Okay this is very basic and simple but I feel I should say it anyways, because many people assume that the laws of thermo-dynamics are the laws of the universe and that the universe is eventually all going to dissipate into nil via entropy.
The lays of thermo-dynamics only apply to heat, they don’t apply to other kinds of energy like electricity, magnetism, light, chemicals, etc. The cosmos contains allot of energies other than heat.
how self-evident. And this means, ofcourse, that the cosmos is not dissipating in a linear course, but instead it functions under many kinds of behaviors/laws, towards many different kinds of eventualities.
I believe magnetism/gravity/nuclear are fundamental forces so the laws of energy don’t apply to them. Everything else shows its effect through light/heat, a display of energy exchange. Chemical energy of course follows entropy and well electricity’s just excited electrons so I think electricity itself is proof for an increase in entropy; and it can, afterall, cause a large number of reactions which could only take place if there’s an energy exchange and where there’s an energy exchange, I believe entropy applies.
are these really different kinds of energy? Or the same? electic and magnetic energy are dues to the electromagnetic force. Light is an electromagnetic wave. Chemicals are bonded by electrons which as the name applies feel the elctromagnetic force. What then is heat? the vibrations of atoms in a macroscopic body. atoms are made up of electrons, protons and nucleons and again these are governed by electomagnetism.
What then is heat? can we talk about the heat of an electron? Can we talk of the heat of an atom? Can we talk of the heat of many atoms?
The universe is made up of many atoms and other particles. What does it mean to look at the universe on a macro scale or on a micro scale?
Heat is a reaction, sensed relative to the speed of what is ‘sensing’ and what is causing said reaction,(rate of vibration, oscillation, slide, etc).
Force is also misunderstood. Centifugal, for example, is a motion not a force. Force does not have spatial qualities. We mistake physical reactions as the force itself. This is why gravity is misunderstood.
A non-spatial photon cause motion when it is absorbed by the electron, or charged particle. The electron emits the photon and then recoils, where it collides with another electron. It’s a recoil and momentum with a corresponding uncertainty in positions, see the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
‘Pulling’ is not a force. We see things that seem to ‘attract’ but in reality ‘singles’ are being compressed by the ‘pairs’. Electrons and positrons pair up, moving the single around until they pair up. There is no willing attraction. The magnetic field is simply being compressed by it’s surroundings.
The annhilation of positrons and electrons and the pairing will produce the non-spatial photon, which rotation creates energy, motion and time.
](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/uploads/default/original/2X/7/7c349bf1053f368a5729d053e1e91215f22ce66c.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
how self-evident. And this means, ofcourse, that the cosmos is not dissipating in a linear course, but instead it functions under many kinds of behaviors/laws, towards many different kinds of eventualities.