The Big Bang, Entropy Destruction, and the Beginning of the Universe??? So for a while now I've been pondering the idea's of times arrow, the creation of entropy and disorder, and ultimately how the higher order state of the universe all originates with the big bang. According to modern cosmology (as I understand it anyway) the universe began with a high ordered collection of energy in an unfathomably high concentration up until the "bang" which initiated the expansion of space-time. With the expansion of the universe, entropy is generated, and of course never destroyed, which generates or at least characterizes the direction of time. The continuous generation of entropy will eventually lead to the "heat death" of the universe or in other words a universe with zero order. This concept of having a big bang and heat death implies that there is a beginning and an end to the universe. I have a very hard time believing this. The idea that the universe or existence itself has a start and a stop that we are stuck in the middle of just doesn't compute to me. Someone saying that the universe is finite in both time and space is like someone telling me that grass isn't green or rocks (at STP) are softer than pudding. This leads me to the point of this thread. If the universe is infinite in time and space, and time is monolithic, this absolutely must mean that entropy can be destroyed and the universe can go from a lower order state to a higher order state spontaneously disproving the second law of thermodynamics. I would think that if this were possible, it would happen during the creation of the hot ball of mass and energy that would eventually create the bang. Similar to a creation of a star from gas and dust that will eventually turn into a supernova creating more dust. When the energy and mass in the universe converges to a single point due to gravity, the destruction of entropy occurs and the universe returns to a higher ordered state. This of course implies that the universe will eventually stop expanding and converge again making the universe indefinitely cyclical. This all makes perfect sense to me. Does my "theory" have any real merit to it? Are there currently any scientific facts, theories, or phenomenon that I am not aware of that disprove the idea of a cyclical universe that involves violation of the second law of thermo (besides M-theory)? I would like to note that I am by no means a physicist. I don't mind if you call me stupid, just as long you tell me why I'm stupid. EDIT: Just realized I posted in the wrong forum, thanks for moving it.