Vladimirovich wrote:
можете прочитать вот это -



А можете не читать, ведь "аксиома" не предусматривает переопределение через что то иное, ведь это АКСИОМА, а не ТЕОРЕМА.
И совсем не имеет значение, как это у вас происходит, и как это у вас определяется.
Я установил аксиому, и это "точка отсчета" для теории.

Laws of Thermodynamics Evidence a Shrinking Universe

The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics provide some evidence that our universe is collapsing rather than expanding. Most scientists believe that since the Big Bang, our universe has been expanding. The red shift discovered by Edwin Hubbell indicated that galaxies were moving away from each other at an increasing speed; therefore, scientists continued with the same line of thinking arguing that the expansion was increasing so that one day, we would be sitting in deep space with no neighboring galaxies, in effect, lost in space.

It is interesting that scientists get so stuck on a theory, like expansion, that when they find evidence that disproves that theory, they simply make the old theory work by forcing the new piece into the theory. So without any logic being utilized, the expansion, which should be slowing down, is accelerating.

This brings us to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the science of entropy. A simple definition for entropy is that everything in the universe goes from order to disorder. For example if you fired a cannon, the ball would explode out of the rifled channel in a rapid burst of speed only to slow down and either strike a target or land on the ground as its trajectory fell. In our universe, there is no law that indicates that the cannon ball will increase in speed after being fired. In the early moments after the Big Bang, the universe probably expanded faster than the speed of light. We know that it slowed down after that. Entropy indicates that the expansion slowed down substantially as our universe got further away from the original event.

But I believe the First Law of Thermodynamics is the most important law that may prove that our universe is shrinking. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that the change in the internal energy of a closed system is equal to the amount of heat supplied to the system, minus the amount of work done by the system. This law is a version of the Law of Conservation of Energy, which states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant. Energy can be transformed, but can neither be created nor destroyed.

In special relativity, mass and energy cannot be destroyed, so it might be more appropriate to say that mass cannot be converted to energy, but instead mass and energy can both be transformed into a different type of mass and energy. During all processes, mass and energy remain unchanged in quantity, but may change forms.

What does all this mean? Well, if you believe our universe is in a closed system, then all matter and energy within our universe cannot be created or destroyed. Thus, no matter how many new stars are born and no matter how many stars have exploded into supernovas, the total of matter and energy in our universe will always be the same.

How does this apply to proving whether our universe is expanding or contracting? Well, a continually expanding universe seems to require an open system, one in which the expansion can move into an infinite space that has no boundaries. If you examine the maps of our universe, the galaxies and clouds of gas appear to connect, forming interconnected filaments in a very homogenous state. In fact, the universe looks like it is a living organism suspended in a confined space like connected algae in a petri dish. It does not look like a universe that is disconnected headed toward empty spaces. Rather instead, it seems to be a smooth universe that is very connected.

Thus, it seems logical that if our universe were closed, then the red shift could be explained as a universe that was collapsing. If the visible matter and dark matter in our universe remained proportional to each other, but were collapsing, the galaxies would be shrinking and thus would be appearing to move away from each other. And if dark energy were causing this miniaturization process, it would become more pronounced as the dark energy grew and the collapse would be accelerating.

Perhaps it comes down to whether scientists believe in an open or closed universe. If our universe were expanding forever into deep space, sometimes called the “Big Freeze,” then we would be living in an open universe. Is there any evidence proving that this is a closed universe?

Well, there might be six arguments that favor a closed system.

There are clear boundaries between the macroworld of gravity and the microworld of quantum mechanics. Boundaries between these two universes are obvious because the laws of gravity do not apply in the quantum world. And demarcation lines prove closures exist.
The Big Bang theory proves that our universe broke out of a shell as if it broke through a boundary and popped into a closed universe. We should not expect to see beyond the Big Bang because it probably is not in our universe. The “Big Freeze” theory does not make sense since our universe is expanding at increasing speeds. Clearly, if our universe were headed out into an infinite open space, it would be slowing down. Also if you believe that dark energy is pulling both visible matter and dark matter out into voids of empty space away from where matter is located, then it would be logical for dark energy to be located outside of the inner orbiting sphere of matter. Then there would be some evidence of stretching of matter located where galaxies are traveling about 90% of the speed of light, which would be assumed to be the outer edge of the sphere of matter. Scientists have not found that to be true. The maps of the universe seem to show filaments, super clusters, clusters, and galaxies pretty uniformly positioned throughout the sphere of matter. It seems more likely that dark energy is a force pulling all matter inside itself. The map of the sphere of matter would look the same and remain proportionally the same, since dark matter would hold it together. Interestingly, the outermost solar systems in galaxies are moving around the center of the galaxies at the

same speed as the inner systems. We would expect the systems near the edge of the galaxy to slow down since the gravitational attraction of the super-massive black holes in the center of the galaxies would decrease. Dark matter probably is the glue holding galaxies and clusters and filaments together throughout the universe, keeping them proportional as to each other. Dark matter is also evidence of a closed system that keeps all matter inside the system.

If we were in an open system, it is unlikely we would be able to view ancient galaxies since the light from those systems would have sped past us billions of years ago. We would only be able to see a few galaxies like Andromeda, which is speeding toward us. The speed of light from those old galaxies would be faster than the speed of acceleration. However, we do see ancient galaxies, which may be explained by a current contraction within our universe so that we are headed back in time to those old events. When we can actually see the Big Bang, this probably will not be a good thing.
There is an invisible order in our universe, which would not exist in an open system. It could be dark energy or the original imprint from the creation of the galaxy, but for the purposes of our argument, it doesn’t matter what you call it. We just know that it exists. The dark energy could be shrinking matter at increasing speeds. If the dark energy were pushing everything away from it, the outer galaxies would be slowing down. They are actually speeding up. So it is logical that dark energy is causing a contraction of the universe. This would also be evidence of a closed system that alternates back and forth between the Big Bang and the Big Crunch.
In an open system, entropy would be the rule as everything slowed down, failed, disintegrated, and came to a final, frozen end. In a closed system, there would be an order and design imprinted on galaxies and everything else in the universe. Of course, entropy also exists in a closed universe, but it is offset by order and design, so that a perpetual system of alternations between the Big Bang and Big Crunch would work very well in a closed system.
Neither hearing nor seeing the microwave background radiation (MBR) seems probable with a constantly expanding universe, heading out into an open universe. The microwave radiation appears to be spread out everywhere, which only makes sense with a closed universe. The radiation, which comes close to the speed of light, would have surpassed the speed of acceleration, leaving all matter from the Big Bang far behind in an open universe. Only a closed universe would permit the MBR to saturate the universe. And only a reversal within the space-time fabric would allow the MBR to be heard and seen again.

In conclusion, a closed universe would require first an expanding universe and then a collapsing universe. After the Big Bang and early expansion, entropy would have caused the expansion to stop and then reverse itself into a collapsing universe. In a closed universe, total matter and energy would remain the same, but dark energy probably would be the force transforming the visible and dark matter into more dark energy, thus causing an acceleration of this process. In a closed universe with edges, a spatial expansion would be limited. However, an expanding and collapsing universe, acting like an inflated and then a deflated balloon would make more sense. I hope that scientists give this idea some consideration in the future.