Fine-Tuning from First Principles don't laugh

[island]

It seems quite ludicrous to me that we have no stability mechanism that
explains why an expanding universe doesn't just blow itself apart, and
even then, the entropy of our near-flat universe is much less than it
should be, given any practical model of structure forming turbulence
that occurs with expansion.

Unless far from equilibrium dissipative structures, like us humans and
black holes serve to somehow enhance the entropic process, thereby
repaying the *most apparent* entropic debt. Surely, the configuration
of our universe must follow the least action principle, so it can't be
that difficult.

I think that the real problem with this lies in the fact that modern
science doesn't generally view the universe as being finite, bounded and
closed, and it doesn't consider space to be a physically connected
entity, because the uniform expansion of the whole will necessarily
entail the most-even distribution of energy possible, **within the
constraints of inherent imperfection**... if the universe is causaly
bound and bounded.

Quantum mechanics depends very much on Hamiltonian mechanics, and so it
isn't inherently able to describe dissipative structuring. As I
understand it, this can be done, however, by way of the "Lindblad
equation", which derives that flatness acts as a natural damper that
keeps the imbalanced universe from evolving inhomogeneously, so this is
the most natural configuration... IF the universe is finite and
closed... given inherent asymmetry in the energy. This will necessarily
maximize the time that the expansion process takes, and that's what a
flat universe accomplishes via anthropic structuring.

I do believe that the AP is telling us that the universe is finite,
closed and bounded... only nobody listens.

 

[mathman]

It seems quite ludicrous to me that we have no stability mechanism that
explains why an expanding universe doesn't just blow itself apart, and
even then, the entropy of our near-flat universe is much less than it
should be, given any practical model of structure forming turbulence
that occurs with expansion.

There are scenerios where the universe expands forever and ends up as a collection of cold dead stars, etc. In some variations, assuming the proton is unstable, then it is even less.

Why turbulence?

 

[sir-pinski]

Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this topic. I understand your perspective and the questions you raise about the stability and entropy of our expanding universe. It is true that modern science does not view the universe as finite, bounded, and closed, and this can lead to difficulty in explaining certain phenomena. However, I do believe that scientists are constantly working to understand and explain these mysteries, and it is not a matter of simply not listening. There are ongoing research and debates about the nature of the universe, and it is important to keep an open mind and continue exploring these questions. The concept of the least action principle and the role of dissipative structures are certainly interesting and worth further investigation. Thank you for bringing this perspective to the conversation.