how do you explain the big bang theory when it goes against the second law of thermodynamics?
817780
The laws of thermodynamics are valid when measured over time.  You cannot create energy where there was none before.  There can be quantum fluctuations wherein particles, and thus energy, pop into existence from The vacuum, but these particles vanish.  These fluctuations do not actually violate the 2nd law even in their short time frames, because there is energy in the vacuum itself.  The 'big bang' was an event in which the energy of the vacuum spontaneously created matter and other forms of energy.  The 2nd law was not violated.  The energy of the vacuum was simply immense enough to give rise to the universe and the matter and energy in it.
985237
In physical cosmology, the Big Bang is the scientific theory that the universe emerged from a tremendously dense and hot state about 13.7 billion years ago
262701
A Student’s Approach to the Second Law and Entropy\nThis is written for you quickly to understand the second law and entropy. All but a few general chemistry texts have discarded “entropy is disorder” and adopted my approach. However, if your text and instructor describe things differently, don’t argue with or correct her/him! Just memorize what you read in the text and hear in class so that you can give the expected answers on exams. Grades are important at this time in your life :-( but the understanding that you will get here will last a lifetime.\n\nThe Second Law of Thermodynamics\nMany texts define the second law as “the entropy of the universe increases during any spontaneous process” and then throw qrev/T or free energy = ΔG and ΔS at you.\n\nThat’s too complex too fast.  We’ll see that the second law and entropy are simple, at the level of first-year university chem. \n\nThe second law is based on human experience.  It doesn’t come from complicated theory and equations.  So, think of these experiences that you have had:  A rock will fall if you lift it up and then let go.  Hot frying pans cool down when taken off the stove.  Iron rusts (oxidizes) in the air.  Air in a high-pressure tire shoots out from even a small hole in its side to the lower pressure atmosphere.  Ice cubes melt in a warm room.  \n\nWhat’s happening in each of those processes? Energy of some kind is changing from being localized ("concentrated" in the rock or the pan, etc.) to becoming more spread out. Look at those examples again to see how that statement fits them all.\n\nOK?  That’s it — a simple way of stating fundamental science behind the second law: \nEnergy spontaneously disperses from being localized to becoming spread out if it is not hindered from doing so.\n\n But what about “entropy” and “universe”  that is in so many textbooks and may be in yours? We’ll see what entropy is in a minute. But the “universe” just means “the system you’re looking at PLUS its surroundings, i.e., everything that’s close around it”.  System plus surroundings.  If that “system plus surroundings” bothers you, or if you want details of three of the processes mentioned above, read the next paragraphs. \n\nIf not, skip down to “What Is Entropy, REALLY?”\n\nThe rock has potential energy localized in it when you lift it up above the ground. Drop it and that PE changes to kinetic energy (energy of movement), pushing air aside as it falls (therefore spreading out the rock’s KE a bit) before it hits the ground, dispersing a tiny bit of sound energy (compressed air) and causing a little heating of the ground it hits and the rock itself.  The rock is unchanged (after a minute when it disperses to the air the small amount of heat it got from hitting the ground).  But the potential energy that your muscles localized in by lifting it up is now totally spread out and dispersed all over in a little air movement and a little heating of the air and ground. [System: rock above ground,  then on ground. Surroundings: air plus ground.] \nThe iron atoms in a hot frying pan are vibrating  very rapidly (like ‘dancing in place’ fast) and therefore the motional energy in the hot pan is localized. That motional energy will spread out — if it can.  Whenever the less rapidly moving molecules in the cooler air of the room hit the hot pan, the fast-vibrating iron atoms transfer some of their energy to the air molecules. The pan’s localized energy thus becomes dispersed, spread out more widely to molecules in the room air. [System: pan. Surroundings: room air.] \nIron in nails or other objects doesn’t have to be hot (i.e., with very fast moving atoms or molecules) to have ‘localized energy’ within it in a chemical sense: Iron atoms plus oxygen molecules of the air have more energy localized within their BONDS than does iron rust (iron oxide). (That’s why iron reacts with oxygen — to release energy from their
851241
Entropy -- the second law of thermodynamics.\n\nThis law states that in the absence of other forces, any system becomes less orderly over time.  This is because of the way energy can be converted to different forms but not lost -- most energy that gets used for work transforms into heat, which radiates into space and can't be used to do useful work ever again.  In other words, energy gets used up, and with no more energy input things fall apart into entropy, or complete disorder.\n\nBUT -- the key there is "in the absence of other forces."  We, for example, on earth have our sun which continuously supplies energy to us with which useful work can be done.  As long as there is an external supply of energy, entropy can be avoided.  Once our sun burns out, however, our solar system is indeed doomed to entropy.
78705
I think you are confused a bit. If you look around at nature, it is incredibly complex. The more we study it and the more we analyze i and measure it, the more complicated it appears. \n\nThe scientific theories and laws are attempts to put some order into this mass of complicated observations, to try to explain what is happening. Predictions based on these scientific theories can be made, and if it is a good theory, then the prediction will be verified by data. \n\nThe big bang is just one theory for the origin of the universe that attempts to explain what we observe: hubble's law, the microwave background radiation, etc. It is an attempt to produce a simpler theory to explain a very complicated and confusing set of observations.
674447
The second law of thermodynamics states that "the entropy of an isolated system not at thermal equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value."\n\nThe Second Law is a statistical law and thus applicable only to macroscopic systems. When one part of an isolated system interacts with another part, energy tends to distribute equally among the accessible energy states of the system. As a result, the system tends to approach thermal equilibrium, at which point the entropy is at a maximum and the free energy is zero.
117141
I assume you mean "has any theory explaning the existence of man and the universe been accepted?"  The answer is no, but you should not assume that the big bang hypothesis is correct as the 2nd law of thermodynamics (AKA entropy) disproves the big bang.  It just depends on which group of thinkers you follow, if you follow secularists then you will most likely accept the big bang hypothesis, if you follow religious thinkers then you most likely will not.
524567
First of all, the Big Bang theory does not address how the universe actually got started. It describes how the universe has been since that point. And it is remarkably well established for times after about 1 millisecond after things got started. The universe is expanding and went through a period of very fast expansion early on. The temperature has been decreasing since the start which was about 13.7 billion years ago.\n\nHow things actually got started is *much* more specualtive. There are two main ways that people approach this, but I want to emphasize that neither is actually part of the Big Bang theory and that both are *very* specualtive. We simply don't have the data to figure out what happened before that first millisecond or so.\n\nThe first approach is to point out that time itself is part of the fabric of the universe. It is not something idependent. Part of the nature of the Big Bang in general relativity is that it is a 'singularity'. An analagous thing would be to look at the north pole. This is a singularity in the coordinate system of latitude and longitude. You can't go 'north of the north pole'. In a very similar way, the time coordinate cannot be extended (in this approach) past the Big Bang. This means there is no 'before the Big Bang'. Time simply doesn't make sense at that point.\n\nThe other main approach is to say that the singularity predicted by general relativity doesn't happen because of smoothing out by quantum effects. This *could* allow the time coordinate to extend past the Big Bang (but it doesn't have to). In this scenario, the Big Bang was a quantum fluctuation that 'got out of hand' and underwent exponential growth becoming the universe. The beginning was random since such quantum events are random (this is known and established). However, there would be physical laws describing the probabilities of such things happening. In this approach, there can be multiple universes that don't interact and that have various physical properties different than our own.\n\nI hope this helps!
690504
in its present form, it can't describe the state of the universe at time=0.  Thus, it doesn't answer the question of where did all the mass and energy come from
24461
I don't see why the "God" and the "Big Bang" theories can't go hand-in-hand. My personal opinion is that GOD made the two atoms ram into each other, thus causing the BIG BANG occur. I think it makes sense enough, but that's just me...
915186
Since the big bang was an explosion OF space rather than in space, your logic will not work.  Wherever you are in the Universe, everything is going away from you.
275638
- All of the above\n\nThe 1st Law of Thermodynamics tells us that energy is neither created nor destroyed, thus the energy of the universe is a constant. However, energy can certainly be transferred from one part of the universe to another. To work out thermodynamic problems we will need to isolate a certain portion of the universe (the system) from the remainder of the universe (the surroundings).
816304
the second law of thermodynamics. it states that a body cannot extract energy from a lower energy body to a higher energy body, in a simplistic sense. the body cannot extract energy from a depleted energy reserve to do work, the physical effects of which are usually of higher energy levels.
300669
The Big Bang was not an explosion, it's only described that way because nobody knew how else to describe it.  In a normal explosion, energy is transformed from one form to another.  The Big Bang created energy and matter, it's totally different.
899198
After 1 to 3 minutes from the initial explosion of the cosmic egg (Big Bang), when temperature has cooled to about 3 trillion degrees kelvin, it is speculated that composite particles such as protons & neutrons become common state of matters.\nKey phenomena that support Big Bang Theory are:\n1) Universe is expanding, and from measurement of the proportional velocities of stars in relation to their distances from us, there is strong probability that an "Event" (such as Big Bang) occurred simultaneously,\n2) detection in 1964 of microwave radiation from not only one location in the universe (but from all directions at once), lends credence to the theory,\nShape/sizes of galaxies or rather the sizes of the galaxy clusters (to aid in estimating distance of faraway galaxies from us)nmay shed more light into the age of the universe as it is postulated that such galaxies and and milky way were at the same point in time at the time of explosion.
725562
The essence of the Big Bang theory is pretty simple:  sometime billions of years ago the universe began;  everything now in the universe was created from energy/matter that was compacted into a really, really small volume/space, and indeed that really, really small volume/space was all there was to the universe at that moment; and since the universe began, it's been expanding.  These are the essential points of the theory.  Over time, we've added new details, such as pinning down the age of the universe to within a few hundred million years (last I heard, we thought it was 13.7 +/- 0.2 billion years old).  And a lot of theoretical and observational work have gone into investigating and refining the theory.\n\nAs to why we think that there was a Big Bang instead of, say, a universe which had always existed or a universe which came into being pretty much fully formed, the main reason and the reason we started thinking there was a Big Bang in the first place is because of very peculiar observations that we can make of distant galaxies.  This observation is that, except for a bunch galaxies which are both nearby and gravitationally bound to our own galaxy, all the galaxies we can see are moving away from both our galaxy and all other galaxies.  Also, the speed with which a galaxy is moving away from us depends directly on how far away from us it is (e.g. galaxies farther away from us are moving away from us faster than galaxies which are closer).  And the reason we first infered a Big Bang from this is that if you imagine running this movement backwards, doing a cosmic rewind if you will, then all the galaxies will be moving back towards each other, and eventually will all find themselves in the same place.\n\nSeveral years after this observation, a key predicition of the Big Bang theory was verified.  When the universe was young, it was also really hot and so for a time would have given off light all its own (I'm simplifying things a bit, but these are the essential facts as we know them).  It was predicted that some of this light should still be around.  And, lo and behold, at the very same time that people were making this prediction and beginning to think of looking for it, practically right down the road some experimentalists stumbled upon it accidentally.\n\nSo, in short and hopefully simple words, that's what the Big Bang is and why we think it happened.
858007
The second law of Thermodynamics has to do with Entropy.  Entropy is the tendancy of a closed system to move to a higher degree of disorder (lower energy state).  Life itself breaks the second law of thermodynamics, at least for the short term.  When a seed is planted, or when an animal or child is created by it's parents, a single cell grows into a more complicated, higher energy structure (life).  However, on the way there, the organism does consume more energy than it gives back, so conservation of energy is never lost either.  \n\nThe theory of evolution would be another example that would break the 2nd Law.  I am not arguing for or against the theory of evolution, I am just stating the the theory.  If a single celled organism evolves into a multi-celled organism, that's a more complicated structure with more energy.  Again, this is considered to be a short-term gain.  The one thing that Entropy has working against it is time.  In the short-term, physical processes like life seem to beat Entropy, then entropy seams to catch up (death).  However, in the extremely long term (cosomolically speaking, 1 * 10 ^76 years or more), entropy never completely catches up with time.\n\nHere's a quote from a great book on cosmology (The Five Ages of the Universe. by Fred Adams and Greg Laughlin, published by Simon and Schuster New York, copyright 1999, Page 168.)\n\n"The universe effectively doles out a fixed amount of energy over an infinite span of time.  This conservation practice underscores the energy crisis of the future and defines exactly what it means for the universe to 'slow down' as it gets older.\n     The universe thus slows down dramitically, but never quite runs out of steam.  Can one think of the universe, with this never-ending quality as having an eternal life?  Perhaps, but that would be rather optimistic point of view, Paul Davies, a renowned physicist and writer, has described this late phase of the evolution of the universe as an 'eternal death'.  This ever dying universe continues to evolve and continues to slow down, but never reaches a final moment of deathlike closure.\n   No matter how old the universe becomes, interesting physical processes continue to operate."