Entropy - "again"

[BobRyan]

From the standpoint of the living system on the 3rd planet it is trivial to observe that no appreciable energy is fueling life on earth from outside our solar system.

I had hoped to get passed the easy part.

Bob

 

[Elena]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
[QB] From the standpoint of the living system on the 3rd planet it is trivial to observe that no appreciable energy is fueling life on earth from outside our solar system.

EF The problem is in trying to isolate a single part of the whole (and ignore del S universe). If you want to argue that the bulk of energy fueling life on earth comes from within the solar system, well ok. In your learned scientific opinion then, why would 2lot preclude evolution within our solar system? The whole 2lot argument against evolution is absurd in the highest degree.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Paul --
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.

Ahhh finally we come full circle and are ready to re-read my opening point. The fact that using the gas in our local area of space as the "mean" off of which we must "Account for" the "increase" in order and information (i.e. the "Decrease" in entropy) represented by the distance of human brain and space shuttle forming on the 3rd planet (of the solar system formed by that gas). We need a "net increase" in entropy for the entire system - where the STARTING point is the cold gas of space in this local area of space.

Getting to the net increase means that we MORE than offset the "distance" measured by the gap between the high end (human brain and space shuttle) vs the starting point "mean" of cold gas in space. From there we must find a "Balancing" degree of reduced information or reduced order that in fact MORE than accounts for the devopment of the complex solar system, living planet, humans and space shuttles.

We seem to have come full circle.

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]

 

[NeilUnreal]

The initial energy comes from the gravitational potential in the original cloud, the energy contained with its atoms, and any energy from molecular bonds between these atoms. As the cloud collapses, the solar system forms, etc. this original enery is used to perform work. Performing that work implies an increase in entropy.

If entropy prevented that "random" cloud from creating something like a solar system, it would also prevent it from collapsing into a "random" lump.

-Neil

 

[BobRyan]

equivocating a mass of hydrogen and oxygen with "A complex solar system with a living planet" - is hardly " an argument from entropy".

Bob

 

[ColoradoFB]

Sometimes order is just our human sense of what we think order is. Examples of "order" from disorder in nature . . .

</font>

• Snowflakes</font>
• Crystals (e.g. quartz, sugar, etc.)</font>

Some order is not so orderly upon closer examination. For instance, the orbits of planets around the sun are ellipsis rather than perfect circles. Eight of the planets' orbits are pretty much on the same plane, but do vary. Of course, Pluto/Charon are on a much more elliptical orbit and quite a bit off the plane of the solar system. These observations are consistent with planets coalescing from a rotating cloud of gas, dust & debris. Leftover interplanetary "junk" is further evidence of this, as well as a disorderly system.

Our view of order is largely a human construct. We seek patterns and order from disorder...it is our nature. That is why we see things in the shapes of clouds, why we see a "face" on a mountain of Mars, a man in the moon, and constellations representative of earthly objects.

 

[Paul of Eugene]

BobRyan's challenge:

Getting to the net increase means that we MORE than offset the "distance" measured by the gap between the high end (human brain and space shuttle) vs the starting point "mean" of cold gas in space. From there we must find a "Balancing" degree of reduced information or reduced order that in fact MORE than accounts for the devopment of the complex solar system, living planet, humans and space shuttles.

First let me translate this into a reasonable challenge. We must show where, in the relative lack of entropy we see in the orderly formation of planetary orbits and the development of orgnized life, the corresponding disorder was that must have happened. Where did the extra entropy go? Having properly expressed the question, we reveal the answer. The extra entropy was radiated off into space as infrared radiation. The same process sheds extra entropy from earth to this very day.

It is the expansion of the universe that makes this possible. As the universe expands, it makes more room for entropy. The total entropy always increases, but the average entropy per cubic light year can decrease because more cubic light years are being created as the universe expands.

 

[NeilUnreal]

Kudos, Paul; a succinct and accurate explanation.

-Neil

 

[Helen]

Well, the explanation may work fine for non-Christians, gentlemen, but please consider that in the Christian frame of reference, regardless of the age of anything, it was God who created the first order and organization. It is possible that before sin there may have been a balance between organization and disorganization (if you will permit me to use those terms...) -- and that after sin entropy took over. I don't know. I don't suppose anyone but God does. But we know the CREATION is in BONDAGE to decay now, and that means that entropy reigns.

It was not always so. There was a moment of creation...

 

[NeilUnreal]

(Hmmm, Neil scratches his chin). Helen, I don't necessarily agree that entropy and the theological concept of "in bondage to decay" are related. However, even if I did, it wouldn't prevent me from believing that order can spontaneously arise in one part of a system as a result of some other part of the system gaining entropy. I would believe that order could arise in both fallen and "unfallen" worlds, with the difference being that the fallen world must pay a price in entropy. It happens all the time.

In other words, even if I were a YEC, experience would tell me that order can spontaneously arise from disorder. My only argument would the be with the magnitude.

So I support Bob's right to be incredulous that a collapsing gas cloud can give rise to the order we see. I disagree, and so do most scientists and engineers, but it's his right. I disagree, however that there is no "down" in originally postulated gas cloud which would prevent order from arising.

-Neil

 

[Paul of Eugene]

In my own mind, the bondage to decay does not mean that the law of entropy was any different for Adam in his unfallen state, rather that Adam was able, in his unfallen state, to supercede entropy on demand, for such purposes as preventing his own aging and death; a miracle in our terms. I'm not omnipotent and I look forward to a full explanation when I get to heaven and the conversation turns, finally, in that direction.