QuoteOriginally posted by: ManuLondonIf you take a system isolated from the rest of the world (energy wise),Nice if. But that's not what we're dealing with. In fact, the further apart two obects are separated by space, the greater their energy. You can use local entropy, or isolated entropy to solve certain types of Shannon-type math problems. But it is only to the extent your assumptions are incomplete or invalid, that we have economics. It's kind of like you round up or cut off a repeating decimal to put the physical world in an equation, and the entire properties of the universe evaporate. I think that was part of the point of my original post, that professors who use T accounts to conserve things will never understand why profits are attainable, or why the arbitrage pricing theory is nonsense when you can invent or create any additional asset with any returns characteristics, and destroy any other at any moment. The only constraint is time, but even time allows some movment, or else there wouldn't be any assets to arbitrage between. That misguided fellow what's-his-name who wrote "Open Universe" or whatever it was called, is sadly the best math-oriented people can hope to do in terms of grasping this. When you say "every even number," for example, you are referring to an infinite variety of things. The statement is meaningless, or has to have meaning added when we further specify the finite set of numbers we are talking about. Math can only make statements about closed systems.QuoteOriginally posted by: ManuLondonThe cost I am refering to are not measurable in actual dollar term, however if you measure it in W (Watts, or even J - Joule), then you will find that effectively the planet is actually losing some Watts,I'm not educated in physics. But our brains would be in different states if we learned different things. Therefore, to the extent there are revelations about the state of the surrounding cosmos, which revelations progressively filter the paths of possible future revelations, and to the extent our brains are part of the Earth, the "local order" of the Earth is rising even as redundant oil molecules are cracked. But it is conserved to the extent the cost of transmission of these revelations is paid in the exhaustion of gravity. However, since we have the gravity, somebody must have originally gotten it for free to give it to us. And there is no reason to be certain it will ever stop giving, particularly given the possibility that we are bathed in the descriptive radiation of infinite big bangs, separated by arbitrarily large time intervals. When we send a rover to Mars, we learn more incremental information about the origins of our solar system than we could by spending the same energy on Earth. We make a profit. We can't help but make a profit in an open universe. We were put here by God for this very purpose, and without us the equations would be incomplete.QuoteOriginally posted by: ManuLondonbut one day of the other, there won't be any more oil, and we'll have to find something else to create Watts (this cost actual dollars). So you could probably say that each time you sell a barel of petrol, the cost for the planet is the profit you make of it. This is "Dollars" that the earth is losing.You could have said this a million years ago, or you could say it a million years from now, and there is no proof that the world will ever stop giving, or that more than half of its giving will ever be in the past. We haven't come close to burning up the entire Earth in an e=mc2 reaction, and even thinking in those terms in the timeframe of human existence is ridiculous, and applying that to a specific man-made, man-invented commodity is even more ridiculous. If the universe was collapsing to a point anyway, than how can surfing on that be a cost? You might as well call the passage of time itself a cost, but it's not like we can stop it by driving smaller cars or by not getting out of bed. It is not even clear that a small handful of hippies can slow down the surfing, or that oil used sooner rather than later doesn't somehow increase the net present value of future surfing. I am of the layman's opinion that the universe will never reach that end point, but rather there will always be objects at a distance in space, which any mass or energy can be used to attract and create more heat upon their collision. Now if you could introduce me to a physics professor who could even half understand how economic activites are coordinated, rather than the average idiot like Einstein who advocated "production for use" over "production for profit," I might look into some of his single-vantage-point mumbo jumbo.