Big Bad Voodoo Posted June 23, 2013 #1 Share Posted June 23, 2013 If universe isnt infinetly old it cant be infinite in extent. Right or wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrooma Posted June 23, 2013 #2 Share Posted June 23, 2013 that's not really a paradox L. it's based on a false premise that the universe is infinitely old, but we know it isn't, and we also know it isn't infinite in extent. a better thermodynamic paradox would be the one of solar energy contravening the law of entropy as it leaves the sun..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Voodoo Posted June 23, 2013 Author #3 Share Posted June 23, 2013 (edited) that's not really a paradox L. it's based on a false premise that the universe is infinitely old, but we know it isn't, and we also know it isn't infinite in extent. a better thermodynamic paradox would be the one of solar energy contravening the law of entropy as it leaves the sun..... What do you mean that universe is infinetly old? It said "isnt infinetly old". Edited June 23, 2013 by the L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrooma Posted June 23, 2013 #4 Share Posted June 23, 2013 what I meant is, the thermodynamic paradox you're talking about, ie- if the universe was infinitely old, then there would be a thermal equilibrium, no stars, no matter, just a universal temperature, a kind of heat death, that would only work if the universe was spatially & temporally infinite, but it doesn't work if the universe is spatially & temporally finite, which we know it is, therefore the paradox falls apart! check out steinmetz's objection to the 2nd law of thermodynamics as a universal law, now THAT'S a paradox you might find interesting..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Voodoo Posted June 24, 2013 Author #5 Share Posted June 24, 2013 what I meant is, the thermodynamic paradox you're talking about, ie- if the universe was infinitely old, then there would be a thermal equilibrium, no stars, no matter, just a universal temperature, a kind of heat death, that would only work if the universe was spatially & temporally infinite, but it doesn't work if the universe is spatially & temporally finite, which we know it is, therefore the paradox falls apart! check out steinmetz's objection to the 2nd law of thermodynamics as a universal law, now THAT'S a paradox you might find interesting..... I said: If universe isnt infinetly old it cant be infinite in extent. I will check Steinmetz objection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepulchrave Posted June 24, 2013 #6 Share Posted June 24, 2013 72[/size]058283' post='4821464']I said: If universe isnt infinetly old it cant be infinite in extent. Sure it can. Shrooma, can you elaborate on Steinmetz? (I assume you are talking about C. P. Steinmetz?) I can't seem to find any of his non-electric circuit work. I can only find a few quotes from him on the subject of entropy, but it seems these were made prior to the publication of Noether's theorem and the development of the Schrodinger equation (which to my mind quite adequately refute his arguments, but as I said I haven't found a direct link to his entire work so I can't really assess his full argument). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Voodoo Posted June 24, 2013 Author #7 Share Posted June 24, 2013 Sure it can. How? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepulchrave Posted June 24, 2013 #8 Share Posted June 24, 2013 How? Just because the universe has existed for a finite quantity of time doesn't imply that it contains a finite quantity of space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now