Is Time Truly Absolute? Investigating Through Thermodynamics

  • Thread starter Thread starter zhangyang
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
zhangyang
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
Can we get the absolute time through thermodynamics?

Beacuse the second law of thermodynamics tells us what is irreversible process,it means the absolute nature of time.

The other reason,the movement in heat is the movement of molecules,that motion don't satisfy the Lorentz Transformation,so it can help us make sure the absolute nature of time.

I must say that,in this talk,this "absolute nature of time" is not Newton's absolute time which is independent of matter.I only want to say the absolute nature of same time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
We also have to take into effect that some of the interactions in the Second Law are going to be moving, and therefore, "slower," relative to the observer. Note that we're going to never see anything moving backwards in time in SR. Everyone's just appearing to move slower than the observer.

Note that when I say "moving slower," what I mean is that, for instance, any clocks of that reference frame will appear to run more slowly. I suggest you look a little into General Relativity.
 
zhangyang said:
The other reason,the movement in heat is the movement of molecules,that motion don't satisfy the Lorentz Transformation,so it can help us make sure the absolute nature of time.
This is not correct. The molecules and any collision events do satisfy the Lorentz transformation. Collisions and changes in momentum are also subject to relativistic transformations.
 
Can we get the absolute time through thermodynamics?

doubtful since time is NOT absolute

Beacuse the second law of thermodynamics tells us what is irreversible process,it means the absolute nature of time.

Don't know what you mean, but entropy sets a direction with the arrow of time not a rate.

When you move faster, time slows relative to the slower frame of reference...thermodynamics follws that.
 
doubtful since time is NOT absolute

ict begs to differ, being an absolute value. :wink:
 
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top