True Story of the Day

[Age]

More strawmans and ad hominems.

So, this one does not like that it cannot prove what it says and claims, and hates it that it cannot counter nor refute what I have said and claimed here.

The Universe is eternal, and any talk about the Universe beginning, 'absolute entropy', and/or 'heat death' is just more proof of just how far the imagination will go when trying to hold onto and maintain False and Wrong beliefs.

[Wizard22]

B) the universe had no beginning, there is infinite energy, matter and space, and entropy is just a local phenomena that exists in closed thermodynamic systems composed of observable energy, matter and space. It does not 'happen' to the whole infinite universe; the sum total amount of energy is never lost or 'spent' throughout.

Remember, if entropy did exist, and a sufficient period of time has passed before 'now' for any system to reach absolute entropy, we should be frozen at this very moment. Not only that, but we would have been frozen for an infinite amount of time before now, since for any moment in that past there was an infinite period of time that had past for absolute entropy to happen by then.

Bro it's like Hilbert's Entropic Hotels. As u can see B has it's own problems. And we don't like that becuz it forces us ultimately to that metaphysical speculation we wanna avoid doing becuz we're scientists not priests and philosophers. If we take A, we have to become philosophers and start wondering about such things as ''how can there be nothing and then something', 'is the what-it-is that caused and created the universe a 'god' like in one of our religions, or just some kind of power source or sum such thing', and 'where did this god or power source come from, etc.'

All that has to follow if we take A and say that the universe had a beginning becuz it would have needed a cause to begin. Sumthin like the big bang would require just that.

If no, our alternative theories like the oscillating model and the steady state model have their own problems.

In the end, all our antinomies in theory might not have to exist if we could actually get to a GUT. Until then, u just pick your cosmology based on the kinds of theoretical problems u are willing to honestly accept and face.

So Entropy is a local phenomenon, and mostly refers to the half-life and decay of radiated particles...

It doesn't apply to the whole universe. What's so difficult about that premise?

[attofishpi]

B) the universe had no beginning, there is infinite energy, matter and space, and entropy is just a local phenomena that exists in closed thermodynamic systems composed of observable energy, matter and space. It does not 'happen' to the whole infinite universe; the sum total amount of energy is never lost or 'spent' throughout.

Remember, if entropy did exist, and a sufficient period of time has passed before 'now' for any system to reach absolute entropy, we should be frozen at this very moment. Not only that, but we would have been frozen for an infinite amount of time before now, since for any moment in that past there was an infinite period of time that had past for absolute entropy to happen by then.

Bro it's like Hilbert's Entropic Hotels. As u can see B has it's own problems. And we don't like that becuz it forces us ultimately to that metaphysical speculation we wanna avoid doing becuz we're scientists not priests and philosophers. If we take A, we have to become philosophers and start wondering about such things as ''how can there be nothing and then something', 'is the what-it-is that caused and created the universe a 'god' like in one of our religions, or just some kind of power source or sum such thing', and 'where did this god or power source come from, etc.'

All that has to follow if we take A and say that the universe had a beginning becuz it would have needed a cause to begin. Sumthin like the big bang would require just that.

If no, our alternative theories like the oscillating model and the steady state model have their own problems.

In the end, all our antinomies in theory might not have to exist if we could actually get to a GUT. Until then, u just pick your cosmology based on the kinds of theoretical problems u are willing to honestly accept and face.

So Entropy is a local phenomenon, and mostly refers to the half-life and decay of radiated particles...

It doesn't apply to the whole universe. What's so difficult about that premise?

C now the awful thing about entropy where intelligent minds exist is that eventually those intelligent minds real eyes they need to create\instigate a system and a set of rules where all have their memories wiped and are subject to said system.

That then their "moral compass" is used per whether they get to exist again, human, animal etc.. as resources diminish....within said system.

WELL AT LEAST THEY WERE WARNED AND GIVEN SOME COMMANDMENTS.

[promethean75]

I can't think of another option - given the circumstances of the steps and the door below - for bringing steps down from this deck.

1000001312.jpg (49.73 KiB) Viewed 1470 times

But if I do it that way, the stairs will shoot way tf out into the yard past the corner of the deck:

1000001315.jpg (55.63 KiB) Viewed 1470 times

1000001318.jpg (55.38 KiB) Viewed 1470 times

[promethean75]

U couldn't do it like that becuz the posts for the landing halfway down would be all up on those door step's grill.

1000001311.jpg (64.92 KiB) Viewed 1473 times

[promethean75]

It's gotta be this way. But I need a landing halfway down becuz I can't run that entire span with a single stringer. It's longer than 16 feet and they don't make 2x12 longer than 16 feet.

1000001310.jpg (46.24 KiB) Viewed 1473 times

[promethean75]

Oh wait could I wrap them around from the back side? Or would those posts beside the house on the other side of the fence be weird? I'd have ten posts stickin up around that fence.

1000001319.jpg (56.02 KiB) Viewed 1470 times

[promethean75]

Oh duh. Like this. Lol this is what happens when u tryda smoke herb and design a deck at the same time.

1000001320.jpg (55.24 KiB) Viewed 1460 times

[promethean75]

Then u guys don't understand the elagance of this problem. If the universe never began and has existed for an 'infinite amount of time' (a nonsensical phrase btw), and, entropy always happens in a thermodynamic system, then maxium entropy in our observable universe should have already have happened becuz enough time has passed for it to have happened. See what i mean?

Either entropy was produced at the creation event of a finite universe and is an infallible 'law' of physics, or entropy is paradoxically a law of the observable universe but not a law of a larger mysterious system that the universe happened in.

If it was the latter and entropy is consistent throughout all conceivable quantum-to-cosmological systems, maximum entropy would have been reached at every and any point in history if the universe had no beginning and time is infinite.

How to resolve the two conflicting laws of thermodynamics. The entropy one and conservation of energy one. If no energy is ever lost, entropy wouldn't be what we describe it as, an inability to perform work. Things ultimately cease to exist by a slow radiating death. Literally the heat lost at subatomic levels in your body is the effect of your particles dyin. Entropy is everywhere. S'gotta be. And when you're talking about infinite universes with no beginning, u can't explain why our universe hasn't already died a heat death or entered Self-Lightening's Big Chill stage.

That's a simple but elegant problem, gentlemen. Do u understand the words that are comin out of my mouthf?

[Wizard22]

1000001318.jpg

How about this?

[Wizard22]

Then u guys don't understand the elagance of this problem. If the universe never began and has existed for an 'infinite amount of time' (a nonsensical phrase btw), and, entropy always happens in a thermodynamic system, then maxium entropy in our observable universe should have already have happened becuz enough time has passed for it to have happened. See what i mean?

Either entropy was produced at the creation event of a finite universe and is an infallible 'law' of physics, or entropy is paradoxically a law of the observable universe but not a law of a larger mysterious system that the universe happened in.

If it was the latter and entropy is consistent throughout all conceivable quantum-to-cosmological systems, maximum entropy would have been reached at every and any point in history if the universe had no beginning and time is infinite.

How to resolve the two conflicting laws of thermodynamics. The entropy one and conservation of energy one. If no energy is ever lost, entropy wouldn't be what we describe it as, an inability to perform work. Things ultimately cease to exist by a slow radiating death. Literally the heat lost at subatomic levels in your body is the effect of your particles dyin. Entropy is everywhere. S'gotta be. And when you're talking about infinite universes with no beginning, u can't explain why our universe hasn't already died a heat death or entered Self-Lightening's Big Chill stage.

That's a simple but elegant problem, gentlemen. Do u understand the words that are comin out of my mouthf?

Take a few steps back...

The Universe is infinite.

Entropy is local, not universal.

Therefore Entropy does not apply to the entire universe. The Universe does not "expand" nor "contract".

Neither.

[Wizard22]

C now the awful thing about entropy where intelligent minds exist is that eventually those intelligent minds real eyes they need to createinstigate a system and a set of rules where all have their memories wiped and are subject to said system.

That then their "moral compass" is used per whether they get to exist again, human, animal etc.. as resources diminish....within said system.

WELL AT LEAST THEY WERE WARNED AND GIVEN SOME COMMANDMENTS.

wut?

Can you rephrase, autofishy?

[Age]

Then u guys don't understand the elagance of this problem. If the universe never began and has existed for an 'infinite amount of time' (a nonsensical phrase btw),

Well considering that you are the only one here using that phrase, and that you also know that that phrase is nonsensical, then why do you use it?

and, entropy always happens in a thermodynamic system, then maxium entropy in our observable universe should have already have happened becuz enough time has passed for it to have happened. See what i mean?

Yes. What you have said here, again for a number of times, was understood the first time you said it here.

What you are essentially saying is that the whole Universe, Itself, is a 'thermodynamic system' and 'has to work', exactly like, any and all 'thermodynamic systems' that you human beings have known of, since this theory has been known about for just a few hundred or so years, right?

Is there absolutely any possibility at all that the Universe, Itself, does not work how you ones who think or believe that the Universe began, and/or is expanding, think or believe it does?

Could it be a possibility that that the Universe did not begin, and/nor is not expanding, and thus does not work like the 'thermodynamic systems' that are known of and about? Or, is this just an absolute impossibility, to you "promthean75"?

Either entropy was produced at the creation event of a finite universe and is an infallible 'law' of physics, or entropy is paradoxically a law of the observable universe but not a law of a larger mysterious system that the universe happened in.

Why would any sane person base what the parts are, exactly, and how they work, exactly, of what are unobservant, on what is able to be observed?

Also, why do you persist with the idea that there was or even had to be a 'creation event', and a so-called 'finite universe'?

If absolutely any only thinks or believes that there was a 'creation event' and/or a 'finite universe', then just explain how 'that event' could even be a 'logical possibility', let alone then moving onto explaining how 'it' could then be a 'physically possibility', let alone ever getting to explaining how 'it' could have been a 'logical and physical actuality and reality'.

Once one can start doing these things, then 'we' will have something to 'look at', and consider. But, until then anyone who thinks or believes that there was a so-called 'creation event' has been fooled and deceived, religiously, by either 'theology' and/or 'science'.

These people have also put their faith, and/or belief, in those that they 'trust', that is; the "preachers" or "teachers" of 'science' and/or 'theology". These people believe in the 'religious texts' within 'scriptures' or 'science' books, which are based not on 'actual irrefutable Facts' but rather on what is just 'theory' or 'presumptions' and what is just 'taught' to be true.

If it was the latter and entropy is consistent throughout all conceivable quantum-to-cosmological systems, maximum entropy would have been reached at every and any point in history if the universe had no beginning and time is infinite.

That is; Only IF 'entropy' exists in regards to the actual whole Universe, Itself.

Is 'entropy' consistent and/or apply to the Universe, Itself?

If yes, then where is the actual proof for this claim?

Now, 'we' could go on for ages and ages talking about 'IF's' or 'what might or could be's'. Or, 'we' could just 'look at' and 'discuss' what actually happens and occurs here, only, and so keep moving along here, and eventually come to what is irrefutably True, Right, Accurate, and Correct.

The choice is 'yours' alone here.

How to resolve the two conflicting laws of thermodynamics. The entropy one and conservation of energy one. If no energy is ever lost, entropy wouldn't be what we describe it as, an inability to perform work.

But 'entropy' works, exists, or is consistent within a 'closed thermodynamic system'. Which means in just 'one system' alone. However, when and if within 'one system' there are other 'systems', which when one system is 'dying out' is helping in the creation of 'another system', and the 'starting/ending, or being born/dying, systems' is how each new one is being created, or when 'energy', itself, is neither being created nor destroyed, but is just changing in form, that is; changing in the sense of forming 'newer or more systems' when other systems' are ending or dying out, then 'the system' that this action/reaction, causation, process is happening in can be, and is, one that never actual began nor will end, Itself.

Things ultimately cease to exist by a slow radiating death. Literally the heat lost at subatomic levels in your body is the effect of your particles dyin.

But 'matter', itself, does not 'die'. It just changes in way, shape, or form. Like 'energy' 'matter' does not disappear, they both just get transferred or changed from one form to another form.

Entropy is everywhere.

If so, then what actual proof do you have that entropy is at, or applies to, the Universe, Itself?

Also, did you explain above already how the Universe, Itself, could have 'logically' began, and be finite'?

If no, then you have three things here to explain, 'now'.

S'gotta be. And when you're talking about infinite universes with no beginning, u can't explain why our universe hasn't already died a heat death or entered Self-Lightening's Big Chill stage.

Here is another prime example of 'blindness' occurring because of a 'currently' held onto belief/s.

1. It does not 'gotta be'.

2. There cannot be infinite universes, with no beginning. That is just self-contradictory and thus self-refuting.

3. There is no 'our universe'.

4. I can, very easily and very simply, explain why 'the Universe', Itself, has not already so-called 'died a heat death'.

That's a simple but elegant problem, gentlemen.

you seem to not have grasped and understand what 'a problem' actually is, yet.

Do u understand the words that are comin out of my mouthf?

Yes. I also fully understand how and why 'your confusion' here.

[Age]

Then u guys don't understand the elagance of this problem. If the universe never began and has existed for an 'infinite amount of time' (a nonsensical phrase btw), and, entropy always happens in a thermodynamic system, then maxium entropy in our observable universe should have already have happened becuz enough time has passed for it to have happened. See what i mean?

Either entropy was produced at the creation event of a finite universe and is an infallible 'law' of physics, or entropy is paradoxically a law of the observable universe but not a law of a larger mysterious system that the universe happened in.

If it was the latter and entropy is consistent throughout all conceivable quantum-to-cosmological systems, maximum entropy would have been reached at every and any point in history if the universe had no beginning and time is infinite.

How to resolve the two conflicting laws of thermodynamics. The entropy one and conservation of energy one. If no energy is ever lost, entropy wouldn't be what we describe it as, an inability to perform work. Things ultimately cease to exist by a slow radiating death. Literally the heat lost at subatomic levels in your body is the effect of your particles dyin. Entropy is everywhere. S'gotta be. And when you're talking about infinite universes with no beginning, u can't explain why our universe hasn't already died a heat death or entered Self-Lightening's Big Chill stage.

That's a simple but elegant problem, gentlemen. Do u understand the words that are comin out of my mouthf?

Take a few steps back...

The Universe is infinite.

Entropy is local, not universal.

Therefore Entropy does not apply to the entire universe. The Universe does not "expand" nor "contract".

Neither.

Do you think that the 'matter', itself, of the Universe does not expand nor contract.

[promethean75]

Wouldn't those two post supporting the upper landing (on the left) interfere with the lower steps and/or be awkwardly positioned in reference to the existing steps? Like what if u walked into the post tryna get to the door steps? Bad spot for posts, mang, but I'll run that design by the homeowner and give u six percent commission for the design patent if he chooses that plan.

1000001333.jpg (52.09 KiB) Viewed 1415 times