Cosmology, Big Bang, Black Holes & New Thermodynamics
Below is a post on thermodynamics. It’s from Kent Mayhew. I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with his views, but CNPS welcomes new ideas on thermodynamics, so please comment and let us know your thoughts.
In my previous blogs, I [Kent] discussed that “lost work” by “useful/expanding systems” can be better explained in terms of the energy lost due to the upward displacement of Earth’s atmosphere’s mass. As simple as this seems, it is truly problematic because it means that we must rethink traditional thermodynamics. And, first and foremost, we need to dethrone the elevated (almost demigod) status of both entropy and its accomplice the second law.
What happens when we apply such logic to cosmology? Certainly the implications to cosmology may be too numerous for discussion in any one blog. The implications range from questioning the universality of Boltzmann’s constant (k) to the applicability of entropy to cosmology. Herein we will start with reconsideration of some of the consequences to entropy and its application to our universe.
Traditional thermodynamics considers entropy as the “arrow of time” for an expanding Big Bang universe. It sounds simple, but once entropy is dethroned, then the concept of signifying time’s arrow completely crashes. Certainly, there is no need for entropy at all in discussion of an expanding universe. Note: Herein I am talking as if Hubble’s conceptualization was correct, which may or may not be our reality.
Rather than entropy we can simply state that conservation of momentum will mean that matter disperses as our universe expands from a Big Bang. There are equally dispersive forces at the molecular level, which can be thought of in terms of kinetic theory and elastic collisions. And, of course, gravity reigns supreme when it comes to forces countering all such dispersive forces. Obviously, entropy is not required when the universe is contemplated at the simplest of levels of conceptualization, irrelevant whether or not we are thinking on a macroscopic or microscopic level. Even if we decide to elevate our thought process and claim that it is the fabric of space-time that is expanding, entropy is still not needed.
The concept of entropy and work does lend itself to a further non-sensible contemplation when considering an expanding universe. Since work and entropy are so intertwined in traditional thermodynamics by the relation: W=TdS=dE+PdV (1). Of course, (1) implies that an expanding universe does work: Onto what, no one can say. When Enrico Fermi was asked where does this work go, his answer was “into the hands of god”. However, once entropy is dethroned, then (1) no longer applies to any universe and Fermi’s words become illogical. One can view this another way: Unless we know what surrounds our universe, hence, onto what work is actually done, then any consideration of work being done by an expanding universe is fool’s gold.
How about black holes and the second law paradox? There are those who consider that contemplations by many (Stephen Hawkins, etc.) have explained this paradox. It must be pointed out that once you accept what I say concerning lost work, then neither entropy nor the second law applies to black holes. As I stated in one of my earlier papers (2004 paper in Physics Essays: Energetics of Nucleation) that a black hole is nothing more than an isometric horizon, one that I would now say that both entropy and the second law renders into unrealistic complicated mess. Our simple reality is that the daunting black holes are a case where humans have complicated the simple. This is not to say that I can fully fathom black holes, but it may be a simpler place than we previously believed.
So does our universe simplify if we entertain what I call new thermodynamics. Well, yes it does.
All comments concerning any aspect of the above will be appreciated.
Sincerely Kent Mayhew
Side Note: I am not sure if anyone is interested but I wrote a book that I was hoping would lead to people rethinking thermodynamics. I am currently rewriting this book and am looking for assistance. If you know of anyone interested in reading and possibly commenting, providing any level of assistance or anything please let me know. It requires common sense and an open mind first and foremost. Moreover, this is a job for someone with little vested interest in traditional thermodynamics And no I cannot do a great job by myself, even though I do have a great puppy dog that I can throw ideas off of, he is having problems with the math, not to mention he is seemingly convinced that the world is flat..
I can be contacted thru my website www.newthermodynamics.com under heading contact.