The Instigator
i-Immaterial
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
EvanScience
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The 2nd thermodynamics law does NOT show that the universe had a beginning!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 595 times Debate No: 48146
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

i-Immaterial

Pro

Many people think that the 2nd law of thermodynamics shows that the universe is not eternal in the past. That if the universe were eternal, we'd have reached heat death by now. I (pro) will be arguing that that is false. Con will argue that the 2nd law does show a beginning of the universe.

Disclaimer 1: Multiverse and universe mean the same thing in this context.

Disclaimer 2: BoP will be on me, but con must provide a refutation to my argument.

Rules

1. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
2. No trolling or lawyering.
3. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed in the middle of the debate.

Voters, in the case of the breaking of any of these rules by either debater, all seven points in voting should be given to the other person.
EvanScience

Con

According to your R1 post, I can argue right now. So, I'll present my argument.

Black hole or supernova death

If the Universe was eternal, having established the fact that the Sun contains a finite amount of hydrogen and helium, which is its source of energy, it should have already ran out. Black holes don't always occur, so there can be 2 results, each involving the end of Earth and it sustaining and habitating life on it. So:

1. When there's a supernova, its remaining pieces, sometimes, want to... fuse. So, that magnetic force will compensate with the centripetal force. The magnetic force, because it is activated, doesn't run out. The supernova force will at one point. Once it does, all the remaining pieces fuse into something very tiny. It'll be SO compact, it's gravitational pull will affect those at the same distance as last time. However, it'll become MUCH more powerful. So, our Earth will be sucked up.

2. There will be a ghastly supernova. It will definitely reach us. Not only do supernovas travel fast, but is VERY hot. Heat. So, once it reaches us, we'll overheat. Our skins'll rot.

I await my opponent's set of arguments.

Debate Round No. 1
i-Immaterial

Pro

Here are the problems with trying to say that the universe is headed for heat death with the 2nd law.

1. The universe isn't temperature dependent to any external source because there's no external environment to the universe. The universe is unbounded. It's a nonsensical impossibility to qualify it within the context of entropy.

2. The"2nd law of thermodynamics only applies when dealing with sub-universe sized systems. A steam engine might be an example of this. The universe would not be.

3. The universe can't be an open, closed, or isolated system since it has no boundaries. There's nothing it possibly be open to, closed or isolated from. There's no other entity or system that separates the universe.

4. The second law is a system specific law. Without a boundary, there's no application.

5. To quote from a website:
"A thermodynamic system is separated from its surroundings by a boundary,"which by convention delimits a finite volume. Exchanges of work, heat, or matter between the system and the surroundings may take place across this boundary. Thermodynamic systems are often classified by specifying the nature of the exchanges that are allowed to occur across its boundary. The system is the part of the Universe being studied, while the"surroundings"is the remainder of the Universe that lies outside the boundaries of the system. The environment is ignored in analysis of the system, except in regards to these interactions."

Source: http://fatfist.hubpages.com...
EvanScience

Con

EvanScience forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
i-Immaterial

Pro

Give victory to me since con broke rules.
EvanScience

Con

EvanScience forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
i-Immaterial

Pro

i-Immaterial forfeited this round.
EvanScience

Con

EvanScience forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
i-Immaterial

Pro

i-Immaterial forfeited this round.
EvanScience

Con

EvanScience forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.