Is Creation of the Universe a Closed System?

[Ken Carman]

I am posting this here because religious arguments apply, with God as the outside influence, but one could just as well posit that something happened before the Big Bang, or Creation, if you prefer without theism.

I find folks often argue the start of our universe as if it were a closed system: big bang forward to now. (Who says it even has to be now forward? Who is to say there might be Langolier like beings who live the time stream differently, even repairing the timeline between our "seconds?") Three ways (at least) to discuss this would be something happened before, God is the outside influence and/or the universe is not all there is and whatever else there is has at least some effect on our universe. A mix of these three and more is welcome, of course.

A closed system cannot survive, and I suspect would not have survived as long as ours. Admittedly, from our perspective, there's a lot here to keep it going a long time from OUR perspective, so maybe it is closed... though I suspect not.

[Angry Citizen]

By 'closed', do you mean 'isolated'? There is a difference.

[Ken Carman]

By 'closed', do you mean 'isolated'? There is a difference.

Feel free to tell me my definition is off, I am at best a laymen when it come to the subject. By closed I mean no outside influences, and a corollary might be in context that there is nothing else... though that's not necessary. I suppose you could have an infinite "somethings" outside the universe but each stands on its own, or at least had no influence on us. To my ear that sounds like it could be both, or just one.

[Angry Citizen]

Closed is a lack of mass transfer. Isolated is a lack of mass transfer and energy transfer.

That having been clarified, let's move on. Physics currently assumes that the universe is an isolated system. It is, however, an open question - one we will likely never resolve. Why do you assume that isolated systems cannot survive?

[Ken Carman]

AC

Why do you assume...

Eventually whatever energy would dissipate. Example: auto needs gas... outside input. Plants need sun, fuel of other sorts like fertilizer. There are no perpetual motion machines we know of, and I would assume perpetual whatever.

[Angry Citizen]

Eventually whatever energy would dissipate.

That would violate conservation of energy. Nothing in this universe "uses" energy. It just transforms it from one state to another, increasing its entropy.

[Ken Carman]

OK, yeah, you're right, but I think the analogy may still work as to what I am trying to say. I would think everything would change after a while... of course it eventually will as the expansion goes far enough. (Unless we're wrong, and were right before that it will return then expand again.) And if it were either closed, or especially isolated, it would change a lot faster that "billions of billions" to tag your gravatar. (I know: overstatement, but my point remains. Without some external influence, of some nature (unspecified), I would think the universe might be less ... energetic? Not as much time involved.

I understand we're speaking (sic) on a massive scale here even if I'm completely wrong.

[Angry Citizen]

The universe is becoming less energy dense, if that's what you mean, but that's the result of the expansion of the universe and the increase in entropy. There are fewer joules per cubic meter of space at any given moment as time increases. I'm not sure how you can say that the speed at which this is occurring is 'too slow'. By what standard? What speed 'should' it be, and how did you arrive at that?

[Ken Carman]

The universe is becoming less energy dense, if that's what you mean, but that's the result of the expansion of the universe and the increase in entropy. There are fewer joules per cubic meter of space at any given moment as time increases. I'm not sure how you can say that the speed at which this is occurring is 'too slow'. By what standard? What speed 'should' it be, and how did you arrive at that?

Speed may be inaccurate. Essentially what I'm saying, using a layman analogy again, if I have a car and don't put gas into it things change after a certain period of time/use. If I never replace the oil it runs out and... things change. I know it's a very rough analogy. The time what we know of the universe has existed and is doing what it's doing is incredible. I am postulating, with no exterior influence of any kind, it might not last as long as it has and will.

I imagine it would take many computers and a lot of calculations to understand how much energy it would take, of what nature, for things to be as they are instead of be more at rest, or change into some other unspecified direction. ("Direction" is inaccurate, I know, but I'm obviously grasping for words to describe what I am trying to say.)

ID people speculate that that force would be God, if it does exist. I'm not convinced, if there is any outside force/influence, it has to do with deities at all. In fact if we look at anything close enough we do find the molecules affect each other. Magnetism is an alignment: north/south. Perhaps: just to toss out one speculation, there are many universes (I suppose realities of planes of existence might work, or dimensions.). Could they affect each other and make the whole system less closed, or less insulated?

Wow, here I was hoping others might add anything of this sort before I start tossing in such "out there" speculations. No problemo, just got there before I had planned to.

Nothing of what I'm saying means I can't accept a closed, or insulated, system, as all there is. Yet everything I've experienced in life tells me there's ALWAYS more than what we think there is. That's why Science, as a more "open" system: means to discover "what is," than Fundamental religion impresses me far, far more.

[Angry Citizen]

Speed may be inaccurate. Essentially what I'm saying, using a layman analogy again, if I have a car and don't put gas into it things change after a certain period of time/use. If I never replace the oil it runs out and... things change. I know it's a very rough analogy. The time what we know of the universe has existed and is doing what it's doing is incredible. I am postulating, with no exterior influence of any kind, it might not last as long as it has and will.

Ken, I know you have an argument somewhere in here, and it's probably a decent one, but I'm afraid it escapes me. I'm asking why you're postulating this. Am I right in thinking that your reasoning is merely a "feeling"?

The universe has changed. It has gone through a series of epochs that have changed it from a soup of intensely, unimaginably hot plasma to a relatively cold, relatively empty vastness. That is a result of the expansion of the universe.

everything I've experienced in life tells me there's ALWAYS more than what we think there is.

Possible, but at some point you'll likely run out of new things to discover. One of the biggest pieces of evidence for an isolated universe is, indeed, conservation of energy itself: the bedrock on which physics is based. If the universe weren't isolated, we would expect to see energy arise where energy did not previously exist, and to see energy disappear where energy once existed.