Implications of the Laws of Thermodynamics
January 26, 2008 3:20 pm Philosophy, Science A theory is the more impressive the greater the simplicity of its premises,
the more varied the kinds of things that it relates and the more extended
the area of its applicability. Therefore classical thermodynamics has made a
deep impression on me. It is the only physical theory of universal content
which I am convinced, within the areas of the applicability of its basic
concepts, will never be overthrown.
The second law of thermodynamics states that processes that occur must result in the same or greater entropy(wright.nasa.gov). Entropy is a measure of the energy in a system that is unable to do work.
High-energy mediums(hot water) will eventually travel towards low-energy mediums(cool water), and you will end up with lots of room-temperature water. This causes a state where there is a reduction in the amount of work that can be achieved, or higher entropy.
This would seemingly make life impossible, because life requires energy that can do work. But, this is not the case since the earth is continuously receiving new energy from the sun.
The first law of thermodynamics states that no energy can be destroyed or created, only redistributed. The combination of these two laws mean that the universe cannot be receiving any additional energy, and that everything should eventually reach equilibrium. This equilibiium would make life as we know it impossible.
The eventual exhaustion of usable energy could lead to one of two things:
(1.) A universe that eventually grows cold and dark, effectively remaining permanently dead.
(2.) A universe that is eventually pulled back together. The universe could explode again with greater force. This is called an “oscillating universe”, where each cycle has higher entropy than the previous cycle.
There are reputed physicists like Stephen Hawking who promote the second possibility, but many physicists think that the universe becoming compact again contradicts the laws of thermodynamics. Generally speaking, compaction decreases the entropy of what is being compacted.
I personally find the later possibility more appealing, but I do not have enough background in physics to say which is correct with any authority.
Either way, it seems the universe is destined to either die or be reshuffled. Unless of course the laws of thermodynamics are proven false, and the universe can either lose entropy or create new energy. While possible, right now this seems unlikely. Chemistry and physics experiments have verified these laws in all documented instances. If an experiment was ever conducted that proved thermodynamics wrong, the experimenter would probably receive a Nobel Prize.
While the impermanence of everything may seem nihilistic, I do not think a mortal universe necessitates apathy.
People are ingrained with a desire to have goals that are bigger than ourselves. We also tend to be the happiest when we are working towards these goals. If it is possible to infinitely preserve some form of information or life, then this only increases the need to advance. While it is unlikely that humans will be around billions or trillions of years in the future, it is possible that something that is descended from us will exist.
