Perpetual Motion Discovered

in universe •  8 years ago 

Science purports to offer us many laws by which the universe functions. For the most part I agree with those laws as they appear to be observable and quantifiable. My issue with science, however, is concerning the first two laws of thermodynamics and its application to the universe, and then to life.

First matter or energy cannot be created nor destroyed. That's great, but where did all the matter or energy come from for the big bang? I understand that the big bang is not an attempt to answer the origin of the matter or energy, but the initial burst to expand the universe.

Secondly, the 2nd law states something like "the total entropy of any system can't decrease other than by increasing the entropy of some other system". In other words "heat can't flow from a colder body to a hotter body without the application of work (the imposition of order) to the colder body".

Many creationist use this to say that you can't have spontaneous order out of disorder but that isn't exactly what the 2nd law states. A better way to think of this is work. A room will warm up to the environment ambient unless you apply work to cool it off, or vice versa. Its also a complicated way of saying when doing work, there will be a loss in the form of heat due to inefficiency through friction or other causes.

If we consider the universe as a whole to be an open system, exchanging both mass and energy, then it stands to reason that the 2nd law of thermodynamics still applies. This means thst while a local event may appear to violate the 2nd law, somewhere else in the open system, energy was added or removed for hat event to occur.

How then is the universe accelerating? What is responsible for doing the work required to keep it expanding at an accelerating pace? Keep in mind scientists until relatively recently thought the universe was decelerating, not accelerating.

So the science looks like this.
(W)ork
(F)orce
(d)istance.
(m)ass
(a)cceleration.
So
Energy = W = Fd = ma*d
If mass of the universe is constant and the universe is expanding at an ever increasing accelerated rate:
W final = m * (a + ∆a) * (d + ∆d)
Note: this is not meant to be an actual representation of an actual physics equation for the universe. Merely to tranate the idea that Energy in universe is not constant.

If this is the case as it applies to the universe then energy is not conserved but ever increasing (or decreasing) by definition due to some unknown principle or there is an outside entity applying the additional force required the accelerated expansion.

What if all of our science is wrong? What if the total amount of energy is in fact not maintained. What if it is cyclic like the output from the sun?

What if it is increasing or decreasing in ways we cannot measure?

For instance, take life. When two people make love, that energy is sometimes converted into a spark of life. That spark of life while on a micro level conforms to the first and second law, on a macro level it appears to be a slap to the face, does it not? We are in a closed system here in the earth sun moon system and in theory should be dying off. Yet we are given a gift which is the ability to reproduce ourselves with enhanced genetic variety to strengthen the species, and in a way are the elusive perpetual motion machine everyone has been looking for.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

But the sun is slowly exhausting its stock of nuclear fuel, which means it will eventually no longer be able to input energy into the Earth which in turn means life will no longer be viable. So it is not perpetual motion and the 2nd law of thermodynamics still applies.

That is the most commonly accepted theory at the moment. But remember, they also thought until about the turn of the century that the universe was slowing down. On an infinite timescale and accepting the idea thst the sun is nuclear, sure everything we are will one day extinguish. But that is just one theory with wide acceptance. On the other hand, our star is much more stable than other stars and admittedly we don't really know the true nature of the sun. Our knowledge of the true nature universe is somewhat limited. We could be wrong. As far as we know all laws of physics might break down at the edge of this universe. I very much appreciate your input.