ooman:

death is inevitable, but suicide could mean death
before reproduction, this is the only difference.

What does this mean?

Reyginus: Let me help you, Mr scientist. On a brief note, equillibrium tends to define a state of a system where their is no change in the properties, with respect to time.
ooman, the period anything goes into equillibrium with some other thing, it presumes what it is going into is at zero value. The same applies here. What I think should be the right word here is 'state'.
Otherwise, entropy and equillibrium are not the same thing. Deal with this, how can anything exhibit entropy at equillibrium, when entropy is zero at equillibrium?

you seem to forget that equilibrium is input=output. Nature stays in balance when its energy rate is constant, at equilibrium, when input=output at the same rate, when animal killed FOR FOOD is at the same rate as animals REPRODUCED. But if there is a catastrophe, the like that could result from suicide, then input would no longer equal output. Balance will be breached. Entropy will increase, this will lead to explosion, like the supernova. Extinction is certain for the cosmos.

I am not saying suicide will immediately lead to extinction of cosmos but it will add to it, just as CO2 from our cars and generators add to global warming.

Reyginus: What does this mean?

it means

ooman: Besides, if people live longer, they would conserve their energy longer, this gives the cosmos more time to stay in balance.

always afford to finish reading what is presented to you.

musKeeto:
bro, if the argument is made any simpler, it would be an insult to retards..

Ooman dey fall hand..

Ooman is making a whole lot of sense but rather indirectly compared to the OP

ooman:

you seem to forget that equilibrium is input=output. Nature stays in balance when its energy rate is constant, at equilibrium, when input=output at the same rate, when animal killed FOR FOOD is at the same rate as animals REPRODUCED. But if there is a catastrophe, the like that could result from suicide, then input would no longer equal output. Balance will be breached. Entropy will increase, this will lead to explosion, like the supernova. Extinction is certain for the cosmos.

I am not saying suicide will immediately lead to extinction of cosmos but it will add to it, just as CO2 from our cars and generators add to global warming.

Hehe. Input=output. A computer?
Supernova. A gigantic explosion, and neutron stars=extinction=-equillibrium?
Lolololol. Truth be told, this is hogwash. Chineke me o! Nairaland sef!

mkmyers45: Ooman is making a whole lot of sense but rather indirectly compared to the OP

Alright. Let'd ignore the Op for a bit. Put me through the basics. I'm all ears.

ooman:

death is inevitable, but suicide could mean death before reproduction, this is the only difference. Besides, if people live longer, they would conserve their energy longer, this gives the cosmos more time to stay in balance. This is what second law of thermodynamics is all about.

I dont care about his feelings, as Dawkins said" The universe owe no one a sense of hope or comfort". I only care about living systems fulfilling the purpose of their evolution.

This is why life evolved in the first place, to conserve energy, which is what we do best when we stay alive!

Bullsh!t.......suicide at 90 years old nko?


Abeg, commot with your false theory!

Reyginus:
Hehe. Input=output. A computer?
Supernova. A gigantic explosion, and neutron stars=extinction=-equillibrium?
Lolololol. Truth be told, this is hogwash. Chineke me o! Nairaland sef!

your lack of understanding is alarming!

pls read a little more about theories of cosmos extinction in some 10 billion years, as predicted by particle physicists.

A fundamental issue addressed in cosmology is the future of the universe—whether the universe will expand forever or eventually collapse. The first case (eternal expansion) is known as an open universe, and the second case (eventual collapse) is known as a closed universe. A closed universe would require sufficiently high density to cause gravity to eventually stop the universe’s expansion and begin its contraction. Such a collapse would require a deviation from Hubble's law, so observational cosmologists try to observe the distances between very distant galaxies and Earth using methods other than measurement of redshifts. The scientists can then compare these distance measurements with the galaxies’ redshifts to see if Hubble’s law holds or not. In the late 1990s astronomers compared the redshifts of supernovas in distant galaxies. Surprisingly, distant supernovas were slightly fainter than had been expected. This result was tentatively interpreted as an acceleration of the expansion of the universe. Astronomers were so surprised by the suggestion that the universe might be accelerating its expansion that they attempted to find other explanations for the relative dimness of distant supernovas, such as absorption by dust. By a few years into the 21st century, however, these other conceivable explanations had been ruled out, and the accelerating universe concept became widely accepted. The search continues to discover more and more distant supernovas.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

ooman:
death is inevitable, but suicide could mean death
before reproduction, this is the only difference.
Besides, if people live longer, they would
conserve their energy longer, this gives the
cosmos more time to stay in balance.

ooman, I'm still finding it difficul to see how these two sentences follow. That you even used 'Beside' as the conjunction has already misaligned them out of concord. Do you understand?

MacDaddy01:


Bullsh!t.......suicide at 90 years old nko?


Abeg, commot with your false theory!

WHY ARE YOU ALL BLIND, ATHEISTS AND THEISTS ALIKE. I THOUGHT ATHEISTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE INTELLIGENT ONES. I WAS WRONG!!
DID YOU NOT SEE THIS

OOMAN: [size=20pt]Besides, if people live longer, they would conserve their energy longer, this gives the cosmos more time to stay in balance.[/size]

Reyginus: ooman, I'm still finding it difficul to see how these two sentences follow. That you even used 'Beside' as the conjunction has already misaligned them out of concord. Do you understand?

"Suicide could mean death before reproduction", i was supposing Muskeeto is not married yet and that if people were to start committing suicide, the unmarried population (THOSE WITHOUT CHILDREN) would be affected most, hence "death before reproduction".

ooman:

your lack of understanding is alarming!

pls read a little more about theories of cosmos extinction in some 10 billion years, as predicted by particle physicists.

Yes, I did. In my formative years. Perhaps I don't understand. Do you mind lending a hand. *I just hope it addresses the op*

ooman: A fundamental issue addressed in cosmology is the future of the universe—whether the universe will expand forever or eventually collapse. The first case (eternal expansion) is known as an open universe, and the second case (eventual collapse) is known as a closed universe. A closed universe would require sufficiently high density to cause gravity to eventually stop the universe’s expansion and begin its contraction. Such a collapse would require a deviation from Hubble's law, so observational cosmologists try to observe the distances between very distant galaxies and Earth using methods other than measurement of redshifts. The scientists can then compare these distance measurements with the galaxies’ redshifts to see if Hubble’s law holds or not. In the late 1990s astronomers compared the redshifts of supernovas in distant galaxies. Surprisingly, distant supernovas were slightly fainter than had been expected. This result was tentatively interpreted as an acceleration of the expansion of the universe. Astronomers were so surprised by the suggestion that the universe might be accelerating its expansion that they attempted to find other explanations for the relative dimness of distant supernovas, such as absorption by dust. By a few years into the 21st century, however, these other conceivable explanations had been ruled out, and the accelerating universe concept became widely accepted. The search continues to discover more and more distant supernovas.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

And this relates to the op how? Don't tempt me.

Reyginus: Yes, I did. In my formative years. Perhaps I don't understand. Do you mind lending a hand. *I just hope it addresses the op*

I DID, just below the quote you quoted! I quoted encarta!

What is ooman on about?. . . .

Reyginus: And this relates to the op how? Don't tempt me.

sorry if i miss the OP, but i am contending the fact that death increases entropy.

Muskeeto's feeling or reason to commit suicide is his own personal business, i do not care about that, as i have quote" The universe owe no one a sense of comfort and hope".

Find your motivation.

I am only giving reasons why he should not commit suicide if he loves the cosmos.

mazaje: What is ooman on about?. . . .

2nd law of thermodynamics!!

I am sorry if i have lost the OP, but i refer to 2nd law of thermodynamics and that law is infallible, no matter what you think, atheists and theists alike.

ooman:

WHY ARE YOU ALL BLIND, ATHEISTS AND THEISTS ALIKE. I THOUGHT ATHEISTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE THE INTELLIGENT ONES. I WAS WRONG!!
DID YOU NOT SEE THIS

[size=18pt]OOMAN: Besides, if people live longer, they would conserve their energy longer, this gives the cosmos more time to stay in balance.
[/size]

1) Why must we conserve the energy? All that matters is that there is energy in us and when we die the energy goes to the soil and nature. The fact remains that the energy remains in the ecosystem. No waste, no increase

2) Millions of babies die from natural causes and birth complications and have done so since the beginning of humans. Living longer has nothing to do with the cosmos being in balance.


Sharaap with your fake science

MacDaddy01:



1) Why must we conserve the energy? All that matters is that there is energy in us and when we die the energy goes to the soil and nature. The fact remains that the energy remains in the ecosystem. No waste, no increase

2) Millions of babies die from natural causes and birth complications and have done so since the beginning of humans. Living longer has nothing to do with the cosmos being in balance.


Sharaap with your fake science

but then, we still have billions of humans alive and even billions and trillions of cells living.

Let me ask you, as an atheist, why do you think life evolved? or as some atheists say, do you believe that there is no reason for reactions in nature? that all things are purposeless and without order? IF YES, THEN YOU MUST BE REALLY INSANE.

ooman:

"Suicide could mean death before reproduction", i was supposing Muskeeto is not married yet and that if people were to start committing suicide, the unmarried population (THOSE WITHOUT CHILDREN) would be affected most, hence "death before reproduction".

Beautiful nonsense! To even suggest a thing as that, the route or analogy to tackle the op's case is unnecessary, less with your fashion, the words in their purest form lose meaning, as we have witnessed.

musKeeto:
Alright. Let'd ignore the Op for a bit. Put me through the basics. I'm all ears.

Entropy – a measure of disorder in the universe or of the availability of the energy in a system to do work. Agreed? Now cause and effect now tries to balances this equillibrium over-time [its an ongoing cycle] . So even if you detonate 100,000,000,000 tons of TNT..Yes it will have a devasting effect [Nuclear winter etc etc] but over time it balances up...Over evolutionary time there have been times when all-life have been wiped off but due to its rather incomplex nature equillibrium was re-established. Now consider a 'Heat Death' this is when the universe reaches thermodynamic equilibrium (maximum entropy) as it approaches absolute Zero meaning there will be no more energy to work. Now i know its indirectly related to the op but imagine every life on earth committing sucide. Where will the energy go? pardon my rambling..

ooman is another wild card. . .The atheist version of OBADIAH and Bugzee. . .

Reyginus: Beautiful nonsense! To even suggest a thing as that, the route or analogy to tackle the op's case is unnecessary, less with your fashion, the words in their purest form lose meaning, as we have witnessed.

sorry if i missed the OP. i immediately referred to the effect of death on the environment, according to the second law of thermodynamics.

As i have said, if he could'nt find reason to live, that is his problem, the universe own no one sense of comfort.

This is why death exist in the first place, to ensure balance of the ever dividing, hence reproducing DNA molecules

ooman:

I DID, just below the quote you quoted! I quoted encarta!

Lol. Are you encarta? By the way, it has nothing to do with what we are saying.

mazaje: ooman is another wild card. . .The atheist version of OBADIAH and Bugzee. . .

or perhaps you all lack basic understanding of the world around you. Now i believe that not all atheists/agnostics are intelligent, some are just tired of life, like Muskeeto.

Reyginus: Lol. Are you encarta? By the way, it has nothing to do with what we are saying.

once again, sorry if i miss the op

ooman:

or perhaps you all lack basic understanding of the world around you. Now i believe that not all atheists/agnostics are intelligent, some are just tired of life, like Muskeeto.

Twice in one day

ooman:

sorry if i miss the OP, but i am contending the fact that death increases entropy.

Muskeeto's feeling or reason to commit suicide is his own personal business, i do not care about that, as i have quote" The universe owe no one a sense of comfort and hope".

Find your motivation.

I am only giving reasons why he should not commit suicide if he loves the cosmos.

Na wa o. How can death increase entropy when by your definition, at death everything goes into equillibrium?

Since i do not have all day to debate a simple basic law with you, i will leave you with Wikipedia:

The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic [size=15pt]equilibrium—the state of maximum entropy[/size]. Equivalently, perpetual motion machines of the second kind are impossible.

The second law is an empirically validated postulate of thermodynamics, but it can be understood and explained using the underlying quantum statistical mechanics, together with the assumption of low-entropy initial conditions in the distant past (possibly at the beginning of the universe). In the language of statistical mechanics, entropy is a measure of the number of microscopic configurations corresponding to a macroscopic state. Because equilibrium corresponds to a vastly greater number of microscopic configurations than any non-equilibrium state, it has the maximum entropy, and the second law follows because random chance alone practically guarantees that the system will evolve towards equilibrium.

The second law is thought to be the source of the direction of time. It is an expression of the fact that over time, differences in temperature, pressure, and chemical potential decrease in an isolated non-gravitational physical system, leading eventually to a state of thermodynamic equilibrium.

The second law may be expressed in many specific ways, but the first formulation is credited to the French scientist Sadi Carnot in 1824 (see Timeline of thermodynamics).

Pls continue your lecture here: [size=15pt]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics[/size]

Reyginus: Na wa o. How can death increase entropy when by your definition, at death everything goes into equillibrium?

METABOLIC EQUILIBRIUM, DID YOU READ THAT?