How can outer space be cold?

[Yoga Face]

Thanks for your erudite response

.. matter has mass, radiation like photons do not. Essentially the Universe is divided into the things that go at the speed of light, radiation and those that travel at less than the speed of light, matter.

I know I read somewhere that if you travel at the speed of light your mass becomes infinite

So you are saying if you travel at the speed of light you have zero mass ?

The theorized Higgs Boson is what gives matter mass but it along with the graviton have yet to be discovered. The phrase that correctly matches your train of thought is that MATTER can't be destroyed it simply is converted into energy. To further complicate your train of thought is that what we see and can test as matter and radiation only represents 5% of the universe ... the rest is unknown but that's another debate.

It is called "dark matter" I believe

I believe they are looking for the Higgs Boson at CERN

The other thing that puzzles me is your statement that time will stand still when the Universe cools ... do you have some refinement to General relativity that would call into question Einstein's theory on space time.

I thought entropy was time in action . No entropy no time ?

Oh and wrong about anti-matter, it actually exists however not in the amounts that it should which is another unknown that science is still looking into. Anti-matter are particles of matter that have a spin opposite to their counterparts ...

http://press.web.cern.ch/livefromcern/antimatter/


kf1

Actually, I knew that

Anyways, if matter and antimatter collide they eliminate each other but I thought matter could not be destroyed ??? so how can matter eliminate itself ?????

 

[Yoga Face]

Your referring to the second law of thermodynamics .... yes the equation has time in it ... I don't really get your point. What we have learned in physics is that no system will ever get to absolute zero because that require perfection in a system and that would violate the third law of thermodynamics.

The third law was developed by the chemist Walther Nernst during the years 1906-1912, and is therefore often referred to as Nernst's theorem or Nernst's postulate. The third law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of a system at absolute zero is a well-defined constant. This is because a system at zero temperature exists in its ground state, so that its entropy is determined only by the degeneracy of the ground state. It means that "it is impossible by any procedure, no matter how idealized, to reduce any system to the absolute zero of temperature in a finite number of operations".

If matter reaches zero energy or not seems irrelevant

What is relevant is that entropy will stop and therefore so will time


The Second Law implies that heat can never move from a colder body to a hotter body. So, as a system approaches absolute zero, it will eventually have to draw energy from whatever systems are nearby. If it draws energy, it can never obtain absolute zero.


But what happens if the universe expands to a big chill


I think these laws state that as matter approaches absolute zero it cannot lose energy to surrounding matter because it is as cold as its surrounding matter therefore it is a Mexican Standoff between matter and matter stays at a constant which is above absolute zero


If this is correct entropy has still stopped so time no longer exists because time is defined as events occuring (the time arrow has stopped)

It’s like the universe is a wind-up toy that has been sort of puttering along for the last 13.7 billion years and will eventually wind down to nothing. (But why was it ever wound up in the first place?)

Once you reach the locally maximum entropy you can get to, there’s no more arrow of time.

It would seem to me

 

[Yoga Face]

You make me think

I guess it depends how you define time

Among prominent philosophers, there are two distinct viewpoints on time.

One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe, a dimension in which events occur in sequence. Sir Isaac Newton subscribed to this realist view, and hence it is sometimes referred to as Newtonian time

The opposing view is that time does not refer to any kind of "container" that events and objects "move through", nor to any entity that "flows", but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz and Immanuel Kant, holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be traveled

And now there is also Einstein time


In Newtonian time events occur. No events occurring means no more time.


I grasp your concept that space/time is one thing therefore time exists if space exists

Can we agree that time still exists after the big chill but the time arrow has stopped flowing ???

 

[red]

can the entire universe cool?

 

[great bear]

can the entire universe cool?

Only if you smoke them. Same issue with Camels getting hot..

 

[Yoga Face]

can the entire universe cool?

If it expands yes it can to almost absolute zero and entropy will stop as everything becomes the same and nothing happens

 

[Yoga Face]

No we can't agree on that ... the arrow of time is something that is different, as long as there is time it flows forward. Even if there is a hot death aka the big crunch were everything collapses on itself the time arrow move forward. Newtonian notions of time were over thrown by Einstein so they are irrelevant.

I did mention that anti-matter particles are thought to move backwards in time because the direction of spin is opposite to matter ... that's not even correct because each backward moment of spin time moves forward.

Let's say you are in a box and that box is the entire universe --- even if you stayed perfectly in place with a very low energy output you still will perceive time as moving forward.

kf1

thankyou