Laws of Physics - source of their existence

[Captain_Jack_Sparrow]

(Posted on the Science forum as well but it seems many on there don't come here or vice versa)

The following is a list of most conservation laws (both classical and quantum) and the reason they exist (i.e. the root cause for the observed conservation in terms of symmetry or invariance.)

(I think this list is from a paper by Victor Stenger but I don't have the paper or reference any more.)

Many people (especially Creationists) seem to get especially confused when applying energy conservation (1st Law of Thermodynamics) and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. How many times do you here the 'Big Bang cannot happen because it violates energy conservation' or 'the Big Bang violates the order-disorder nature of the 2nd Law'.

Note that we don't have energy conservation without time translational symmetry - thus the Big Bang having a time singularity (t=0) can make no statement as to whether total energy is conserved. On top of this General Relativity cannot even calculate the total energy of the Universe anyway. Also note that the arrow of time cannot be defined in quantum gravity regime such as when we approach t=0. Therefore to make any 2nd Law statements is invalid.

The net result is that Thermodynamics DOES NOT APPLY at the Big Bang in any form we know of. So to make carte blanche statements that the Big Bang cannot happen because it violates Thermodynamics is just a typical ill thought out Creationist argument from people who don't know any theoretical physics.


Conservation of momentum ------------ Space translation symmetry

Conservation of angular momentum ------------Space rotation symmetry

Conservation of energy (First law of thermodynamics)------------ Time translation symmetry

Newton's 1st Law of Motion Conservation of momentum -----------(space translation symmetry)

Newton's 2nd Law of Motion ------------Definition of force

Newton's 3rd Law of Motion Conservation of momentum------------(space translation symmetry)

Second law of thermodynamics -----------Statistical definition of the arrow of time

Special relativity -----------Space-time rotation symmetry

Invariance of speed of light -----------Space-time rotation symmetry

General relativity -----------Principle of covariance

Quantum time evolution (time-dependent Schrödinger equation) ---------Global gauge invariance

Quantum operator differential forms ----------Global gauge invariance

Quantum operator commutation rules---------- Global gauge invariance

Quantization of action -----------Global gauge invariance

Quantization rules for angular momenta ----------Global gauge invariance

Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism ---------Local gauge invariance under U(1)

Quantum Lagrangians for particles in presence of electromagnetic field ------------Local gauge invariance under U(1)

Conservation of electric charge------------ Global gauge invariance under U(1)

Masslessness of photon ------------Local gauge invariance under U(1)

Conservation of weak isospin -----------Global gauge invariance under SU(2)

Electroweak Lagrangian ------------Mixing of U(1) and S(2) local gauge symmetries (spontaneous symmetry breaking)

Conservation of color charge ---------Global gauge invariance under SU(3)

Strong interaction Lagrangian -----------Local gauge invariance under SU(3)

Masslessness of gluon ----------Local gauge invariance under SU(3)

Structure of the vacuum (Higgs particles) --------Spontaneous symmetry breaking

Doublet structure of quarks and leptons -------------Conservation of weak isospin (global gauge invariance under SU(2))

Masses of particles -----------Higgs mechanism (spontaneous symmetry breaking)

 

[lucaspa]

Many people (especially Creationists) seem to get especially confused when applying energy conservation (1st Law of Thermodynamics) and the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. How many times do you here the 'Big Bang cannot happen because it violates energy conservation' or 'the Big Bang violates the order-disorder nature of the 2nd Law'.

Note that we don't have energy conservation without time translational symmetry - thus the Big Bang having a time singularity (t=0) can make no statement as to whether total energy is conserved. On top of this General Relativity cannot even calculate the total energy of the Universe anyway. Also note that the arrow of time cannot be defined in quantum gravity regime such as when we approach t=0. Therefore to make any 2nd Law statements is invalid.

The net result is that Thermodynamics DOES NOT APPLY at the Big Bang in any form we know of. So to make carte blanche statements that the Big Bang cannot happen because it violates Thermodynamics is just a typical ill thought out Creationist argument from people who don't know any theoretical physics.

This is certainly accurate. Perhaps a simpler way to say this is that
1. The thermodynamic laws apply to behavior within the universe.
2. Therefore they cannot apply to getting a universe to begin with. Without a universe, these laws don't exist.
3. The universe, as a whole, is increasing in entropy. It is this increase of entropy of the whole that allows local decreases of entropy such as life on earth.

 

[Nicaea 325]

F=MA, because God made it so.

 

[Captain_Jack_Sparrow]

F=MA, because God made it so.

I can see you are a really profound thinker.

 

[lucaspa]

I can see you are a really profound thinker.

That's unfair in this context. Anglican is using simpler language to say what Gravesande and Whewell said earlier:
"A Law of Nature then is the rule and Law, according to which God resolved that certain Motions should always, that is, in all Cases be performed. Every Law does immediately depend upon the Will of God." Gravesande, Mathematical Elements of Natural Philosophy, I, 2-3, 1726, quoted in CC Gillespie, Genesis and Geology, 1959. [emphasis in original]

"But with regard to the material world, we can at least go so far as this -- we can perceive that events are brought about not by insulated interpositions of Divine power, exerted in each particular case, but by the establishment of general laws" Whewell: Bridgewater Treatise.

It's a way of looking at "natural law" that appears to be different from how you are doing it.

 

[Nicaea 325]

The laws of physics are there bbecause God made them that way. They are more absolute then the ten commandments are absolute. They can not be broken. Mathamaticly, they are perfect as God their creator is perfect.

 

[Captain_Jack_Sparrow]

The laws are what they are based upon fundamental properties of space and time. When I say fundamental I mean with respect to quantum effects etc etc.

As for mathematically perfect I would say that is meaningless. What is perfect in that sense?

Though I would say quantum nondeterminism seems an imperfect system - when things are inherently stochastic seems to buck the perfection idea.

 

[Nicaea 325]

To every action is an equal and oppisite reaction every time. There are never times when an equal and oppisite reaction does not occur. I am refering to the fine tuned precision of physical laws. Maybe I'm waffling.

 

[pmh1nic]

I don't think I've ever heard a person that believes in special creation say the Big Bang could not have happened because it violates energy conservation. In fact energy conservaton says that all the matter and energy in the universe has always existed which to me is a description of the eternal nature of God.

As far as the perfection of "the system" is concerned I think you'd get some strong arguments from leading theoritical physicist that the conflicting issues between relativity and quantum mechanism are finding perfect solutions in Superstring Theory. Theortical physics research (the mathematics of physics research) is far ahead of experimental physics, so far ahead that it probably won't catch up to substantiate what is being theorized and substantiated mathematically with respect ot the harmony between relativity and quantum mechanics in our lifetime.

 

[Nicaea 325]

Energy converts to energy but E=MC2. The only thing that could travel at the speed of light squared is a god. The speed of light is required for theoretical time travel.The God we serve inhabits eternity. Therefore I believe all energy was originally created by God.

 

[ThePhoenix]

Energy converts to energy but E=MC2. The only thing that could travel at the speed of light squared is a god. The speed of light is required for theoretical time travel.The God we serve inhabits eternity. Therefore I believe all energy was originally created by God.

The energy inherint in matter is equal to the mass of the matter times the speed of light in a vacuum squared. Nothing is traveling at c^2

 

[lucaspa]

The laws of physics are there bbecause God made them that way. They are more absolute then the ten commandments are absolute. They can not be broken. Mathamaticly, they are perfect as God their creator is perfect.

Don't get too carried away here. You just eliminated miracles. Because many miracles are violations of the laws of physics and you say they "can not be broken".

The laws of physics are actually theories. They are mathematical descriptions of how a part of the physical universe behaves under stated circumstances. But they can, and have, been "broken" when the circumstances are changed. For instance, Newtons "laws of motion" are not mathematically perfect as they are reductions of more complex equations that apply at low velocities.

 

[lucaspa]

I don't think I've ever heard a person that believes in special creation say the Big Bang could not have happened because it violates energy conservation.

If you go to the other creationism vs evolution forum you will see this argument several times in the last 4 months. Apparently it is a new argument in YEC circles.

In fact energy conservaton says that all the matter and energy in the universe has always existed which to me is a description of the eternal nature of God.

But having matter/energy exist forever is against the Big Bang. Matter/energy came into existence at the BB.

As far as the perfection of "the system" is concerned I think you'd get some strong arguments from leading theoritical physicist that the conflicting issues between relativity and quantum mechanism are finding perfect solutions in Superstring Theory.

Maybe. You would also get an argument from loop quantum gravity people that String Theory is not perfect math because it uses ad hoc hypotheses as their basis. The January issue of Scientific American has a great article on this.

Theortical physics research (the mathematics of physics research) is far ahead of experimental physics, so far ahead that it probably won't catch up to substantiate what is being theorized and substantiated mathematically with respect ot the harmony between relativity and quantum mechanics in our lifetime.

In term of M Theory, that is probably true. However loop quantum gravity may be able to be tested before that. Again, see the January Scientific American.

 

[lucaspa]

The only thing that could travel at the speed of light squared is a god.

Or tachyons. Remember, according to Special Relativity there can be particles that travel only at velocities greater than c.

Energy converts to energy but E=MC2.

I think you mean energy converts to matter. However, what the equation says is that matter and energy are two different forms of the same thing.

The God we serve inhabits eternity. Therefore I believe all energy was originally created by God.

I have no trouble with your statement of belief. However, it does not follow from anything else said in your post. Therefore the "therefore" is misplaced.