# Decomposition

Supposition.

You wish me...a pint of sand on the ocean floor to define the whole ocean? What more can I offer than suppostion?

By your definition all these bubbles are themselves closed systems...alltogether make up the whole universe and thus the way bubbles universe are is not what universe is.

Many closed systems within another system do not define whether that system is open or closed.

No.. I was just telling you that your argument contradicted your earlier statement "there are no closed systems".

It always exists and therefore has its existence as its purposed. Before is irrelevant as everything is cyclical.

But during the process of Eruding, It has changed form

No.. I was just telling you that your argument contradicted your earlier statement "there are no closed systems".

Thats because this so called bubble is not closed...it is not a bubble...it is shaped as a bubble in my view (because of expansion from singularity all throughout to form such shape).

Is bubble a closed system?:bugeye:

You wish me...a pint of sand on the ocean floor to define the whole ocean? What more can I offer than suppostion?

But you state it as fact...
Pint of sand?

It always exists and therefore has its existence as its purposed. Before is irrelevant as everything is cyclical.

:bugeye:
A plant, for instance, did NOT always exist. Yet the purpose of the universe is for it to decompose, according to you.
Why did the universe create the plant in the first place ?

While living things are highly ordered (decreased entropy) they cause chaos in their immediate surroundings (increased entropy). The two cancel out.

But you state it as fact...
Pint of sand?

Allright than I..."I draqon state the following that what I have stated is the most probable assumption of the nature of universe based on other most probable assumptions called laws"

Is bubble a closed system?:bugeye:

It is if you define it as you did: they "exist in a different dimensional space/frame/time".

Most probable?
Never mind

:bugeye:
A plant, for instance, did NOT always exist. Yet the purpose of the universe is for it to decompose, according to you.
Why did the universe create the plant in the first place ?

While living things are highly ordered (decreased entropy) they cause chaos in their immediate surroundings (increased entropy). The two cancel out.

life is a very delicate branch in understanding entropy...I am not sure myself why life exists itself, because such would mean that in following scenario the highly complex life with a definite unfavoring of entropy seems to be in place of existence...I simply cannot answer the question.

A plant exists in time frame of existence of universe for that cycle of its existence. So in next cycle of universe creation that plant will most likely exist as well again.

Allright than I..."I draqon state the following that what I have stated is the most probable assumption of the nature of universe..
Not to me.. you are just stating your opinion.

..based on other most probable assumptions called laws"
Show that these laws support this.

look people...you rain me with questions I have no answers myself. As I stand, the answers I give are most probable assumptions with the highest probability of being a fact for cases you ask me for. Because everything is an assumption.

life is a very delicate branch in understanding entropy...I am not sure myself why life exists itself, because such would mean that in following scenario the highly complex life with a definite unfavoring of entropy seems to be in place of existence...I simply cannot answer the question.

A plant exists in time frame of existence of universe for that cycle of its existence. So in next cycle of universe creation that plant will most likely exist as well again.

Nonsense, unfounded assumptions and more pseudo-babble..
I'm sorry Draqon, but this is it for me.

Not to me.. you are just stating your opinion.
Show that these laws support this.

read into "string theory" and choose your own most probable belief.

The probability of decomposition is 77.7% in the odds favoring all matter if it were to be out of the box

Allright than Enmos...you wish me to cite others because you do not believe me? Fine

here is a site on string theory:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/

a site on discussion of open, closed, and flat universe: http://www.superstringtheory.com/cosmo/cosmo21.html

the laws of entropy or laws of thermodynamics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics

Discussion of multiverse theory:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse_(science)
http://arxiv.org/abs/0711.4460 (if you got the subscription to this)

The probability of decomposition is 77.7% in the odds favoring all matter if it were to be out of the box

Wtf ? LOL

<78

Enmos you want concrete answers, there are none. Thats why we got projects like CERN to give us "most probable" answers. Now read those sites I posted, please.

Decomposition occurs because universe favors entropy.

then how is conception, pregnancy and birth possible?
wouldnt the forming of an organism be anti-entropic?