acidphos

The universe cannot be infinitely old because if it were, it would have entered into a state of entropy long ago.

:huh:

The full quote-

"Entropy is the second Law of thermodynamics that states that all things are moving toward chaos and no-usable energy. In other words, everything is running down. The universe is not in a state of entropy, therefore it is not infinitely old. Since the universe is not infinitely old, it had a beginning. The universe could not have brought itself into existence. Something before the universe and greater than the universe had to bring the universe into existence."

Those wacky creationists.

http://webx.tennessean.com/cgi-bin/[email protected]/5043

RBH

The phrase "a state of entropy" is a nonsense phrase, meaningless.

I'm going to toss this to S&S.

RBH
E/C Moderator

Yggdrasill

They are assuming that the laws of the universe were the same before the big bang as they are now, this is not necessarily true.

Dark Knight Bob

The whole finite universe arguement assumes the rate of entropy is constant.

If it starts off infinitely slowly then it will take an infinite amount of time to reach final solution.

But all they've said is that they support the big bang theory, thrown in some complicated words and just tacked on "btw there's a god who did all this" on the end and called it proof

Also to talk of "before" the big bang and what happened is in the current theory non-sensical

The main support for the big bang theory though is the expansion of the universe, the microwave background radation, and the formation of black holes.

Seb

Doesn't the OP assertion have a point? To do with the paradox of infinite time? :huh:

Yggdrasill

I don't think the current theory accuratly represents reality. Although I don't have any evidence there was a "before the big bang", you don't have any that there weren't, so let me just tack a "if there was a 'before the big bang'" in front of my previous post.

Dark Knight Bob

The theory defines time as being created by the big bang.

This isn't about evidence for whether it's true or not this about using the theory.

If you're using the theory of the big bang then by definition there is no "before" in regards to time. It's more to do with being logically consistant in that sense.

Seb

Here it is: Zeno's Paradox

After a cursory look I guess the solution makes some sense. I need to read the webpage carefully. :Cheeky:

Yggdrasill

Yes, one of the theories does, not all agree with that element.

Dark Knight Bob

Different people disagree with elements of the theory. That's what makes good science. But the theory is defined as that. You can try and modify relativity to take into account quantum equations but that wouldn't be the theory of relativity. That'd be a modification of it.