The arrow of time

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Pages

AuthorTopic: The arrow of time
By Committee
Member # 4233
Profile #75
Consciousness is bound to this time arrow, I think. After all, what is consciousness but the continuous observation and recollection of changes over time? Take away sensation, or memory of sensation, and does consciousness have any meaning? Would a person born without the ability to sense anything, ever have any sort of consciousness, and therefore, any sense of time?

I realize this is probably beside the point, but the last two posts or so went right over my head. :)
Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00
Shock Trooper
Member # 3980
Profile Homepage #76
quote:
The preponderance of probability against the 'unburning ash' states, in our observations, is far too overwhelming to write off our arrow of time as a fluctuation.
Preponderance where time goes forward.
Everything else is dubious extrapolation.

My question is - would we notice if we were at a place where the arrow of time were pointing the other way round?
Our sense of "forward" in time is the sense of the burning rather than unburning - fluctuation or not.

Time is something local as relativity theory has taught us. There is no universal clock.
Posts: 311 | Registered: Friday, February 13 2004 08:00
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
Profile Homepage #77
quote:
Originally written by Student of Trinity:

...
For every initial state with a log that evolves into a final state with a pile of ash, there is a time reversed image of that final state. (Basically, just reverse the velocity of every particle, and there is the image of your state under time reversal.) This time reversed image constitutes an initial state from which an ash pile would indeed 'unburn' into a log. So among all possible states of the stuff in our tank, 'ash piles that are about to unburn' are exactly as common as 'logs that are about to burn'.

This set of 'unburning ash pile' states is surely a minute fraction of the size (phase space volume) of the set of states that a human would recognize as 'ash pile states'. In this sense, ash piles that are about to unburn are miraculously rare among ash piles.

But we are still left with the puzzle of why 'logs that are about to burn', which are exactly as rare, among all possibilities, as 'ashes that are about unburn', should be no more than moderately less common, among typically encountered states, than ordinary 'ash piles'.

Which, alas, is disappointingly similar to the problem we started with.

I might be missing something, but it seems to me that the number of states in which log is about to start burning is much higher than number of states in which ash is about to unburn. (Just take any room with temperature high enough. All logs in that room will burn. Not all piles of ash in that room will unburn.)

Could this be due to the fact that several different logs will turn into the same pile of ash? Or, talking about states, for each state in which a pile of ashes is about to unburn, there are several states in which a log could start burning that could lead to it.

Another example is a stone thrown into a pool of water. You could throw a stone from many different directions to make it land in the same spot with same forse. However, after the waves have sufficiently subsided, it will be impossible to tell which direction the stone came from.

Or you can vary initial energy, rather than direction. If you throw a rock into middle of perfectly circular pool, when the waves bouncing back from walls return to the center, you will not know whether they are returning to the center for the second time or third time, so you will not know the rock's initial energy.

--------------------
Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword,
For it too has the power to kill.
However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword,
Can also have the power to heal.
Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #78
This reminded me of my favorite analogy for the second law of thermodynamics: you know those yogurts with "fruit on the bottom," the ones you have to stir to make into flavored yogurt?

Well, if you stir the yogurt, the fruit will get mixed in, but if you stir the opposite direction, the fruit won't unstir out. That's increasing entropy.

This may be completely irrelevant, but I like it, so there.

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Warrior
Member # 3351
Profile #79
Maybe the error is at the beginning.

If we assume that CPT is constant then T must be variable. And if I remember correctly there was an experiment showing such an asymetry using kaons and anti-kaons.

--------------------
/Seawinds are calling
Posts: 187 | Registered: Thursday, August 14 2003 07:00
Shock Trooper
Member # 3980
Profile Homepage #80
Kelandon, I love your yoghurt example-only I am not sure it has to do with arrow of time.

There are actual experiments in which you can observe some "unstirring" (spin-echo), i.e. you start with a macroscopically ordered state, allow some motion at rates that differe over a microscopic length scale and thus prepare a macroscopically unordered state. The system may still be ordered but the order is not apparent macroscopically, because the order is in the correlations which we do not see. Then you reverse the process - like reversing an external magnetic field - and after a while the order reappears.

This demonstrates that not all kinds of order are captured by our view on the macroscopic scale.
In principle it should be possible to prepare a cup of youghurt with fruit in such way that by meticulously precisely adjusted stirring you get the ordered state back. However, thsi seems to be even beyond the tricks of David Copperfield because we have only macroscopic tools at our disposal.
Posts: 311 | Registered: Friday, February 13 2004 08:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #81
I've heard that eight perfect shuffles will bring a deck of cards exactly back to its original order. I have no idea what makes up a perfect shuffle, but it sounds like what you're talking about.

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
By Committee
Member # 4233
Profile #82
I heard it was seven. I could be wrong, though.
Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00
Shaper
Member # 32
Profile #83
The number isn't really all that important. Even if you screw up a few shuffles it should eventually get back to the correct form...

P.S. A perfect shuffle is one in which the two piles from the deck alternate evenly when they are shuffled together. One card from one then a card from the other...

--------------------
Lt. Sullust
Cogito Ergo Sum
Polaris
Posts: 2462 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
Profile #84
Yogurt stirring is a perfectly good instance of irreversibility. Spin echo is a classic example of how subtle irreversibility can be. It is important to realize, though, that the physics of fruit-on-the-bottom yogurt is actually outrageously more complicated than that of spin echoes. The highest-tech experiments are very often used to create the simplest physical systems.

So Incredibly Sad is quite right that microphysics does not actually seem to be invariant under time reversal; you'd need to reverse space and charge as well. But the violation of T is an extremely tiny effect involving the nuclear forces, and it is very hard to see how it could possibly be the driving agent for the irreversibility in yogurt cups. So the working assumption is that the interesting kind of irreversibility is an emergent property of macroscopic systems governed by reversible microphysics. If only we knew what that meant.

Zeviz, my statement about equal numbers of states is exact, apart from the issue just raised by SIS. Your point about temperature is true, but temperature is not a microphysical parameter. Your observation that all logs in a hot enough room will flash, but hot ashes won't unburn, is really just the same as my observation that states with 'ashes about to unburn' are an incredibly small fraction of states with ashes. "Ashes at temperature T" means "a typical state with ashes and total energy E(T)".

--------------------
It is not enough to discover how things seem to seem. We must discover how things really seem.
Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00
Post Navel Trauma ^_^
Member # 67
Profile Homepage #85
I think the asymmetry is that there are vastly, vastly more states that are piles of ashes than there are states that are logs.

--------------------
Barcoorah: I even did it to a big dorset ram.

desperance.net - Don't follow this link
Posts: 1798 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00
Master
Member # 4614
Profile Homepage #86
quote:
Originally written by Lt. Sullust:

The number isn't really all that important. Even if you screw up a few shuffles it should eventually get back to the correct form...
After some number of years, you mean. I've always noticed, however, that the with the traditional way of shuffling, the better you get at it, the less you're actually shuffling in a totally random way.

Spreading the cards out all over the table and then randomly pushing them back together, while it takes longer, is better. :D

--------------------
-ben4808

For those who love to spam:
CSM Forums
RIFQ
Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00
Infiltrator
Member # 154
Profile #87
I think a partial reason why we cannot understand the brain is that we expect it to be complex, and perhaps our understandings are overly abstracted. It's possible, if not likely, that the brain is simple to an extent which we overlook the lowest level of it, i.e. the basis to understanding it.

Information in the future can change the past and present, just as information from the past can change the present and future.

For some reason I'm repeating the same again which I've already typed recently; that being that there are infinite dimensions.

- X cannot exist without Y. (1D in 2D.)
- Y cannot exist without Z. (2D in 3D.)
- Z cannot exist without T(time). (3D in Time.)
- T cannot exist without U(niverse). (T in U.)

There is little reason for this not to go on forever and ever. It works in the sense that a paper with 0 thickness does not exist, and something does not exist if there is 0 time to hold it.

[ Friday, July 22, 2005 16:53: Message edited by: Kakakaka ]

--------------------
Inconsistently backward.
SWOH. IM, PATF, ND.
Posts: 612 | Registered: Saturday, October 13 2001 07:00

Pages