God could be thought of as the opposite of entropy. Everything in the universe tends toward entropy and energy is required to organize it again.
God organizes. His creation is an act of organization. Some say He creates order in disordered lives. He is the ultimate source of energy for overcoming entropy.
Entropy is the "natural state" of physical elements. Ungodliness in our actions/thoughts is the natural state of our spiritual lives and can only be overcome through the input of effort (energy).
You said you wanted interesting things to come up so I added some theology.
|
i like where this thread is going
here's another contribution:
Since entropy is based on conversion of energy to unusuable energy, i.e. heat, yet we use heat as a mechanism to perform work for us (i.e. steam engine, etc.) is it possible to reverse entropy through using the universe as a giant heat engine?
|
On December 23 2008 14:47 Chariot wrote:My biggest "concern" with it is that he's justifying everything with words, no supporting math. I noticed in one section he is talking about "spin" in degrees, when spin isn't measured in degrees. Seems like a bad article that hasn't undergone peer review (by definition it can't be science if it hasn't), and would hardly stand up if it did... as there is no experimentation, no formal proof... no reason to believe any of it is anything *but* bullshit.
Perhaps, but meta arguments aside, I would like to know the logical argument against it.
Science actually doesn't require peer review to be legitimate. It only has to agree with reality and make predictions. Generally religion is when you need a group of people to agree with you.
|
On December 23 2008 15:39 Caller wrote:
i like where this thread is going
here's another contribution:
Since entropy is based on conversion of energy to unusuable energy, i.e. heat, yet we use heat as a mechanism to perform work for us (i.e. steam engine, etc.) is it possible to reverse entropy through using the universe as a giant heat engine?
Read that website I posted. It goes into detail about the difference between efficiency and COP (coefficient of performance). The problem with your idea of converting energy to heat, then using heat to do work, is the theoretical limit to efficiency of heat engines (look up carnot engine).
edit: as salvio noted, the concept of entropy itself seems very strange when you consider the big bang, which assumes a point of zero entropy.
|
this thread has an entropy level of 0 degrees boring.
you know what really is a topic of discussion, Oreos vs Chips-Ahoy!
|
what's up with all these random intellectual, philosophical threads that keep popping up.
Also, Oreos > chips ahoy
|
On December 23 2008 17:47 shavingcream66 wrote:
what's up with all these random intellectual, philosophical threads that keep popping up.
Also, Oreos > chips ahoy
this
and
I thought this blog was going to be about chemistry homework
|
Do you intend to revert energy or revert the changes that occured due to energy variations?
You may be interested in what this man has to say. http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/GiantNegentropy.pdf(this will probably be dismissed as pseudo science, although I would like to hear a good explanation as to exactly what is wrong with it. edit: actually, reading the article, you probably won't understand what that man is talking about unless you do some background reading. What he is saying is that charges are constantly spewing out virtual photons and ordering (polarizing) the vacuum continuously.
the man developed almost an entire theory without a scientific model,scientific finding nor experimentation he took part of the physics-chemistry and deducted some other parts, thus the text sound hypothetics and in the scientific scale
hypo<finding<model<theory<law(correct it if i screwed).
|
Netherlands6142 Posts
The energy I put in something pays out in the amount of satisfaction in a 1:1 ratio.
|
United States24718 Posts
On December 23 2008 14:47 Chariot wrote:My biggest "concern" with it is that he's justifying everything with words, no supporting math. I noticed in one section he is talking about "spin" in degrees, when spin isn't measured in degrees. Seems like a bad article that hasn't undergone peer review (by definition it can't be science if it hasn't), and would hardly stand up if it did... as there is no experimentation, no formal proof... no reason to believe any of it is anything *but* bullshit.
I did a quick look and it seemed like the article was in a peer review journal.
|
|
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
I almost shit myself, I thought for a second teamliquid was going to dissect me. I will add a decent reply after work.
|
Entropy within a system can definitely be reversed, to put things in order, but you have to expend energy to do this, which expels heat to the surroundings, increasing the total entropy (of the system + surroundings). So to reverse the rise in entropy within a system is trivial (just expend enregy), but there really is no way to reverse the entropy of the entire universe, save for a spontaneous contraction of the universe, since total Entropy is considered to be directly proportional to the area of the universe. If we really could reverse it at whim, then we could have an infinite supply of energy.
Oh, also, entropy can spontaneously reverse, but this is almost impossibly unlikely for any significant system.
|
On December 25 2008 19:16 ItsYoungLee wrote:
Oh, also, entropy can spontaneously reverse, but this is almost impossibly unlikely for any significant system.
An infinite improbability generator ought to do the trick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
