My purpose was to correct your fallacious statement, you are the one who wants to argue and insist you didn't make a mistake.

I did not make any mistake. Mass-energy equivalence does not rely on useful energy for the principle to be true, you could have an infinitely expanding universe where all matter has been converted to energy, that energy density can move asymptotically toward 0, and still a random quantum fluctuation can spontaneously create matter from vacuum energy. It may very well immediately decay and still that does not refute the eternal nature of mass-energy. ie what cosmological model you use is irrelevant to the concept that energy and matter being two sides of the same coin are eternal.

You are clearly not aware of it, or are purposely trying to confuse the topic.

It absolutely does.



This has nothing to do with the discussion. Quantum Fluctuations create new matter and does not effect the amount of entropy.



Matter is not eternal. Entropy cannot be changed into any other form.



Energy is eternal. Usable energy and matter are the same thing at different densities. Entropy is unusable energy that can never be changed into a new form. This means that matter is not eternal. Usable energy is not eternal.



You are ignoring the elephant in the room.

All I needed. From what?

From nothing.

Really? I will give you a little bit of time to revise this . . . or further explain . . something you never want to allow others who you dislike.

If you really believe this, then this explains your misunderstanding.

I'll use an atheist source, because maybe you'll accept that.



'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss

Don't tell me you thought that quantum fluctuations turned entropy into matter.

Are virtual particles real?

yes.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=are-virtual-particles-rea

Is it matter, yes.

=================================

would love to watch that vid, but you have a malformed url.
Nope, you are the only one that has brought entropy into the conversation, I do not see it as useful for this topic.



Just to help you back on track.

Edit: I have seen that video. You do realize Laurence Krauss is a materialist? Right?

Point?



It wasn't a malformed URL, it's because of a change that YouTube made awhile back. I have edited my post to use the "share" link, it works now.



Matter is not eternal. Get that through your head. This isn't crazy Christian talk, it's science. It's physics, which you claim is your field. Matter is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT eternal.

I'm not here to discuss that, so stop trying to change the subject. You said something, which is clearly not true. By this point, you have to be admitting it to yourself. Matter is not eternal. PERIOD. There is no debate on this.

Yes, it is. It is eternal in the sense that all things are made out of matter which includes energy.
Context matters Spider. This is about philosophical Materialism where matter and energy are not seen as distinct becuase quite often one can create the other and vice versa.

You have this misunderstanding of my position. You think I am saying that matter (the stuff I am made of specifically) is going to last forever. I AM NOT SAYING THAT AT ALL.

I am saying that all of reality is matter. Reality is eternal. This is materialism, welcome to the conversation.

You do realize that he states that quantum fluctuations create matter from nothing, right?

You are always keeping score on these things, so let's see...

Quantum Fluctuations create matter from nothing: Point goes to SpiderCMB

Matter is not eternal: Point goes to SpiderCMB

That's 2 to 0 friend. It's about time for you to up your game or admit defeat.

Entropy invalidates the claims of materialism, welcome to reality.

Spider why do you do this?

You are completely ignoring the discussion in favor of a claim within the discussion regardless of the context.

What a fantastic quote! This shows me you not only have no clue what materialism is about, nor what entropy is about.


Spider you do realize that Laurence Krauss is a Materialist Atheist right?

. . . lol, and here you are trying to use him for your misguided understanding of science to support your misguided understanding of philosophy.

This is a hoot!

It's seems you are not following this discussion we have been having. Let me break it down for you.

You falsely claimed that matter is eternal. I corrected you repeatedly. You continued to repeat that falsehood, because you were unwilling to admit I was right.

You brought up inflation and quantum fluctuations as counter arguments to entropy, but I shot both of those down.

Then you queried where the new matter came from that was created by a quantum fluctuation. I said it came from nothing, which you proceeded to scoff at. Then i provided proof that quantum fluctuations produced matter from nothing and you then changed the subject do discussing materialism.

Materialism has nothing to do with my original point. I will correct my previous post, materialism isn't invalidated by entropy. The universe is still composed of energy. But that doesn't change the fact that matter is not eternal. It all comes back to my original post. You were wrong to say that matter is eternal and science backs me up on that. You have offered no proof that matter is eternal except to claim that energy is eternal. That is true, but not all energy can be converted into matter. Entropy is unusable. It can't be turned into matter, it can't be used to perform work. It's waste. It's dead energy. It's useless. Therefore, energy is eternal, but matter is not.

I used him to support my assertion that Quantum Fluctuations produce matter from nothing. You were wrong on that, just as you were wrong about matter being eternal. Do you not understand that or are you simply trying to appeal to ridicule to avoid admitting you were wrong on both counts? I admit when I'm wrong, I feel there is no shame in it. It's actually freeing to not have to pretend to be perfect.

I'm correcting a false statement you made. The discussion would be entirely not worth having, if fallacious statements like this weren't refuted. If you had simply admitted the mistake from the beginning, a lot of time and humiliation to yourself could have been saved.

Rereading your posts, the fact you are trying to distinguish between newly created matter means you do not understand what I mean when I say matter is eternal.

Your entire argument is predicated on a misunderstanding. I feel no need to go back over it, if you carefully and honestly read my posts you should be able to understand.

No matter how you try to spin it, the statement that "matter/energy is eternal" is false. Matter is not eternal.

As long as there is space, there is energy. As long as there is energy there is matter.

These are true statements, and if you understand that by eternal I just mean there will always be matter where you find space, then you will not need 4 pages of off topic posts to get on track.

Virtual particles are real, they are matter, and if you have space you have energy, and you will have virtual particles.

This does not require any cosmological model. It only requires QM and special relativity to explain.

Eternal might have been a poor choice of word, but it shouldn't take 4 pages to understand my meaning.