Where is the Disorder

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Willem, Apr 19, 2019.

  1. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Can an entire galaxy be born that has no more energy than that of a single atom?

    If all the grains of sand in a sandpit are resting at the bottom of the pit (lowest potential energy), can one grain of sand start an avalanche?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,453
    If you really think you can do that, you are barking.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    I'm thinking more of one atom exploding and a following chain reaction setting off others

    With the whole of the remnants of our Universe becoming another Big Bang

    Forgive the Hodge Podge answer as I am runner out of beer coasters to write my thoughts on

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,453
    I had my suspicions from his determination to find causes behind events in particle physics, but this entropy thing is a very old one from creationists. It is getting less common in creationist tracts because it has been debunked so often and so thoroughly. But Willem, like all creationists, displays a lack of science education. If he had been educated in science, he would not be a creationist.
     
  8. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    A Pseudoscience thread, started by a creationist, maybe isn't the best place for fanciful speculation. He's having a hard enough just sciencing.
     
  9. phyti Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    732
    davec426913 #21;
    No, but the sand is getting warmer from the g-field, thus increasing in energy. In order to remain in a state of equilibrium, it must radiate the energy at the same rate of absorption, which is unlikely. Heat propagation from the core to the outer surface requires more time than gravity requires inward.
     
  10. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,453
    Whut?

    No it is not getting warmer, if the grains of sand are at rest, as stated. No work is being done and no energy is being "absorbed" from anywhere. What on Earth are you on about?
     
    DaveC426913 likes this.
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    OK, no. Gravity is not an energy source. Stationary objects do not absorb energy from it.

    But more to-the-point: You are taking the analogy too literally.

    M345 thought that atoms could "explode", and trigger more atoms to explode - as if they each had potential energy stored in them. In my analogy the potential energy is on the form of gravitational potential of sand grains to fall to the lowest point. Sand grains, left to themselves, cannot "avalanche" uphill.

    That is the extent of the analogy.
     
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    Question; Are there stationary objects at all? How would that be defined?
    Stationary relative to each other as grains of sand on a beach?
     
  13. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    He was obviously talking about being stationary relative to a mass.
     
    Write4U likes this.
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    In a state of "greatest satisfaction" relative to a mass.
     
  15. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Huh?
     
  16. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Everywhere else. Life can produce local order. Although, after a tree is dead, it doesn't reverse its order and come to life again.
     
  17. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    That is true, but I really think that is a useless statement no matter how many times I hear it. There is an implication in that statement that life is somehow 'special' because it can create order or (a worse statement) reverse entropy.
    A dew forms - production of local order.
    A crystal forms - local order.
    A hurricane forms - local order.
    Snow forms - local order.

    What one of the things that life and all of the above examples have in common? They all increase the entropy of the universe.
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    A grain of sand is not falling toward the Earth, therefore it has no potential energy wrt the ground. There is no potential energy to release to cause it to start an avalanche of sand. The grains are in their ground state - just like atoms are in their ground state.

    This 'grains of sand on a beach' is only an analogy, to show why atoms don't explode and trigger a cascade of exploding atoms. See post 23.
     
  19. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    I am a little confused here. I always thought that everything (on earth) is a constant state of falling, but that we never even touch the ground. The Coulomb force?
    Again, I always thought that nuclear explosions was a cascading phenomenon a chain reaction requiring an inititial nuclear explosion to the trigger the nuclear chain reaction, no?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

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

    What am I missing?
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2019
  20. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    In one scenario, the cosmos could continue to expand forever, with all matter eventually disintegrating into energy in what's known as a "heat death," Caldwell said

    LATER

    Galaxies pull apart, the solar system pulls apart, let your imagination run wild," he said. "Planets, and then eventually atoms, then the universe itself." [How Does a Black Hole Form?

    https://amp-livescience-com.cdn.amp...ence.com/65299-how-will-the-universe-end.html

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    You're over-thinking it.

    You cannot extract energy from a rock sitting on the ground (just like you cannat extract energy from a magnet unless you get something moving near it first - i.e. you set up a potential energy situation). You can extract energy if the rock is above the ground and converts its potential energy to kinetic energy.

    But when a rock is sitting on the ground, it has no potential energy with which in could move spontaneously. It has to have potential energy relative to some lower surface. If it were on the side of a hill, its potential energy relative to the valley is something that could be converted to kinetic energy, if someone were to give it a push. That energy could be used to move other rocks on the side of the hill.

    But a rock at the bottom of the hill has no potential energy to transfer. It would require energy input to get it moving. Thus, you don't get avalanches spontaneously occurring on flat ground.

    Diffuse atoms freely distributed around the universe are in their ground state. They're not sitting on the side of a hill, stored with energy.

    Sure, because the nuclear pellet is in a low state of entropy. Energy has been out into it to keep it as a pellet. Now, when you add energy - in the form of a chemical explosion surrounding the pellet - it imparts that energy to the neutrons, whose energy can overcome the weak forces holding it together.

    But such is not the case in the diffuse matter at the end of the universe. Free floating atoms do not have potential energy stored in them in a way that can be extracted merely by collision. Even if a cosmic ray smashed into an atom, it might decay, but the energy is not there in all the other atoms to start some sort of chain reaction. A chain reaction requires the components to have energy stored in them that can be released.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  22. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,069
    TY, I'll have to give this more thought to find a proper perspective....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I have a problem visualizing rocks sitting on the ground? Don't all rocks or grains on a beach float in space above the ground, suspended by the Coulomb force between them. This presents to me a paradox.

    I have a similar problem with the example of wo magnets. Positive to positive presents a condition which makes it impossible to overcome the repulsive potentials. It just cannot be done. Holding them still in a state of mild repulsion negates the repulsive potentials or do they continue to exist as a latency?
    But I'll work it through......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2019
  23. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Yes, but so what?
    They can't fall farther.
    The electro-repulsive force between rock and ground isn't going to make the rock jump off the ground.

    Why not? I can push two magnets together.
     

Share This Page