Arrow of Time
in [Physics]
|
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 10 Jul 2010 23:01 From sci.physics.research: "Arrow of Time" A nonlinear dynamical system is deterministic and fully causal, and yet not entirely predictable. It can go from quasi-classical behavior, including periodic behavior, into full or partial chaotic behavior, and back again. A NLDS has a definite "arrow" and you can call it the arrow of time, or the arrow of determinism, or the arrow of causality. They are all different "facets of the same crystal". The key issue here is that you do not have to invent untestable hypothetical "multiverse" pipe-dreams in order to explain the arrow. If you have an NLDS on any scale, microscopic or macroscopic, then you have a local arrow for that system on that scale. This is the reason you cannot unscramble your scrambled eggs. It has nothing remotely to do with the Big Bang, or pre-Big Bang physics. Then the question is: how common are NLDS? My intuition and observations suggest that the answer is: highly ubiquitous. I would ask: what well-studied, and observed at high resolution, physical systems are not NLDS? Back to topic, RLO www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: G. L. Bradford on 11 Jul 2010 05:46
"Robert L. Oldershaw" <rloldershaw(a)amherst.edu> wrote in message news:15662d4d-ea67-4f3f-bfe5-955f807e712c(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... > From sci.physics.research: "Arrow of Time" > > A nonlinear dynamical system is deterministic > and fully causal, and yet not entirely predictable. > It can go from quasi-classical behavior, > including periodic behavior, into full or > partial chaotic behavior, and back again. > > > A NLDS has a definite "arrow" and you can > call it the arrow of time, or the arrow of > determinism, or the arrow of causality. They > are all different "facets of the same crystal". > > > The key issue here is that you do not have to > invent untestable hypothetical "multiverse" > pipe-dreams in order to explain the arrow. > If you have an NLDS on any scale, microscopic > or macroscopic, then you have a local arrow for > that system on that scale. This is the reason > you cannot unscramble your scrambled eggs. > It has nothing remotely to do with the Big Bang, > or pre-Big Bang physics. > > > Then the question is: how common are NLDS? > My intuition and observations suggest that > the answer is: highly ubiquitous. > > > I would ask: what well-studied, and observed > at high resolution, physical systems are not NLDS? > > > Back to topic, > RLO =================== There is nothing like -- nothing to beat -- the infinite Singularity of all singularities (The ultimate in 'dual nature': The other side of the same coin being the infinite Universe of all universes. The Planck base / surface / horizon / universe....., [being] the finite entity of the coin) for being an totally energetic scrambler of eggs. 'Entropy' in -- entropy of a piece with -- the Universe side at large acts as, and accomplishes, the resistance since entropy's ultimate destiny, its ultimate conclusion, [is] matter itself (simply the entity and order of 'matter', no more, no less). To scramble eggs anytime anywhere on the Universe side at large takes a lot of energy, a hellishly awesome, hellishly titanic, amount of energy being continuously pitted against, being thrown against, an implacably relentless tendency to stone cold order (Uni-verse). GLB =================== |