Origins of the Universe

[Kevin_Levites]

@Get_off_my_lawn

Yes, this is the conventional interpretation, and what will normally happen. But what @Kevin_Levites was talking about was the corner case where, by freak chance, all molecules have a position/velocity vector that is near/points towards the lid. Highly unlikely, yes, but still a valid microscopic state. It would, of course, quickly develop into a more likely state due to collisions etc.

I do owe a “thank you” to Get Off My Lawn for pointing out certain flaws in an idea–regarding the origins of the Big Bang–that I have been obsessed with since I was a teenager.

I have argued (in prior posts) that I think that the Big Bang was an extremely unlikely statistical anomaly in the second law of thermodynamics that is 100% likely to happen in an infinitely old Universe.

GOML pointed out that if I argue that one statistical fluke resulted in the Big Bang in a Universe that is in a state of maxmum entropy, then I must consider all statistical flukes equally to avoid a subtle double standard.

The example (which I thought was a powerful argument at the time) which I gave to back up my argument was a pollen grain attached to a microscopic bungee cord that is placed under tension by Brownian Motion.

Well, it turns out (as is often the case) that a layperson speculating outside of his or her field can make some gross, fundemental mistakes without being aware of it.

I have since learned about the “Brownian Ratchet” which is–for all intents and purposes–the same thing as my pollen particle with an elastic Bungee cord attached to it.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201305/physicshistory.cfm&ved=2ahUKEwie5eCwxpGOAxV9STABHSS3G1oQFnoECEEQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0BY7OGShLoencwQf6NNSZL

The Brownian Ratchet fails as a device to extract energy from Brownian motion because we look at the effects of Brownian motion on one part of the device while failing to recognize that this same Brownian motion causes any energy “gains” to be reversed just as quickly in another part of the device.

So, my idea that the Big Bang is a result of the random shuffling of molecules in a state of maximum entropy is probably wrong for the same reasons why the Brownian Ratchet fails to function.

The microscopically tiny paddle wheel is supposedly being turned by molecules hitting it and causing it to turn like a pollen grain moving around at random from Brownian motion.

See below:

Maybe I can salvage my bruised ego by showing that the Brownian Ratchet can be applied to cosmology, but I’m sure that someone else has done that too.

In any case, everyone was nice enough to not be dismissive, so thank you again.