Entropy - "again"

If this is so obvious, then surely you will have no problem explaining what in the world you mean by all of this rambling.

As the molecular cloud collapses the entropy of the universe increases evan as the cloud becomes more organised. The energy from the sun provides an incredible amount of energy that will allow for local decreases in entropy even as the entropy of the universe increases. The is no problem with entropy as far as any of this is concerned. If you believe that there is a problem please show some proof rather than asserting than you must be correct. If you are going to make an incredible claim then at least have a smidgen of evidence.

 

Careful there, Bob. You've almost said that even God couldn't make a gas molecular cloud from which would eventually pop out the space shuttle. God could make a cloud that would, without further manipulation, eventually pop out a man bearing space shuttle, couldn't he? If He wanted to do it?

 

So if a temperature gradient in the Atlantic "organizes itself" into the highly complex storm system called a hurricane, then the entropy of the entire system is increasing?

Nonsense.

 

All right you guys. Get the direction about entropy you are arguing about right.

Entropy is a "positive" measure for chaos, a "negative" measure for order.

So when Hurricans spontaneously form, entropy has increased because there is more disorder involved than in the previous state. The disorder is not just in the hurricane spiral structure; its also in the heat released and radiated to space, of course.

And when life evolves, entropy has increased because there is more disorder involved than in the previous state. The disorder, however, need not be in the living organism. Living creatures habitually shed lots of entropy into the surrounding environment and keep a relatively level amount of entropy within themselves.

 

Bob

I'm just going to have to plead ignorance here. I have no clue what you are trying to say or what you are trying to show. Asking for better information just gets more.. well I'm still not sure what it gets.

Just suffice it to say that you have not shown any step along the way that would violate the 2LOT or cause any kind of entropy problem. Local decreases in entropy are allowed as long as the entropy of the system (the universe) increases. What's the problem?

 

BobRyan,

See what three authors of textbooks think about thermodynamics and evolution. Hint: they think the creationists are all wet. For more details see:

http://www.ntanet.net/Thermo-Internet.htm

Do you want to argue with three experts and tell them they are wrong?

 

>>>>>Alberty simply begs the question by drawing an arbitrary boundary for living systems. HAD he observed that our solar system comprises an isolated system for ALL life on earth - he would be forced to agree with the point he is so desperately trying to dodge.<<<<<<

No, you are mistaken. It is the combination of the earth and solar system having to obey the 2nd law, as a system, that allows evolution to proceed unhindered by thermodynamics, in a small part of that system. The key point is that is the total system that must proceed to greater entropy and not every part of it. Portions of a system are allowed to become more organized, if that is more than offset by other portions producing greater entropy.

Alberty by the way, probably has never before commented on this issue. I think you overestimate his interest in this issue. It does not matter much to him, or to most other authors of thermodynamics text. As far as I know these three have never before commented on the record. But when asked about he gives a truthful answer.

The bottom line is that these three authors of textbooks on thermodynamics know far more than you do about the subject, since it is obvious that you have never taken a course in thermodyanmics.

 

>>>>>Bottom line. Trying to argue your way "against" entropy is hopeless Peter. And there are a very great number of scientists on both sides of the isle that agree with that.<<<<

Again you mistate the facts. Can you give us the names of two authors of thermodynamics texts who view evolution as in conflict with thermodynamics? I mean two authors whose books on the subject are in use in classrooms around the world. The three authors mentioned in the link clearly state that they disagree with your viewpoint. Can you provide any authors of equal distinction, who agree with you?

 

Bob, you just countered your own arguement.

Its the entropy of the system that has to increase. Even if you want to take the solar system as an isolated system, which it is not, local decreases in entropy are allowed as long as the entropy of the whole increases. The decrease in entropy by the process of life is countered by a greater increase in the entropy of the system.

 

BobRyan, earlier:

This is a major mistake. The solar system does NOT comprise an isolated system for the purposes of analyzing entropy. Scads of entropy leave the solar system all the time by means of radiation, both from the sun and as radiation heat loss from the planets.

ALL INTERESTED PARTIES should purchase the current issue of Scientific American. The article there on the "holographic universe" has LOTS to say about entropy, including the sometimes controversial statement that entropy in physics and entropy in shannon communication theory can indeed be equated, when suitable understood. There should be enough seed statements there to engender LOTS of comments and, alas, misunderstandings.

 

Hmmmm. Trying to follow these posts is an exercise in tackling a lot of entropy.

Entropy always increases, that is the 2nd law of thermodynamics, often abbreviated 2LOT for these discussions. Some say that this prohibits evolution because evolution brings increased order over time. But the reasoning is faulty because nothing about the 2LOT prohibits a reduction in entropy in a specific place or object as long as entropy elsewhere is allowed to increase to a greator extent as a consequence. The increase in entropy can be widely seperated from the objects that have reduced entropy, and the second law is not violated. So, in principle, order can come about where order did not exist before. All heat engines work on this principle. Your car moter generates lots of excess entropy in the form of heat that is dissapated and you don't really care, as long as you get the orderly transporation of yourself to the desired location. The bald declaration that 2LOT prohibits the kind of increasing order seen in evolution then is simply a canard, but it rears its head frequently in the debates against evolution.

I think this speaks in opposition to BobRyan's posts, but his writing is not real clear to me.

 

If entropy prohibited local increases in order, reality itself would be unimaginably different and life as we know it would probably be impossible -- evolution or no evolution.

-Neil

 

EF That's incorrect. 2lot applies to the entire Universe. Local decreases in entropy include galaxies and solar systems. However, our sun is losing energy, but the earth gains this energy (albeit temporarily) and can use that energy to create local decreases in entropy. No matter how one views 2lot (local increases or decreases in entropy), it is always the del S[sub]Universe[/sub] that increases. Nothing in 2lot precludes evolution. In fact, such a claim is absurd (even by creationists) because they accept evolution within some ill-defined limit.