/sci/ - Science & Math

Chemically speaking ...

>>10629341
entropy is false because if it was true nothing would ever come to be

>>10629394
You absolute brainlet
Entropy always increases, but in a closed system. The earth, the solar system, the galaxy, and the entirety of existence up until the theoretical boundries of physics we don't yet know, all up until the endare an OPEN system. Complexity can, and does arise in open systems.

>>10629448
Complexity has parabolic nature as entropy increases.

>>10629456
that just proves my point further

>>10629463
I wasn't the one arguing anon

You are right OP. However there is one light at the end of the tunnel

We still see visible stars in the universe, this means one of two things.

1: There are no advanced species in the universe besides humanity because stars waste so much energy towards entropy that every species with the ability to do so would extinguish all stars. Stars still being visible means humanity will be the species that will gather all this Mass-Energy for ourselves over time
2: Advanced species do exist and them not collecting every Joule possible as evidenced by the existence of stars mean that they found out a solution to entropy after all.

Either way no matter which one is true we'll have a lot more energy than you'd expect. Sure we'll most likely still die out when we use up every Joule and everything is entropic. But at least we won't have resource wars with other intelligences over our limited supply.

Boltzmann new universe when?

>>10629480
Impossible. The level of entropy is too high to allow chance to make that happen. Universe also keeps expanding forever even when the heat death happened so a boltzmann universe actually keeps decreasing in chance forever to the point of not happening.

Boltzmann brains keep being possible because it's only a very small flunctuation needed to create such a system.

>>10629470
We can also harvest energy past star era - from black holes. Either way , Heat Death will happen eventually.

>>10629470
>We still see visible stars in the universe
we see stars in Milky Way and nowhere else
and we see them how they were, not how they are.

>>10629486
Yeah the point is more that stars that are currently burning waste a lot of energy towards entropy. Stopping all stars in the universe from burning would give humanity (and any other intelligence) millions or billions of times longer total existence.

We'd go from 4*10^12 years of existence to 4*10^30 years of existence if we extinguished all the stars in the universe and "store" their energy for later usage.

>>10629492
Wouldn't energy needed to do that increase entropy anyway?

>>10629490
>Lives in a city
Move to the countryside with no light polution and you can see the andromeda galaxy with your naked eyes. It's about the size of the moon.

>>10629497
Yeah but only an insignificant fraction would be used.

You could harvest that energy needed from the stars as well in a process known as starlifting where you use the star's energy to make it slowly spew out its material from the top and bottom of the star which you can gather up and store in gas giants of black holes to minimize entropy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_lifting

>>10629492

>>10629504
Meant for >>10629490

>>10629470
Maybe highly advanced civilization is precisely that- stars ....

>>10629515
Then who was phone?

>>10629504
why would you do this? just go on the internet and shoop photos

>>10629341
>inevitable
No. Big rip happens long before heat death is a problem.

>>10629504
You're not exactly seeing individual stars when you observe Andromeda with the naked eye.
Even in the best conditions its kind of just a smear of faint light.

>>10629558
Big rip is very unlikely. And if you are talking about the recent paper that's just 1 measurement against hundreds of measurements that seem to imply dark energy is constant and thus no big rip will happen.

Sure there is still a chance the big rip will happen but it's still very unlikely. It's not scientific to imply it's going to happen.

>>10629499
>>10629504

>>10629566

Maybe increasing entropy in our universe decreases it somewhere level below. Maybe it's like never-ending cycle of big bangs. Prove me wrong.?

>>10629341
>Turn off your electric blankets to slow it down
It will make it faster dumbass

>>10629592
No it won't. Prove.

777 stops entropy

>>10629448
>muh open system
>muh complexity
you obviously dont even know what you are talking about

>>10629341
this may be answered by some high up physics shit i've never heard of, but on a long enough timeline, gravitational forces should pull everything back together, causing compression, fission, and fusion all generating heat again, and freeing the energy locked by entropy, correct? entropy is energy that has been locked into an unusable state, but the heat generated by compression on a planet scale, up to the fusion/fission reactions of a star, that shit is caused pretty much purely because of gravity compressing shit isn't it?

>>10629584
entropy is universal at all scales. The law is that TOTAL entropy always increases. Not that entropy has to increase everywhere equally so even if that was true it always increases totally meaning there won't be a cycle of big bangs.

What if entropy is increasing in the universe because some other advanced culture of aliens built a machine that funnels the entropy out of other parts of the universe and sends it to them

>>10629341
All living creatures - and heat engines - create entropy, but some are more effective than others.

>>10629470
This is assuming other civilizations are perfectly rational. Given that our only examples of civilization are anything but perfectly rational this seems unlikely. You assert that the fact we still have any stars at all means they don't exist/avoided entropy, but now you're assuming at least one of these perfectly rational civilizations has existed long enough with the technology and resources to snuff out every star by now. Meanwhile you have the possibilities that such civilizations don't exist, haven't existed long enough, haven't had the technology long enough.

>>10630017
>entropy is universal at all scales
>he thinks our puny thermodynamic laws are absolutely applicable to the whole universe
Yeah, just like original Newton's gravitational "law", right

>>10630056
also they implied that such feats are even possible, while it is highly propable that physical limits won‘t allow for that

>bring it on, I'm awaiting

>>10629470
What if
*rips bong*
just imagine what if
*cough*
the advanced civilization is creating stars to speed up entropy.

>>10629341
Have some sci-fi ideas how to prevent the heat death or bank on it.

>Tfw I don’t think our understanding of physics is developed enough to make a drastic claim like that.

Lol. We have fags thinking the great filter is true because we should be advanced enough to detect aliens. Our trust in our understanding is totally retarded