NNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO THE ENTROPY OF AN ISOLATED SYSTEM CAN NEVER GO DOWN BECAUSE...BECAUSE IT JUST HECKIN FLIPPIN FREAKIN CAN'T OK????????????
The Laws of Thermodynamics are a bitch.1. You can't win2. You can only break even on a very cold day3. It never gets that cold
>>16974972>NNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO THE ENTROPY OF AN ISOLATED SYSTEM CAN NEVER GO DOWN No one says this, brainlet.
>>16974974There's no law against luck, though. If you can roll for a Boltzmann brain who said you can't roll for a Boltzmann universe?
>>16974972it actually can. the probability can be calculated fairly easily. it's just that for many macroscopic systems, no matter how small, the chance is way lower than the lifespan of the universd
>>16974976Ive talked to someone who said that
>>16975018ThisThey're not fundamental laws of reality so much as inevitable mathematical consequences of things being made of so many particles.
entropy is the belief of energy dissipating because of physical interactions which, itself, is entropic for how retarded it is.energy is transferred because of physical interactions. we're in a closed system. nothing is lost.
>>16974972>expand measured system boundaries>entropy instantly dropsCheque and m8
>>16975734the expansion of space, if it exists, which it doesn't, would be whole, such that objects also increase in size, and such that all increments in size, uniform, would be indeterminable and undetectable; which doesn't explain movement in space, because movement in space explains movement in space, rather than a fundamental non-uniform vague lazy rule of the universe that *empty* space expands while occupied space does not.
>>16974972Fluctuation theorem says it can... it's just not very probable.
Why do protons and electrons defy the 2nd law of thermodynamics by not decaying into quantum foam? Because it's not a universal law.
Why do photons not experience time or distance (spacetime). Because spacetime is not a universal substrate
>>16974972Why not?
>>16977564no you can't.
>>16974980Not all infinities contain what you're looking for.
>>16977566Maybe it's like a knot that will only come untangled when it reaches a knot tied the opposite way.
>>16975054except they fucking are laws you fucking retard, maybe stop trying to change the meanings of words if you want to be pedantic??????
Entropy is about typicality. Typical configurations outweigh atypical configurations at an exponential rate as the size of the system increases. In physics this matters because of chaotic systems. Like stirring tea and milk together. Mixed configurations significantly outweigh unmixed configurations. The chance of the tea spontaneously unmixing is astronomical. On a cosmic scale, practically valuable work is necessarily entropy increasing. Negative entropy is a non-renewable resource. You can't extract work from ambient heat.
>>16974972ok
>>16978205Provide the ontological grounding for the speculation, or it is equivalent to saying "God does it that way"
This is a question that I really want answered ever since I learned of entropy.How did the universe become atypical in the first place, such that we are generally trending toward typicality?Like why are things so ordered, in general? What is the origin of all of this ordered-ness?
>>16982156Contact with their anti-matter counterparts returns them into the quantum foam with some photons carrying away all the energy.
>>16982293That's not what I tological grounding is. Provide physical evidence of antimatter, and it's UV shifting of EM radiation. What you're attempting, is reification of a poorly defined bookkeeping device
>>16978211they aren't laws, dumbass. there's nothing pedantic about it. it's just not that. go read a book instead of fuming.
>>16975768I'm not talking about expanding space, entropy is the measured thermodynamic equilibrium of a point in space in some measured system, the boundaries of the system are mathematical and can be set arbitrarily by the person doing the math, thus entropy can be mathematically changed simply by changing the boundary of the measured system
>>16974972it can go down, it's just that for any realistic system entropy going down is so unlikely we'd need a new word for it.
>>16982425>Provide physical evidence of antimatterNigga, we use it in PET scans. What you're asking is retarded and I deem you an absolute subhuman. May you stub your toe and may your hemorrhoids become inflamed.
>>16974972Ok
>>16974972Okie dokie jakkie
>>16974974Can we sue reality for being such an eventually cold hearted bitch? Pretty sure reality is run by communists trying to redistribute our mass energy for the greater good, which removes the feasibility of life.
>>16974972Tell us how you really feel anon
