Sunday, March 29, 2009

Can Boltzmann eggs really exist?

This post is a reaction to recent article of Lubos Motl, where he disputes the illustration presented from prepared book of Sean Carroll about thermodynamical time arrow. As usually, when Lubos begins to deny something, one can be sure, he's wrong, because he is applying strictly causal stance despite the fact, here's always symmetry between causal and intuitive approach. In general, consecutive logic of formal math isn't quite robust tool for determination of time arrow symmetry, being based on time arrow asymmetry. Therefore people with strictly logical thinking have often problems with unbiased, symmetric thinking, especially when supersymmetric ideas are separated by more distant space-time perspective (for example consideration of ancient Aether models together with modern geometrodynamics). Only emergence of many isolated formal theories, which are apparently singular/inconsistent mutually can bring us the clue about general symmetry in causality and to convince the hard core of formally thinking theorists about relevance of Aether concept.


Boltzmann egg is an paraphrase of Boltzmann brain concept in somewhat more edible form, related to famous chicken or the egg problem supposedly. Despite of Motl's algebraic game with entropy it's apparent, in sufficiently dense gas such egg can be formed spontaneously in less or more distant perspective, because every chaotic system forms a nested density fluctuations of various degree of complexity. We can observe for example a formation of two levels of density fluctuations during condensation of supercritical vapor and inside of environment of ultradense stars (so called "black holes") we can expect a spontaneous formation of even more complex systems. This is because despite low probability of intelligent brain formation the number of space-time states possible increases with number of particle involved fast and many combinations are even redundant: they lead to the same working brain - just rotated, translated or scaled in space-time perspective.


The complexity and number of nested levels of density fluctuations is virtually limited just by mass/energy density and here's no arbitrary reason not to suppose, Aether is infinitely dense environement. This makes formation of eggs or even moderately clever scientists undeniable. Suppose the human brain consist of 10^{23} particles, while we have landscape of roughly 10^{23*23} = 10^520 particle configurations available (maybe this number may sound fammiliar for someone in connection to solutions number of certain strrr...ange theory). After than the probability, at least one group of 10^{23} atoms would appear here in configuration, corresponding human brain complexity is just unitary. According to Hawking, a black hole of M kg has exp(1016 M2) quantum states. A typical astrophysical black hole formed by stellar collapse weighs about 1031 kg and carries as many as states. Converselly, the number of particles configurations observable inside of Universe by conscious creatures corresponds 10^{23*23} particles, which roughly corresponds the visibility scope of observable Universe.

From AWT follows, every formation of egg will be followed by spontaneous dissolving / destruction of some other egg in less or more remote perspective in analogy to spontaneous formation and dissolving of particle fluctuations inside of dense gas or elastic fluid. Evolution combines both the formation of complex system from chaos by the same way, like formation of chaos from complex system. String theory is the best illustration of the later with its landscape of 10E+500 solutions, because it's serving like quite costly generator of random numbers...

So I'm quite convenient with Dirac's and Carroll's idea of two or more reciprocal time arrows, separated by distant space-time perspective, as we can met with this phenomena at all dimensional scales: rain droplets condense and evaporate at the same moment, by the same way like stars evaporate into radiation, while still condensing into more dense clusters of galaxies or even black holes and this process still appears like causal from more general time perspective. The same conclusion follows from brane world cosmology. Our Universe may dissolve gradually during passing through even much larger gradient (space-time brane) and the acelleration of Universe expansion even supports this model. We can say, it's evaporating like black hole. The relation of reciprocal time arrows to the dark matter and antimatter distribution was disputed recently.

It's just a question of symmetry, where we should place such such general time scale, because in AWT the time is local concept by the same way, like space and at sufficiently remote scale Universe is basically aspatial and timeless, when looking both into past (i.e. cosmic scale), both future (i.e. Planck scale) and if some local symmetry violation still exists, it's probably of anthropic origin by its very nature.

4 comments:

El Cid said...

Hi Zephir,

Hahahaha ... I thought your admiration for your compatriot was bigger. However, I think like you. Lubos speaks, speaks and finally speaks ..... and speaks one time and again, too. But, there are physicists, who are much better than Lubos, like Grünberg, who born in Lubos's city, Pilsen (Bohemia). When a physicist is a super scientist, then she doesn't need to talk (or write) so much. If Lubos has little respect for you, do not matter, because, you're much original than he is and will ever be.

Zephir said...

I believe, Motl is talented mathematician, especially when deriving well defined output from well defined input. Such approach requires a lotta knowledge, experience and originality as well ... well, in different areas, that I can handle by now.

But fuzzy logic based on rather vague initial conditions is not ideal situation for Lubos, because in this case he tends to biased opinion, which is better defined from in his eyes, then the golden mean. When travelling through Aether foam of logical deductions, he adheres to surface gradients of bubbles, thus becoming divergent in less or more distant perspective. Inside of our Universe, every biased approach leads into black hole undeniably. The most general rule in thinking is, here are (nearly) no rules!

Foam formed by nested density fluctuations of particle gas appears being formed by pair of closely adjacent surface gradients. This is the reason, why strictly logical approach fragments itself into pair of mutually dual theories (relativity/quantum mechanics, string theory/quantum gravity, etc) which are fighting mutually (and uselessly) - whereas the truth is still somewhere inbetween.

Strictly causual approach is always divergent inside of random system. The future will lead to close cooperation of formally and nonformally thinking physicists, because no one can handle all aspects of reality in balanced way.

Zephir said...

From certain point of view it's symptomatic, just the formally thinking mathematicians are the most convincend deniers of Aether concept.

Random particle environment is not the best illustration of claim, our Universe is of inherent mathematical nature. Strictly logical people afraid of randomness and they tend to ignore fact, many real phenomena is impossible to predict / compute exactly. This perspective weakens their intellectual nimbus of priests, who are capable to predict everything in our society.

Therefore Motl's stance is pretty substantiated even from deeper sociological and psychological perspective.

Anonymous said...

HAHA:
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=25111