The entropy of systems

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Stoat</i>
<br />...I would argue that a particle at rest is half kinetic energy and half potential energy. Mass does not increase with motion but the total energy is redistributed. Think of it as a see saw, one side goes up, the other down....<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I agree with this! If matter starts to emit light, then it's energy state is changing.
Let's say the universe is accelerating. At what speed will it's contents start to emit light?
Why use gravity in your equation, when gravity is a force?

Is gravity a force which converts matter into energy with time but also causes acceleration in the process?

Is there such a thing as gravitational force and gravitational energy? Or is this a phenomenon which is produced by the interactions between forms of energy (matter included)?

In other words:
g= interactions between forms of energy

What would this equation look like ?

GD, I am assuming the universe recycles and therefor is unchanging. How do you explain a changing universe? It is beginning this thread is going down into the deep dodo like every thread eventually does because of modeling details like the difference between a watt and a joule or newton.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />GD, I am assuming the universe recycles and therefor is unchanging. How do you explain a changing universe? ...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The clustering of galaxies is what I would call a changing universe. Once all the clusters merge into one mega cluster, then the universe will be close to the next Big Bang. You are right, the universe does recycle.

Stoat, Einstein derived Lorentz's equation to get E=mc^2. Could you explain to me in words the transformation from one equation to the next?

GD, In a recycling universe you don't need a big bang or any of the silly stuff obtained from modeling. Why do you say clusters are coming together?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />GD, In a recycling universe you don't need a big bang or any of the silly stuff obtained from modeling. Why do you say clusters are coming together?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hi Jim,

Because it has been like this for quite a while:

www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=2476

GD, The article you referenced said more info will be available in a future issue of AJ-do you know if the AJ article has been published and what at what date? According to observers tere are at least 50,000 galatic clusters known to be out there. And they say the cluster in the article will converge in 7by or so-is that right? If so how long after that do you figure the big bang will occur?