The second principle of thermodynamics states that an out-of-equilibrium isolated system spontaneously moves towards an equilibrium state with a larger entropy. A decrease of entropy is possible in a sub-system in contact with a larger isolated system as long as the entropy of the global system increases.
Yet, the very simple fact that we are alive shows that, at least on Earth, the entropy decreases by large amounts. This means that we have to be connected to a large system in which entropy increases.
Then should one consider that the Universe is an isolated system?
I like your question, but why you state that the entropy on Earth decrease due to we are alive?
In order to discuss your question you need clearly define what is the Universe?
I fully agree with Yuri.
Besides, their assumptionsare unclear.
In my son's room I can assure you that the entropy does not decrease on earth ........ even less!
Yurii and Marcelo are correct. By universe are we discussing the galaxy of which we are a part or the cosmos?
To-date we can safely distinguyish: a) the universe that we can observe, and b) the universe that presumably exists as a whole.
We are believers (stressed!) that the universe had a beginning (say some 14 billion years). But this a very recent belief, by something that has not been proved as such, namely, the Big Bang. if so, we must:
i) Know whether or not this universe truly had a beginning, and its presumable end. There is no consencus about it, so far.
ii) We do not truly know the very composition of our universe: say, wht it definitely dark matter and dark energy are all about.
I do concur with your claim about non-equilirium thermodynamics. We can think, f.i., that our universe is open and one among many other universes. However, we have not proved it, as yet.
Carlos,
I cannot add much to your erudite response. Let us remember that there is a universe of the infinitely large and a universe of the infinitely small (a basic premise of differential calculus). Are quarks the smallest unit believed to exist? Based on your work, do you believe that gravitons exist? I am a non-physicist.
You point out to a fundamental questio, dear Valentine, namely, the distinction between a mathematical universe, a physical one, and others. No question about that: mathematically we shouyl distinguish at least an infinetly small and and infinitely large universe. I take that Charles invitation pertains the hysical dimension.
To be honest, as you know, we haven't come to the las word regarding the world of the particles - f.i. gravitons, and the like. While this leads us to a fundamenta ground, we must nonetheless also look at the general or fundamental picture... I guess.
Carlos,
Thank you. I find no fault in your logical point of view.
To Isabella.
Life in general is creation of order from disorder while entropy growth is destruction of order into disorder. So life, as a spontaneous process, seems to contradict the second principle of thermodynamics that states that the spontaneous evolution of a closed system creates disorder. Therefore the solar system must be an open system to solve this contradiction.
To Yurii et al
The Universe is all what our conscience can have access to.
To Marcelo.
Nobody ever tried to calculate the balance between growth and decrease of entropy on Earth. In his book on statistical physics Lev Landau even mentioned that it could happen that we live in a positive fluctuation of entropy in a Universe that would globally be at equilibrium.
The entropy state of your son's room is a transient state as you spend much time and energy asking him to put order. :-) Life is a transient state too.
L. Landau et E. Lifchitz, Physique Statistique, MIR 1967, p. 42
Yes Carlos, there is no proof. This is what physics is about: finding support arguments to our theories. The second principal of thermodynamics is a non proved affirmation. As you clearly and simply write, we are looking for systems or situations that would contradict it.
Yes Valentine I am considering the physical Universe(s).
Dear Prof. Hirlimann,
I want to draw your attention to the fact that in my PhD thesis at NYU I had derived a result in the asset market context in Economical Information and E-Commerce systems that the distribution of matter within the Edgeworth Box somewhat like the Schroedinger Box determines the Entropy of the market system. Hence for e.g. the information as an eternally impressed force can dynamically bring the Econophysics system to equilibrium as one alternative solution. The other solution generates a solution to the Heisenberg paradox because of the Dbranes String property of the solution (please see some of my papers on String Theory on my RG page) which is that if there is a nanotechnology can make all the masses equally likely in whichever cordinate the quantum is likely to exist. This shows that the Higgs-Englert-Bosonic meanfield is a solution to a universe in equilibrium. However we can't create universes. So I don't know what answers String Theoretic Genetic Econophysics Hamiltonian Systems can provide to your question. Earl Chair Prof. Dr. SKM QC EPS Fellow (In) MRES MES MRES MAICTE; Earl Prince SM MPCI MAICTE
Life is a complex sequence of chemical reactions. Living organisms are thermodynamically unstable open systems. The solar light energy is the single source of energy for life. The Earth is also an open system.. It absorbs light and emits photons. I'm wondering how to count the contribution of photons to the entropy change, e.g. in the reaction of water splitting:
2 H2O + 4 photons -> O2 + 2 H2
What is the standard Gibb's energy formation of one photon?
How the solar light energy contributes to the entropy balance of the Earth?
Yuri, I'm afraid that your statement: "The solar light energy is the single source of energy for life", while correct in general, should be qualified, because of some exceptions, such as the blind life forms existing in very deep locations where the solar light doesn't arrive, and the energy source is the heat coming from the interior of our planet.
Dear Charles:
Regarding his sentence. "Life is a transient state too", of course. What gives me the right to my position, after life passes, entropy continues acting with different physical manifestations and growing ..... may change the rate of growth ... but not its directionality! .. is a concept ...... ............ A given species remains in thermal equilibrium as long as its interaction rate is larger than the expansion rate of the universe. Roughly speaking, equilibrium requires it to be possible for the products of a given reaction have the opportunity to recombine in the reverse reaction and if the expansion of the universe is rapid enough this won’t happen. As a good rule of thumbthe expansion rate in the early universe is “slow,” and particles tend to be in thermal equilibrium.
En tiempos muy tempranos (cerca de la era de Planck, por ejemplo), el universo puede estar expandiendo tan rápidamente que ninguna de las especies se encuentran en equilibrio; como la tasa de expansión se desacelera el equilibrio se hace posible. Everything is transient,inclusive the equilibrium.!
Thanks, Menakhem
I'm not sure that this is correct:"and the energy source is the heat coming from the interior of our planet." I've just read an interesting paper: A New Physics Theory of Life
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-new-physics-theory-of-life/
I asked a new question, please comment
Is the solar light energy the single source of energy for life?
No iy isn't.
This is from an archived post.
Biology: There is life deep underwater. Is there life deep underground? self.askscience
submitted 2 years ago by GlicketySplit
224 comments
share
Yes there is. We've discovered it in isolated bits through mining, cave explorations, or drilling cores of ocean sediments.
We've found microbes living in very old sediments 800m below the seafloor (source). While they seem to be fairly widespread, it's difficult to tell exactly how common they are (source).
In 2010 a group drilling cores in the North Atlantic found a bacterium 1.7km below the seafloor crust (source). They seem to subsist on degrading hydrocarbons that are being produced through inorganic reactions resulting from interactions between water and rock.
In addition to these deep sea discoveries, in 2008 a microbe was found living 2.8km underground in a gold mine in South Africa. Its name is Desulforudis audaxviator, named for an inscription on a paper found by the professor in Journey to the Center of the Earth: Descende, audax viator, et terrestre centrum attinges, or Descend, bold traveller, and you will attain the center of the Earth (source).
In 2011 a nematode was found a kilometer underground, also in a gold mine in South Africa. They eat bacteria found at that depth.
Finally, in August a small snail with a translucent shell was found living living a kilometer below ground in a cave system in Croatia, which is one of the deepest cave systems in the world (source). One living snail was found, along with a number of empty shells. Their clear shell and loss of any sort of visual system indicated that they're exclusive to cave systems.
permalink
The microbes that were found in the gold mine, is it possible they were taken down by the gold miners, and were maybe only a few metres underground (relatively)?
[–]corskier 65 points 2 years ago
That would be highly unlikely. Those microbes have evolved a pretty unique metabolism for that environment, using energy from decaying uranium permalink parent
[+][deleted] 2 years ago (1 child)
Agree with Prof. Yurii's view and No, I do not think our universe is isolated.
The fact that there is order locally (on earth) does not refute the general disorder tending on a large scale. Some people conjecture that our universe is a white hole emerging from a huge black hole elsewhere. At present physics does not have the tools available to answer the question of whether our universe is isolated or one of many. At present there is no way to percieve a universe outside our own. There is also much we cannot percieve in our own universe at the present time. I think we need to realize there are limitations to physics and what it can do. What are the limitations of physics, and is mathematics capable of addressing these?
Entropy: A concept that is not a physical quantity
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230554936_Entropy_A_concept_that_is_not_a_physical_quantity
Dear Dr.Zhang,
correct me if I am wrong but isn't entropy a measure of Thermodynamical energy in a closed system instead being a force or some such variable ? Therefore Entropy requires a representation. I think this is the concept of Entropy you are trying to lead to.
Soumitra K. Mallick
for RHMHM School
Dear All
Point#1 This universe is cyclic, energy convert to matter; matter converts to energy; energy convert to other form of energy; matter converts to other form of matter and bla bla, but everything (all matter and energy) remains here.
Point#2 The equilibrium in this Universe tells us that that there is nothing for free. The max you can go is 100% efficiency. We cannot get something out of nothing. This in-turn tells us that this universe is isolated system. And isolation dose not mean that it must have a boundary it just mean that no energy or matter leaving or entering from this system.
@ Charles Hirlimann
Yes, the Universe is an isolated system in terms of Science only (we are not talking about religion here), as the entropy of one part of an isolated system can decrease relative to other part but till the point we achieve equilibrium. Entropy can not decrease below equilibrium. If you want lower it further then an external work must be done out side the system and as a result it is no more isolated.
I think for a question to be scientific, there should be some scientific basis for the question. Unless there is some scientific evidence for multiple universes, I consider the present question metaphysical.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Human-Computer Interaction
- Collaboration