The End Of Matter?

[carbon dioxide]

But you mean end in the sense of finite time, correct?  Even if matter were finite in volume, it wouldn't lead to a dissolution of body.  What would do is prevent future formations/organizations of spirit/body/world because we would eventually reach a point where there would be no matter left to organize something new.

Perhaps there there is just so much matter out there that in all practical purposes it there always will be enough to organize something new.  Just one supermassive black hole can have the mass of billions of suns.  And if there are many universes out there, it is basically endless.  Then there is dark matter and who knows what else that has not been discovered. 

Edited July 22, 2015 by carbon dioxide

[sethpayne]

Perhaps there there is just so much matter out there that in all practical purposes it there always will be enough to organize something new.  Just one supermassive black hole can have the mass of billions of suns.  And if there are many universes out there, it is basically endless.  Then there is dark matter and who knows what else that has not been discovered. 

 

Yeah.  Multiverse theory has been mentioned on this thread and, while I am a complete dolt when it comes to physics, I understand that some varieties of string theory (perhaps all...) require a multiverse.  Fascinating stuff.

[sethpayne]

Perhaps there there is just so much matter out there that in all practical purposes it there always will be enough to organize something new.  Just one supermassive black hole can have the mass of billions of suns.  And if there are many universes out there, it is basically endless.  Then there is dark matter and who knows what else that has not been discovered. 

 

Interesting ... almost like a reverse Planck length (is there a corresponding value for very very very large sizes/distances?).  In nature matter is absolutely finite.  But the volume of existent matter is so large, that any attempt to compute/categorize it would be a bust because the numbers are simply too big to consider via mathematics.  

 

I think there is a a legit, albeit fringe, physicist out there who challenges Hawking on black holes and argues that conditions within a black hole resembles those of the big bang.

[thesometimesaint]

Entropy works. At some time in about 100,000 Trillion Trillion, Trillion, Trillion, Trillion years all matter/energy of this universe will be at a uniform dispersion. No more work can be done. Who knows at that far distant time the Gods will once again say "Let there be light" and it will be.

[Saint Sinner]

Isn't this one of the laws of thermodynamics?

[Robert F. Smith]

Isn't this one of the laws of thermodynamics?

Yeh, the second law.

[thesometimesaint]

Isn't this one of the laws of thermodynamics?

 

Yes; Now if we can just figure out how to reverse it.

[Robert F. Smith]

Yes; Now if we can just figure out how to reverse it.

The only way entropy can be reversed is through the application of intelligence and organization.  The Second Law always remains in force, as does gravity.  Neither stops being in effect, but only that other laws apply.  That is how a watchmaker makes a watch.  He applies his intelligence and organizes materials in such a way that you wear a timepiece on your wrist.

 

Entropy does offer the future of a cold and fully dispersed universe.  Gods can apply their intelligence and glory to control that process.  Just how they do that is a mystery.  However, it is not by fiat.

[thesometimesaint]

I have no problem with the Gods doing just that. I simply want to know how it is done.

[Ahab]

I have no problem with the Gods doing just that. I simply want to know how it is done.

I'm satisfied knowing it will be done.

When we are resurrected, entropy won't be a problem for us anymore. No more dissolution of our bodies or the matter they are made of.

I think there will still others of our kind that are going through the experience of death in other places. I think of those places as other dimensions of our one and only universe, rather than other universes, but maybe that's just semantics.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Ahab

[Joshua Valentine]

A fellow Mormon buddy of mine recently posed an interesting question.  One that I'm curious to see what others think. It has to do with whether Joseph Smith's cosmology proposes matter that is infinite in time, volume, or both?

 

Let's just get it out of the way up front that all of this is speculation and may or may not represent Church doctrine.  A few things from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism -- a source that I find offers some great summaries and references.

 

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Matter

 

 

For now we'll just set aside my developing theory that Joseph Smith was actually a great scholar of the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita.

 

 

Ok.  So if I'm reading Joseph Smith correctly, matter cannot be created nor can it be destroyed.

 

I'm not sure what Joseph Smith meant by "the pure principles of element."  Is he referring to something akin to the Forms?  

 

Also, when he says "they had no beginning and can have no end" is that a reference to time, volume, or both?  

 

I have always *assumed* that Joseph Smith's view was that matter's existence in time was infinite  but that its volume was finite.  But if I dig into that I find I don't really have a good reason for making that assumption.  My buddy who posed the question was working from a similar assumption.  

 

And I suppose that for Joseph's theology to be consistent matter must be both infinite in both time and volume.  Otherwise, there would come a point where exaltation must halt because all of the matter would simply be used up.  

 

I cannot escape the conclusion that the amount of matter is finite.

 

According to Joseph, matter cannot be created or uncreated/annihilated/destroyed completely..

 

This seems to necessarily mean that there is no such thing as "new matter", no recently created matter, because matter cannot be created. If matter were new, then it would have to have been created.

 

But, in order for there to be an infinite amount of matter, there would have to be new matter coming into existence/created endlessly. There is no point at which one can reach "an infinite amount" of anything, so it must continuously be added to by more new/created matter.  But, according to Joseph, there is no creation of "more" matter, so there is no endless addition of matter, so there is, by definition, no infinite amount of matter.

 

Thus the amount of matter anywhere, this universe or any multiverse, is finite, and whether there's just an inconceivable amount, or not, we will reach the end of it eventually.

[thesometimesaint]

I'm satisfied knowing it will be done.

When we are resurrected, entropy won't be a problem for us anymore. No more dissolution of our bodies or the matter they are made of.

I think there will still others of our kind that are going through the experience of death in other places. I think of those places as other dimensions of our one and only universe, rather than other universes, but maybe that's just semantics.

 

I want to know everything God knows.

 

How does one do away with entropy? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

Could's be.

[Ahab]

I want to know everything God knows.

How does one do away with entropy? Inquiring minds want to know.

Could's be.

Yeah well okay. I do want to know too, or at least I will want to know how someday.

I should have said that I'm satisfied for now just knowing that it will be done. And I imagine that I'll be pretty excited when it happens! A resurrected body that doesn't EVER deteriorate is going to be freakin AWESOME!

And it's something nice to think about and look forward to when I see my wife or myself having health problems with our mortal bodies.

I like to look at the bright side.

[Ahab]

I cannot escape the conclusion that the amount of matter is finite.

According to Joseph, matter cannot be created or uncreated/annihilated/destroyed completely..

This seems to necessarily mean that there is no such thing as "new matter", no recently created matter, because matter cannot be created. If matter were new, then it would have to have been created.

But, in order for there to be an infinite amount of matter, there would have to be new matter coming into existence/created endlessly. There is no point at which one can reach "an infinite amount" of anything, so it must continuously be added to by more new/created matter. But, according to Joseph, there is no creation of "more" matter, so there is no endless addition of matter, so there is, by definition, no infinite amount of matter.

Thus the amount of matter anywhere, this universe or any multiverse, is finite, and whether there's just an inconceivable amount, or not, we will reach the end of it eventually.

I kinda agree that the amount of matter is finite, but only as a matter of fact. In terms of actual availability though I think we're always going to be able to find some more somewhere, whatever kind of matter we need.

And keep in mind that when Joseph used the word create he had 2 definitions in his mind although he was usually thinking of only one definition at a time. He rejected the idea of creation ex nihilo but he did believe in creation as organization. So he would say that God can create anything and everything when thinking in terms of organization, just not from nothing. So God can and does create/organize life, and matter, and whatever else you can think of. He just doesn't do it from nothing.

[thesometimesaint]

Yeah well okay. I do want to know too, or at least I will want to know how someday.

I should have said that I'm satisfied for now just knowing that it will be done. And I imagine that I'll be pretty excited when it happens! A resurrected body that doesn't EVER deteriorate is going to be freakin AWESOME!

And it's something nice to think about and look forward to when I see my wife or myself having health problems with our mortal bodies.

I like to look at the bright side.

 

I have more than enough health problems myself. I look forwards to the eternities when I don't.

[TheSkepticChristian]

So no I'm not saying matter can't be destroyed. It can be. Just not annihilated to nihilo, or nothing.

 

Photons are created out of nothing, virtual particles are popping in and out of existence. Our universe may have been created out of nothing. 

 

 

PS and that doesn't contradict LDS theology because if the universe was created out of nothing, it means there are other universes too.

Edited July 24, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Ahab]

Photons are created out of nothing, virtual particles are popping in and out of existence. Our universe may have been created out of nothing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UemhCsaeGgc

and that idea doesn't contradict LDS theology because quantum vacuum fluctuations are required for the Universe to be created out of nothing.

Oh where oh where is my link to that song in the Sound of Music movie?

Nothing comes from nothing. Nothing ever could...

Fine, if you want to think something can come from nothing at all, then you go right ahead and think that. I won't believe it until I see that happen, if it ever does.

And virtual or imaginary particles don't count.

[TheSkepticChristian]

Nothing comes from nothing. Nothing ever could...

 

What is the cause of the photon that is hitting your eye? There’s no physical cause, it was emitted spontaneously. When an atom in an excited energy level drops to a lower level and emits a photon, a particle of light, we find no cause for that event

 

Fine, if you want to think something can come from nothing at all, then you go right ahead and think that. I won't believe it until I see that happen, if it ever does.

 

You vs all the Physicists in the world that are observing reality. 

Find one physicist that doesn't agree that photons are created out of nothing. 

 

 

And virtual or imaginary particles don't count.

 

What is a virtual particle? 

Edited July 24, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Mormonmaniac]

Photons are created out of nothing, virtual particles are popping in and out of existence. Our universe may have been created out of nothing. 

 

 

and that idea doesn't contradict LDS theology because quantum vacuum fluctuations are required. 

 

PS  I don't believe in ex nihilo

I just got dumber.

What a joke we have made science these days.

[Joshua Valentine]

I kinda agree that the amount of matter is finite, but only as a matter of fact. In terms of actual availability though I think we're always going to be able to find some more somewhere, whatever kind of matter we need.

And keep in mind that when Joseph used the word create he had 2 definitions in his mind although he was usually thinking of only one definition at a time. He rejected the idea of creation ex nihilo but he did believe in creation as organization. So he would say that God can create anything and everything when thinking in terms of organization, just not from nothing. So God can and does create/organize life, and matter, and whatever else you can think of. He just doesn't do it from nothing.

In terms of availability or not, if Joseph was teaching true facts about matter, that it can't be created (not just organized), then there can't be more of it. If there can't be more if it, and since an infinite about of matter can not exist all at once (or, in other words, without there being more and more forever), then Joseph's teachings necessitate a finite amount of matter. No matter how plentifully available, eventually, given enough time, especially if time is infinite/everlasting then all matter will eventually be consumed, or occupied, and no further increase of generations.

Given the principles Joseph taught, I cannot see how one can escape this conclusion and the problems it creates for his teachings.

[Joshua Valentine]

Photons are created out of nothing, virtual particles are popping in and out of existence. Our universe may have been created out of nothing. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UemhCsaeGgc

 

and that idea doesn't contradict LDS theology because quantum vacuum fluctuations are required. 

 

PS  I don't believe in ex nihilo

At the end there he ends up saying there is no particles, space, laws, and that's a pretty good definition of "nothing". But he just got done postulating multiple universes with random characteristics that just come about (from a system that "contains"and"produces universes! At best, he is basically saying there are no particles, space, laws "of our universe"and this is his definition of "nothing. Oh, but forget all this "spontaneous random universes over there and the whatever that they come from and inhabit and from which all our "nothing"came from. His version of nothing isn't describing our universe coming spontaneously and randomly from nothing, he is just describing what "was"before the beginning of our universe! And he mentioned a whole lot of something (multiple universes and their requisite environment, the multiverse). Is this double-speak, bad communication, bad manipulation, evidence that he is very wrong, or am I missing the forest along with the trees.

I can't escape the conclusion that this video is awful. But I'll hold out an unfounded and admittedly unwise hope that it somehow isn't... Completely.

[Mormonmaniac]

At the end there he ends up saying there is no particles, space, laws, and that's a pretty good definition of "nothing". But he just got done postulating multiple universes with random characteristics that just come about (from a system that "contains"and"produces universes! At best, he is basically saying there are no particles, space, laws "of our universe"and this is his definition of "nothing. Oh, but forget all this "spontaneous random universes over there and the whatever that they come from and inhabit and from which all our "nothing"came from. His version of nothing isn't describing our universe coming spontaneously and randomly from nothing, he is just describing what "was"before the beginning of our universe! And he mentioned a whole lot of something (multiple universes and their requisite environment, the multiverse). Is this double-speak, bad communication, bad manipulation, evidence that he is very wrong, or am I missing the forest along with the trees.

I can't escape the conclusion that this video is awful. But I'll hold out an unfounded and admittedly unwise hope that it somehow isn't... Completely.

The video is truly foolish.

[Ahab]

In terms of availability or not, if Joseph was teaching true facts about matter, that it can't be created (not just organized), then there can't be more of it. If there can't be more if it, and since an infinite about of matter can not exist all at once (or, in other words, without there being more and more forever), then Joseph's teachings necessitate a finite amount of matter. No matter how plentifully available, eventually, given enough time, especially if time is infinite/everlasting then all matter will eventually be consumed, or occupied, and no further increase of generations.

Given the principles Joseph taught, I cannot see how one can escape this conclusion and the problems it creates for his teachings.

It comes down to the idea that everything that will ever exist already exists in some form or another. And I see no problem with that because we (our kind of being) has the power to make something into something else by creating/organizing/reorganizing matter. Don't worry about it, for now. If at any time in the future all of the space there is in existence is ever filled with nothing but us shoulder to shoulder then you can start worrying.

[TheSkepticChristian]

At the end there he ends up saying there is no particles, space, laws, and that's a pretty good definition of "nothing". But he just got done postulating multiple universes with random characteristics that just come about (from a system that "contains"and"produces universes! At best, he is basically saying there are no particles, space, laws "of our universe"and this is his definition of "nothing. Oh, but forget all this "spontaneous random universes over there and the whatever that they come from and inhabit and from which all our "nothing"came from

 

No, you simply don't understand what he is saying. He is not saying that nothing else existed. 

 

 

His version of nothing isn't describing our universe coming spontaneously and randomly from nothing

 

What creates the photons? What about quantum mechanics? 

Edited July 24, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[sethpayne]

Photons are created out of nothing, virtual particles are popping in and out of existence. Our universe may have been created out of nothing. 

 

 

Are you sure this is accurate?  Are not photons the result of energy output due to electrons instantly switching "orbit" around the nucleus?  So photons represent a change of state in energy-matter, no?  The energy-matter of a photon didn't come out of nowhere.  Rather, it is change of energy-matter form.

 

This is my understanding of it but I could be absolutely wrong.