On 11/6/2013 4:15 PM, LizR wrote:
That's very interesting. I'm afraid I can't quite see what is meant by the entropy of
the universe being maximal but not the local entropy. There is a claculation showing
that the entropy in a sphere is less than maximal /until /the sphere equals the Hubble
volume. This is where my understanding breaks down. This is the sort of thing I was
trying to explain - badly I expect - in my last post. How can the entropy of a small
sphere be non maximal if the entropy of the entire observable universe is maximal (I
referred to "information" but entropy is probably better).
Because the entropy density is roughly constant and depends on the number of different
quantum fields. So the entropy within a volume is proportional to the volume. But the
Beckenstein bound is proportional to the bounding surface area. So for small spheres the
maximum possible entropy can be much bigger than the BB; but as you consider larger
spheres the entropy due to particle fields goes up as the cube of the radius while the BB
only goes as the square. So at some size the former catches up with the latter. And this
happens roughly at the Hubble radius; which suggests it may be more than a coincidence.
It doesn't seem to make physical sense. But then the whole BB surface area thing doesn't
seem to make sense, to me at least, because if you consider a sphere and move outwards
you are including matter / information / entropy proportional to the cube of the radius
, but the amount of information and entropy allowed to exist inside the sphere goes up
at the radius squared. At some point - apparently the Hubble sphere - surely something
has to give!
What am I missing here?
On 7 November 2013 13:03, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>>
On 11/6/2013 2:46 PM, LizR wrote:
On 7 November 2013 11:31, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net
On 11/6/2013 2:09 PM, LizR wrote:
That's similar to my pet theory for explaining the Beckenstein
information capacity only goes up as volume in the multiverse.
The volume of the multiverse is generally thought to be infinite. Even
volume of our universe may be infinite. If you want to apply the
bound, consider the observable universe since its boundary forms an
relative to us.
Yes. The BB has to be applied to a finite volume. Indeed it seems
intuitively - the volume of the universe is quite likely infinite, so we
the BB on larger and larger scales for as long as we like (in theory) - and
do so, we will presumably find that we reach a point where the information
we derive for the interior of that volume is insufficient to account for its
contents. (Or does something always prevent that happening in practice - is
the point at which we reach a "cosmic horizon" ? Does the BB have an
protection conjecture" that makes the universe safe for information
If you estimate the entropy of the visible universe (i.e. our Hubble
being the Beckenstein bound it comes out the right order of magnitude
to an estimate from particle physics.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.