Dark Radiation?

[Blackmarch]

11 hours ago, Jamie123 said:

What the Second Law of Thermodynamics actually says is that in a closed system, entropy can never decrease. Entropy is not necessarily the same as lack of complexity, but it does coincide with disorder. (Everyone knows this: if you don't tidy up your desk every now and then, it will keep getting more and more disorderly until it reaches a state of "maximum entropy".)

The thing everyone forgets is that this applies to a closed system. The Earth is not a closed system: we are slap-bang in the middle of an enormous heat engine. On one side of us we have the sun, which is incredibly hot, and on the other side we have outer space, which is incredibly cold. Energy confined in atoms within the sun (order) is being dispersed into interstellar space (disorder) and it passes through us as it goes. Compared to that massive increase in entropy, what's the piffling decrease associated with the emergence of life?

frame of reference issues... the closest we can come to observing a closed system is bounded by the limit of how far we can literally see.

we have been able to measure distant star movement, it's more a matter of accuracy than ability to.. certainly not easy by any means, but we've got gear now that lets us measure in very small increments... over the last decade we've been starting to realize how vital supermassive black holes are necessary to both help keep a galaxy together as well as to help generate matter collapse for star formation.

[Jamie123]

16 hours ago, Blackmarch said:

frame of reference issues... the closest we can come to observing a closed system is bounded by the limit of how far we can literally see.

we have been able to measure distant star movement, it's more a matter of accuracy than ability to.. certainly not easy by any means, but we've got gear now that lets us measure in very small increments... over the last decade we've been starting to realize how vital supermassive black holes are necessary to both help keep a galaxy together as well as to help generate matter collapse for star formation.

Closed System: Technically you are right - since we do receive a few photons from stars in (for example) the Andromeda galaxy, we are bound to them in a common closed system, but the connection is only slight, and the increase in entropy associated with our receiving them is dwarfed immeasurably by that associated with the sun. That is the heat engine which drives our planet and makes life possible. If the sun were somehow magically removed while the Earth's energy were somehow magically maintained, then we would have some claim to being a "closed system" - or at least a good approximation of one: in that case all the retained energy would transform itself into evenly distributed heat - which has the highest entropy possible. And yes, the emergence of life in such a situation would be virtually impossible.

Star Motion: The proper motion of stars was first proven by Edmund Halley (the comet guy) nearly 300 years ago, and with modern instruments can now be measured with some accuracy. However, detecting the gravitational effects of stars on each other across interstellar distances is another matter*: what we mostly see is the aggregated gravity of the entire galaxy (including stars, nebulae and supposed dark matter) on individual stars. Perhaps as the Voyager probes continue to penetrate interstellar space we will learn more about how gravity really behaves out there (though I daresay that other things out there like the Oort Cloud and the Kuiper Belt objects will distort the measurements).   

Supermassive Black Holes: We certainly know there is one in the centre of the galaxy (called Sagittarius A*), since we can observe the rapid orbits of stars in its immediate vicinity. However it contains only a very small fraction of the mass of the entire galaxy, and cannot possibly account for its high speed of rotation. Furthermore, the stars in the galaxy do not follow Keplerian orbits (stars close to the hub travelling much faster than those near the rim) quite unlike planets in our solar system orbiting the sun. In fact the angular speed of stars does not vary much between the core and the rim, showing that the bulk of the mass is not concentrated at the centre but more evenly spread out. Though I suppose its possible that there are many other supermassive black holes spread out across the galaxy, which account for the extra mass now attributed to "dark matter"...

*Afterthought: Having said that, I suppose the stars orbiting Sagittarius A* (the alleged black hole the centre of the galaxy) could be said to be responding to its gravity over something approaching interstellar distances (a few hundred light-hours) but I don't believe those orbits are mapped accurately enough to be certain, nor do we (as far as I know - correct me if I am wrong) have an independent estimate of the mass of the central body.

Edited July 27, 2016 by Jamie123

[Traveler]

The second law of thermal dynamics has a lot to do with proving particle theory (quantum mechanics).  In essence any “attribute” of a particle must have a component particle with that attribute.  The closest exception is the Higgs Boson that does not have the attribute of mass but is necessary for any other particle to have mass as an attribute.  The theory is that there exists a Higgs mass field and that as a particle capable of mass joined with the Higgs boson passing through the Higgs mass field then takes on the attribute of mass.  The point I am trying to make is that the attribute already exist – somewhere.  In science there is not random magic that produces something that in some state or another did not already exist.  This construct of attributes is a fundamental principle of science and is a derivative of the second law of Thermal Dynamics. 

I have yet to discuss the existence of life with any scientist that does not believe in evolution.  With this thread I am using the argument that life is a fundamental attribute of things that we define as alive.  This attribute of life must have a source.  Basic to my scientific friends is that the attribute of life is a chemical combination.  There are a lot of problems with this theory that science clearly establishes and scientist must all openly admit.   One interesting aspect of evolution is that in theory it is believed that all life on earth has a single source.  I have always been amazed that the religious community has objected to this idea and principle.

Does it not seem odd that life cannot be replicated except from previous existing life?  The attribute of life – if random – should have basic principles by which it begins initially.  If we do have an explanation of the initialization of life – we should be able to replicate the parameter and reproduce the results.  If the results are not reproducible – then we indeed do not understand the parameters. 

Again as we consider empirical attributes of matter and the Chaos Theory of fractals; we understand that the attribute at the macro level is derived from the attribute of life at the micro (smallest level).  With this scientific construct we stand at the threshold of so much of LDS theology I am stunned that the entire world (religious as well as scientific) resists baptism and becoming a Latter-day Saint.  Especially that intelligence is a basic construct of not just life but matter in general and exist in the “spirit” of all things.  Isn’t this exciting and interesting – that at this juncture of modern civilization – basic religious notions have such a prominent place – and that the religious community, as a whole, does not want anything to do with it?????

 

The Traveler