Big crunch logic

  • Thread starter maximus
  • Start date
  • #1
maximus
495
4
i remember reading some old phyiscs question as to whether, when (and if (depending on the mass of the universe)the universe began to contract, if time would also flow backwards(or more accuratly that entropy would decrease). i remember one person (i think this was stephen hawkings actually) said that our lives would move in reverse and we'de "relive" our lives backwards. but i was wondering if this did happen would we realize it? if everything happened in reverse (i.e. chemical reactions in the brain, memory, ect.) then to us we would not realize it. we would see the universe just as it was before-expanding. but if in actuallity it was contracting and we only thought it was expanding then eventually, (if humanity ever lived to see it begin its contraction which I'm fairly certain we won't) we would die in the contracting or the big crunch which we didn't expect. is this a flawed line of thinking? (i know it's sort of pointless to post this because this theory of entropy decrease has been disproved but I'm just wondering about this logic.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Tyger
398
0
The arrow of time.

The question of why our perception of the universe runs one way and the nature of the "arrow of time" is complex and fascinating. One of the better semipopular treatments I've read, but still interesting to the pros, is by P.C.W. Davies. There are many factors to consider, not just the flow of energy and matter, but of information too. The universal expansion is the most important factor in defining the arrow, but the fact that there is only positive rest energy is important too.
 
  • #3
The question of why our perception of the universe runs one way and the nature of the "arrow of time" is complex and fascinating. One of the better semipopular treatments I've read, but still interesting to the pros, is by P.C.W. Davies. There are many factors to consider, not just the flow of energy and matter, but of information too. The universal expansion is the most important factor in defining the arrow, but the fact that there is only positive rest energy is important too.

But, the arrow of time is closely connected to second law of thermodynamics, ie entropy and it has been shown to be violated in the microscopic scale. These are two sites I found concerning the latest experiment that I know of, about this violation:

http://nanodot.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/20/0445232 [Broken]

http://www.sciencenews.org/20020727/fob1.asp

I wonder whether this violation can be amplified to include the macroscopic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
Tyger
398
0
It's the expansion of the Universe

which keeps the entropy of the Universe low and allows the second law to operate on the large scale.

Originally posted by jby
But, the arrow of time is closely connected to second law of thermodynamics, ie entropy and it has been shown to be violated in the microscopic scale. These are two sites I found concerning the latest experiment that I know of, about this violation:

http://nanodot.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/20/0445232 [Broken]

http://www.sciencenews.org/20020727/fob1.asp

I wonder whether this violation can be amplified to include the macroscopic.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
wimms
496
0
Originally posted by Tyger
It's the expansion of the Universe which keeps the entropy of the Universe low and allows the second law to operate on the large scale.
Stupid question, why not the other way round - increase of entropy is what is perceived as expansion of universe?
 
  • #6
It's the expansion of the Universe which keeps the entropy of the Universe low and allows the second law to operate on the large scale.

I thought the universe's entropy increases with the expansion. How can it be low?
 
  • #7
AndersHermansson
61
0
No, Hawking said that even if the Universe started contracting again the arrow of time would not reverse.
 
  • #8
Tyger
398
0
I wouldn't reverse for a long time

but it eventualy the entropy would be so high that it wouldn't matter, all processes would be essentaily reversible.

Originally posted by AndersHermansson
No, Hawking said that even if the Universe started contracting again the arrow of time would not reverse.
 
  • #9
maximus
495
4
Originally posted by AndersHermansson
No, Hawking said that even if the Universe started contracting again the arrow of time would not reverse.

i know this is the conclusion that he eventually came up with, but i don't understand how it can be so. if the universe were to recollapse into a singularity it would be going to a ordered form therefore at some point, mustn't the entropy decrease? i mean, we do define a singularity as being a very ordered form, don't we? after all don't we call the big bang the ultimate ordered form of the universe.
 
  • #10
AndersHermansson
61
0
Originally posted by maximus
i know this is the conclusion that he eventually came up with, but i don't understand how it can be so. if the universe were to recollapse into a singularity it would be going to a ordered form therefore at some point, mustn't the entropy decrease? i mean, we do define a singularity as being a very ordered form, don't we? after all don't we call the big bang the ultimate ordered form of the universe.

No black holes are very cold and of high entropy. The smaller they are, the higher the temperature and the more they radiate (hawking type).
 
  • #11
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
43,021
970
but it eventualy the entropy would be so high that it wouldn't matter, all processes would be essentaily reversible.

That's a peculiar statement. The higher the entropy, the LESS reversible processes are.
 
  • #12
Tyger
398
0
but it eventualy the entropy would be so high that it wouldn't matter, all processes would be essentaily reversible.

Originally posted by HallsofIvy
That's a peculiar statement. The higher the entropy, the LESS reversible processes are.

What I mean to say is that when entropy is maximum everything is in equilibrium and all the processes work the same backwards and forwards, so there would be no "arrow of time".
 
  • #13
JetBlckNewYr03
13
0
If the universe contracted back into a singularity, do you think it'd be possible for the universe to repeat itself again or for an infinite amount of time (that is, once it dies it can start growing again)?
 

Suggested for: Big crunch logic

  • Last Post
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
345
Replies
3
Views
755
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
972
Replies
5
Views
659
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
1K
Top