Professor Brian Cox, the Wonders of the Universe, BBC

4 Comments
Join the Conversation
a red dwarf, a dying star - Wisisky, from Hubble Field data
a red dwarf, a dying star - Wisisky, from Hubble Field data
The first episode of Professor Brian Cox's new BBC series, the Wonders of the Universe, left me asking as many questions as it answered.

According to Professor Cox, although we may think that we're evolving and progressing, the universe is moving steadily from its creation to its demise because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Cosmologists like Professor Cox believe in an hypothesis known as 'heat death'. This states that everything in the universe is moving towards becoming a uniform temperature, at which point there will be no more stars, no more black holes. No more anything, pretty much.

So What Is the Second Law of Thermodynamics?

The Second Law of Thermodynamics, which is also known as the Law of Entropy, was initially formulated in the nineteenth century by scientists and engineers who were working on the development of more efficient steam engines. The Law states that our world, when left to itself, always behaves in such a way as to increase entropy. The term entropy has specialised meanings in the context of thermodynamics and cosmology, but it can be defined basically as the tendency of everything to move from order to decay. If you put a glass of hot water in a cold room, the heat flows out of the water - in other words, the heat 'decays' - into the air of the room until they are both at the same temperature, at which point the flow stops. This is the point of maximum entropy. In the same way, the heat of our sun and the other stars is flowing outwards until a state of uniform temperature is reached. We are billions of years away from this, but, according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it is inexorable.

Professor Cox uses a sandcastle to demonstrate the Second Law of Thermodynamics. A sandcastle is a highly-ordered structure; that is to say, it is in a state of low entropy. However, once it has been built and if it isn't maintained, it inevitably crumbles back into a pile of sand. All the physical laws of the world act upon it to return it to maximum entropy. Entropy is the natural condition of everything.

The Arrow of Time

This universal law, that our world always behaves to increase entropy, is used to explain the Arrow of Time. The Arrow of Time says that time always moves in one direction, from the past to the future. And it always moves in this direction because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The sandcastle is unable to spontaneously rebuild itself, even though its constituent grains of sand are still there.

I am certainly no physicist, and Professor Cox explains his concepts in a way that is both illuminating and entertaining. But I walked away from my television with a great many unanswered questions. How does the Big Bang fit into the Second Law of Thermal Dynamics? If everything moves inexorably from order to decay, what created the order in the first place? How? Did the Second Law not exist at that point? Is Professor Cox's explanation no more than a theory, an hypothesis, and, if so, what are the alternatives?

I am looking forward to seeing if he answers any or all of these questions in following episodes. In the meantime, I shall continue my own investigations into what other cosmologists are thinking. However, if his intention was to generate enthusiastic inquiry into his subject, he has most definitely succeeded.

Sources

Cox, Brian The Wonders of the Universe Part 1 'Destiny' BBC March 2011

N.J Evans , N.J. Evans

N. J. Evans - N.J. Evans lives in North Yorkshire, England and works as a freelance writer and novelist. She has a Masters Degree in Medieval Studies ...

rss
Advertisement
Leave a comment

NOTE: Because you are not a Suite101 member, your comment will be moderated before it is viewable.
Submit
What is 3+5?

Comments

Mar 9, 2011 6:05 AM
Guest :
I tend to agree he has left a few unanswered questions, but his program has certainly got my curiosity going, hence reading this. Isn't he a fascinating bloke to listen to though and his knack of explaining complicated science to Joe public is amazing
Mar 12, 2011 6:37 AM
Guest :
Over the years the charm of thermodynamics degenerated. Hoping to explain the second law in simpler terms (it, in fact is simple enough) especially, the popular lectures and TV shows destroy the essence of the second law. They first portray entropy as an enigmatic quantity and then try to make it simpler. In the process, they devise examples such as the ones - the sandcastle, scrambled eggs, broken glass ware, new deck of cards shuffled once etc. They easily appeal to students and general public who go satisfied that they understood how entropy/second law of thermodynamics operates.
It is not an exaggeration when Truesdell said, many physicists do not understand the second law. So is the case with some cosmologists.
Unless the said process is shown to be possible in one direction (say clockwise) but impossible in the opposite direction (anticlockwise) second law claims no responsibility! For example, if the sandcastle crumbles and you are able to rebuild it leaving no other changes whatever, then, sandcastle example doesn't serve the intended purpose. New deck of cards shuffled once, for example, can be brought back to the original arrangement leaving no changes whatever. Sandcastle example is similar.
However, while production of heat from mechanical energy is possible in a one temperature cyclic process its reversal is impossible without leaving any changes elsewhere. It is such processes that lead to the so called heat death of the universe, the arrow of time etc.
It must be mentioned however, the second law is controversial from inception and is not to be taken as one among the laws such as the conservation laws.
P. Radhakrishnamurty
Mar 19, 2011 3:28 PM
Guest :
I get annoyed with science when it presents workign hypotheses as Laws. It is arguable that the running down to an even temperature is a manifestation of law, not chaos and that the original conception of the working hypothesis might be fine when its applied to a team engine, but leaves a lot to be desired in a universe where even black hols decay and Big Bangs happen spontaneously. Who knows but that a lowering of the desity of energy and matter is merely a prerequisite for the next big bang to occur, a sort of self limiting metre measurement of the likelihood of there being life still about to prevent the big bang explosion until a time when the universe is "dead".

I love N.J. Evans comment above

===========

"How does the Big Bang fit into the Second Law of Thermal Dynamics? If everything moves inexorably from order to decay, what created the order in the first place? How? Did the Second Law not exist at that point?"

===========

Priceless, and it makes you wonder why it hasn't been asked before. You could also ask is not life a magnificent, fundamental attempt to bring order from chaos. Is not the working of intelligence as it grasps the essential underpinnings of the universe, the bringing into order of magnificent chaos. Does not our intelligence alone order the universe. Are we not order-creating or order-inventing machines?

Michael O'Neill
Jul 19, 2011 4:22 AM
Guest :
Contrary to what Prof Cox says, entropy can be made to decrease with time, and that is by increasing energy. I and most physical chemists know this.
My 15-year-old daughter independently figured this out. She correctly pointed out that how else could one build a sandcastles or plants grow in real time.
4 Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement