Thread: Why people say...things tend to chaos?

I guess thats a stupid question for a physicist but...what does it mean if physicist say that all things tend toward to chaos?
I guess that this has something to do with radioactivity and that all things tend to "fall apart" or turn into other things in a more comfortable state...for example lead.
But from my everyday observation I would say things tend to form systems (which are usually described as order).
And doesn't the history of the universe...which started with a singularity and later a unorganized bunch of particles...evolved into a universe with complex systems? Isn't that "order" and the complete opposite of chaos.
Maybe I just don't understand the words right...maybe someone can help...thx.

look up ENTROPY

Entropy is the answer...everything heads to chaos as their entropy increases,although i think an high entropy system might not be chaotic....IMO when there is an absolute discrepancy between some occurrence,then it could lead to chaos...but if everything matches and the disorderness pesist. Then i think the system just changes its speed and not chaos...check chaos theory.

I also am not sure if something could be disorder and at sametime match...so it clear to me that as entropy increases it tends to a chaotic system.

Originally Posted by Headdresser

And doesn't the history of the universe...which started with a singularity and later a unorganized bunch of particles...evolved into a universe with complex systems? Isn't that "order" and the complete opposite of chaos.

Rather than concentrating on isolated systems, you have to look at the universe as a whole.

It started out in a highly homogeneous state - it was the same everywhere - a superheated quark-gluon plasma. It was very "smooth".

Then, the cosmic microwave background shows us that 370,000 years later, the universe was still "smooth", but with very small temperature differences in the order of 1 in 100,000. This was the seeds of large scale structure later on.

13.7 billion years later, the universe is "lumpy". There are vast areas with little matter in them (voids), and lots of lumps of matter scattered around (galaxies).

So it has gone from being "smooth" (the same everywhere), to a state where there are vast differences between places.

Originally Posted by Headdresser

I guess thats a stupid question for a physicist but...what does it mean if physicist say that all things tend toward to chaos?
I guess that this has something to do with radioactivity and that all things tend to "fall apart" or turn into other things in a more comfortable state...for example lead.
But from my everyday observation I would say things tend to form systems (which are usually described as order).
And doesn't the history of the universe...which started with a singularity and later a unorganized bunch of particles...evolved into a universe with complex systems? Isn't that "order" and the complete opposite of chaos.
Maybe I just don't understand the words right...maybe someone can help...thx.

Always use caution when you see widely sweeping generalizations like this.

look up ENTROPY

Thx...I looked entropy up and on the one hand it was really helpful, on the other hand it only changed my question from "why people say the universe tend to chaos" in "why people say the universe tend to entropy"

So it has gone from being "smooth" (the same everywhere), to a state where there are vast differences between places.

Like I got it entropy and the 2. law of thermodynamic describes the option particles have within a system.
More options higher entropy...less options lower entropy.
At least thats the simplified version I turned it into. Please correct me if I'am wrong.
So a system where every particle does whatever it wants has a high entropy. If energy comes from outside a system it can cause a limitation of option...for example cause all atoms to fly in the same direction or keep a special state or move on special ways or whatever. In our universe this is constantly happening to systems, thats why we have orderly systems.
So isn't the entropy of the "smooth" universe extremely high? No particle is bounded by any necessity of a system or something.
So...if we marked high entropy with darker grey and lower entropy with lighter grey...wouldn't a picture of our universe today be much lighter than a picture of the young universe?
So...why don't we say that the entropy of the universe is getting lower?
And if the "smooth" universe is described as the high entropic one...than isn't low entropy what benefit systems? So shouldn't Chaos or (high entropy) be the words physics describe working, stable systems with? Do they use the word "order" in the complete opposite meaning common sense is using it?
This is so confusing...

Originally Posted by SpeedFreek

Originally Posted by Headdresser

And doesn't the history of the universe...which started with a singularity and later a unorganized bunch of particles...evolved into a universe with complex systems? Isn't that "order" and the complete opposite of chaos.

Rather than concentrating on isolated systems, you have to look at the universe as a whole.It started out in a highly homogeneous state - it was the same everywhere - a superheated quark-gluon plasma. It was very "smooth".

I wouldn't go as far to say that "it was the same everywhere" with respect to the universe's early stages as there were very subtle "quantum fluctuations" across this quark-gluon plasma which actually lead to the vast differences (regions of dense matter and intergalactic space with very few particles per square, well, light year!) across the universe which we see today.

Originally Posted by Headdresser

So it has gone from being "smooth" (the same everywhere), to a state where there are vast differences between places.

Like I got it entropy and the 2. law of thermodynamic describes the option particles have within a system.
More options higher entropy...less options lower entropy.
At least thats the simplified version I turned it into. Please correct me if I'am wrong.
So a system where every particle does whatever it wants has a high entropy. If energy comes from outside a system it can cause a limitation of option...for example cause all atoms to fly in the same direction or keep a special state or move on special ways or whatever. In our universe this is constantly happening to systems, thats why we have orderly systems.
So isn't the entropy of the "smooth" universe extremely high? No particle is bounded by any necessity of a system or something.
So...if we marked high entropy with darker grey and lower entropy with lighter grey...wouldn't a picture of our universe today be much lighter than a picture of the young universe?
So...why don't we say that the entropy of the universe is getting lower?
And if the "smooth" universe is described as the high entropic one...than isn't low entropy what benefit systems? So shouldn't Chaos or (high entropy) be the words physics describe working, stable systems with? Do they use the word "order" in the complete opposite meaning common sense is using it?
This is so confusing...

"Order" simply means "less random". ie: If all atom has same speed & direction then its ordered.

In real sense:
you see "order" in marching troops, but saw "chaos" on people on the street. Street people wear random cloth and do random stuff, while marching troop working together as a unit and do same thing while is pleasant to see.

In computer sense:
it took alot of byte to remember "chaotic" stuff than to remember "ordered" stuff. Memory is part of entropy system because this allow you to understand the dilemma possed by "Maxwell Demon" without violating thermodynamic law of nature.

thats it just it

"Order" simply means "less random". ie: If all atom has same speed & direction then its ordered.

Hmm...maybe my mistake was to see "order" as a synonym for "organised"...if I got you right the opposite is the case.
But I still don't get the details...

..doesn't radiactive decay leads to elements that won't react anymore. Like lead for example. Is lead a very entropic material

If the early universe was a singularity and the the old universe will be a big bunch of chaotic particles...will they look alike (from outside)

If I would be a particle and I wanted to be part of a very complex structure (like a human being or a Planet) would you suggest me to settle in a area with low or with high entropy

Instead of saying the universe tends to entropy would it be right to say the universe tends to build more and more complex structures or systems but this trend also leads systems to constantly falling apart

Is fire or better to say...extreme heat or extreme cold the highest form of entropy

Originally Posted by Headdresser

..doesn't radiactive decay leads to elements that won't react anymore. Like lead for example. Is lead a very entropic material

I have no idea. I guess it decay because its quantum wave doesn't fit the nucleus or something???

Originally Posted by Headdresser

If the early universe was a singularity and the the old universe will be a big bunch of chaotic particles...will they look alike (from outside)

IMO old universe will look like a graveyard, while early universe looks like a crystal ball. I think it will be filled with dead organism!

Probably this is better answer: Heat death of the universe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Headdresser

If I would be a particle and I wanted to be part of a very complex structure (like a human being or a Planet) would you suggest me to settle in a area with low or with high entropy

IMO I recommend you to be in high-entropy because alot of chemistry happen at high temperature.

Originally Posted by Headdresser

Instead of saying the universe tends to entropy would it be right to say the universe tends to build more and more complex structures or systems but this trend also leads systems to constantly falling apart

I beg to differ, without complex structure, everything will fall apart more quickly. On earth we exploit the flow of high-entropy into low-entropy area to create useful energy which drive our mechanical engine & our cells, and do meaningful stuff like "building skyscraper" and create "more DNA" (this stuff add more complexity to the universe). Such process is called heat engine, without them: a heat from a burning leaves will quickly dissipate into the air and wasted without meaning...

The general idea is this: the heat flow between HOT and COLD actually contain useful energy. With enough ingenuity, a person could harvest this energy for doing useful work. This exploits actually delays the rate of entropy change for the whole universe.

Another source of useful energy is between zero-point energy and any n-th level quantum energy.

Originally Posted by Headdresser

Is fire or better to say...extreme heat or extreme cold the highest form of entropy

Extreme temperature is the highest form of entropy. High temperature means atoms has higher energy; thus they could do more random motion, but at lower temperature mean lower energy; thus atom has less motion or can't move at all. At really really low temperature: Atom will stay in uniform arrangement (like crystal) and do not move.

Originally Posted by Headdresser

look up ENTROPY

Thx...I looked entropy up and on the one hand it was really helpful, on the other hand it only changed my question from "why people say the universe tend to chaos" in "why people say the universe tend to entropy"

I am following this thread because I too am trying to understand entropy and am apparently going around in the same circles. But how did chaos get into this? Is chaos not a particular kind of order that was previously thought to be random?