5 ms·

I have my own theory about how life and entropy interrelate. I think total entropy in the universe starts at zero and will end at zero. This is because 'order'

I have my own theory about how life and entropy interrelate. I think total entropy in the universe starts at zero and will end at zero. This is because 'order' must be considered 'negative entropy'. As the universe evolves over time patterns in molecules and behaviors of molecules begin to occur. Starting with particles, atoms, molecules, compounds, planets, solar systems, galaxies, etc. Physics doesn't drive just randomness, but it also drives order. So you ask what is the ultimate MOST NEGATIVE entropy that exists? Life. Specifically brains. Life forms are the most ordered things in the universe (non-random/order). Brains are massively large negative entropy locations in the universe. If you total up all positive entropy and negative entropy the balance out to zero. The reason is because the laws of physics don't change and DO create patterns. You can even study this "Zero Entropy" law in Conway's Game of Life. As the randomness increases over time to does the 'order', and i argue that the roughly cancel out. It's a kind of 'information conservation' at work here. If no new information is added into a system, it cannot gain or lose entropy, because all the random events are creating 'patterns' and by definition a pattern is an non-randomness and therefore negative entropy.

azag0 10y ago
What you describe is not your theory, it's pretty much conventional understanding of what life is in terms of thermodynamics -- a local capsule of low entropy. It's just that in formal treatment of thermodynamics, there is no negative entropy, there is just high entropy and low entropy. Also, the total entropy of the universe is largely irrelevant. This view is nothing new. What is new (or claimed to be new) about the work reported here is what drives the emergence of these capsules of low entropy.
- ClayFerguson 10y ago
  Thermodynamics states that in any closed system the entropy ALWAYS increases over time. I think this law works, but they need to stipulate that it's for situations where there is a begin-time and end-time (finite time range), but if you integrate entropy over all time (even in a closed system), you end up with a situation where the total area under the entropy curve is zero. In other words if you sort of 'remove' time from the equation, and only consider a closed system, then all particles are guaranteed to have had time to interact with each other and fall into a well ordered pattern where there is equal order and disorder. This is my belief and it is NOT the 'conventional' understanding, but people are beginning to adopt this idea into their thinking.
  - lomnakkus 10y ago
    > Thermodynamics states that in any closed system the entropy ALWAYS increases over time. You left out a bit. If we take Wikipedia's definition (I know, I know): > The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system always increases over time, or remains constant in ideal cases where the system is in a steady state or undergoing a reversible process. As far as is currently known the laws of physics are time-reversible, which (ISTM, at least) would imply that the latter clause could very easily apply to the universe as a whole. (There's also the issue of whether the universe itself is a closed system.)
    - ClayFerguson 10y ago
      Yes I left out the part about steady state condition as well as absolute zero temperature condition, because those are boundary conditions (constant conditions) that don't involve time. My point is about an integral over all time. And yes the definition of "universe" is something I define as "a closed system that doesn't interact with other systems", which is also a consistent definition even if the multiverse theory is correct. If two things interact then they are by definition in the same universe.

azag0 10y ago

What you describe is not your theory, it's pretty much conventional understanding of what life is in terms of thermodynamics -- a local capsule of low entropy. It's just that in formal treatment of thermodynamics, there is no negative entropy, there is just high entropy and low entropy. Also, the total entropy of the universe is largely irrelevant. This view is nothing new. What is new (or claimed to be new) about the work reported here is what drives the emergence of these capsules of low entropy.

ClayFerguson 10y ago
Thermodynamics states that in any closed system the entropy ALWAYS increases over time. I think this law works, but they need to stipulate that it's for situations where there is a begin-time and end-time (finite time range), but if you integrate entropy over all time (even in a closed system), you end up with a situation where the total area under the entropy curve is zero. In other words if you sort of 'remove' time from the equation, and only consider a closed system, then all particles are guaranteed to have had time to interact with each other and fall into a well ordered pattern where there is equal order and disorder. This is my belief and it is NOT the 'conventional' understanding, but people are beginning to adopt this idea into their thinking.
- lomnakkus 10y ago
  > Thermodynamics states that in any closed system the entropy ALWAYS increases over time. You left out a bit. If we take Wikipedia's definition (I know, I know): > The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system always increases over time, or remains constant in ideal cases where the system is in a steady state or undergoing a reversible process. As far as is currently known the laws of physics are time-reversible, which (ISTM, at least) would imply that the latter clause could very easily apply to the universe as a whole. (There's also the issue of whether the universe itself is a closed system.)
  - ClayFerguson 10y ago
    Yes I left out the part about steady state condition as well as absolute zero temperature condition, because those are boundary conditions (constant conditions) that don't involve time. My point is about an integral over all time. And yes the definition of "universe" is something I define as "a closed system that doesn't interact with other systems", which is also a consistent definition even if the multiverse theory is correct. If two things interact then they are by definition in the same universe.