I've heard Creationist argue that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics, although I cannot see why it does... So does anyone know what their "arguments" are and what "evidence" they have for it? Because I honestly cannot see the contradiction...
Evolution and the second law of thermodynamics
OK, the argument goes like this.
The 2nd law of thermodynamics says that in a closed system entropy will always tend to increase. One way of rephrasing that is that 'disorder' will tend to increase. Now life, as we know, is actually very ordered - much more ordered than the basic materials it is made up from. Therefore, the argument goes, life is actually acting against the 2nd law of thermodynamics and decreasing entropy.
Now - your job, should you choose to accept it, is to debunk this completely....
The 2nd law of thermodynamics says that in a closed system entropy will always tend to increase. One way of rephrasing that is that 'disorder' will tend to increase. Now life, as we know, is actually very ordered - much more ordered than the basic materials it is made up from. Therefore, the argument goes, life is actually acting against the 2nd law of thermodynamics and decreasing entropy.
Now - your job, should you choose to accept it, is to debunk this completely....
^Disorder can decrease, when it causes energy to be dispersed more efficiently, which is why ordered convection patterns like the ones in a heated pan of oil, the sun, our atmosphere, and hurricanes can form. Life could be seen as something like an extremely complicated energy dispersal pattern.
Yep - but that's not a clinching argument. You mentioned the key word in that first sentence...
^Eh, you could replace 'can' with 'must'. Taking the example of ordered convection currents, those currents will form any time that they would make the dispersal of energy more efficient.
No, the simple refutation is:
2nd law specifies a CLOSED system. To consider life in a closed system you have to include the sun. When you include the sun then the amount of entropy in the closed system increases, not decreases.
2nd law specifies a CLOSED system. To consider life in a closed system you have to include the sun. When you include the sun then the amount of entropy in the closed system increases, not decreases.
| Bikerman wrote: |
| No, the simple refutation is:
2nd law specifies a CLOSED system. To consider life in a closed system you have to include the sun. When you include the sun then the amount of entropy in the closed system increases, not decreases. |
As it always does, but it allows for the formation of complex energy dispersal patterns, such as life, in the process.
| Bikerman wrote: |
| OK, the argument goes like this.
The 2nd law of thermodynamics says that in a closed system entropy will always tend to increase. One way of rephrasing that is that 'disorder' will tend to increase. Now life, as we know, is actually very ordered - much more ordered than the basic materials it is made up from. Therefore, the argument goes, life is actually acting against the 2nd law of thermodynamics and decreasing entropy. Now - your job, should you choose to accept it, is to debunk this completely.... |
It is important to think of the entire system...the entire universe. In order to make a a complex, ordered organism requires a lot of material. To make our billions and billions of cells what did we have to do? Eat, and eat, and eat! You eat other ordered, complex organisms, break down the molecules and reassemble them into the molecules your body needs. What do you also produce? Lots of waste (urine, feces). The amount of order created within your body is a fraction of the order that is destroyed to produce your cells and molecules. In no way does this disprove the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
Hilarity ensues.
Dontcha just love how religious fundamentalists use a very specific school of science to try and convince people that god must be at work here, but then they totally dismiss that same school of science when it contradicts their view of creation?
Cherrypickinsummabitches...
The thing is, there is much about the Universe that we don't know. The more we learn about it, the more of our old theories go down the crapper. Maybe life defies the 2nd law of thermodynamics, or maybe it doesn't, and we just have yet to figure out the details of why. In either case, it's very arrogant to claim that at this point in time we have the answers, one way or the other.
Dontcha just love how religious fundamentalists use a very specific school of science to try and convince people that god must be at work here, but then they totally dismiss that same school of science when it contradicts their view of creation?
Cherrypickinsummabitches...
The thing is, there is much about the Universe that we don't know. The more we learn about it, the more of our old theories go down the crapper. Maybe life defies the 2nd law of thermodynamics, or maybe it doesn't, and we just have yet to figure out the details of why. In either case, it's very arrogant to claim that at this point in time we have the answers, one way or the other.
| Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
| Hilarity ensues.
Dontcha just love how religious fundamentalists use a very specific school of science to try and convince people that god must be at work here, but then they totally dismiss that same school of science when it contradicts their view of creation? Cherrypickinsummabitches... The thing is, there is much about the Universe that we don't know. The more we learn about it, the more of our old theories go down the crapper. Maybe life defies the 2nd law of thermodynamics, or maybe it doesn't, and we just have yet to figure out the details of why. In either case, it's very arrogant to claim that at this point in time we have the answers, one way or the other. |
If you look at the individual chemical reactions that happen in the cell, it's pretty obvious that life follows all the laws of thermodynamics. Those reactions aren't mysterious, and their free-energy changes are well known.
| Solon_Poledourus wrote: |
|
The thing is, there is much about the Universe that we don't know. The more we learn about it, the more of our old theories go down the crapper. Maybe life defies the 2nd law of thermodynamics, or maybe it doesn't, and we just have yet to figure out the details of why. In either case, it's very arrogant to claim that at this point in time we have the answers, one way or the other. |
You don't need any unknown law to explain it. It's really quite simple.
Entropy works towards making order into disorder, BUT it also works at making high concentrations of energy into spread-out diffusions of energy.
IF life, by being more orderly, can speed up the process of diffusing energy, then it will become more complicated until the maximum energy flow is accomplished. Then when the energy flow stops, life will succumb to the order-to-disorder aspect of entropy.
You see the same phenomenon when heating liquid or gas: orderly convection coils spontaneously come into existence, they can do this disorder-to-order trick because they make transferring the heat energy more efficient. Once the energy source (heat) stops, the convection coils will succumb to entropy and disappear.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| You don't need any unknown law to explain it. It's really quite simple. |
I don't disagree. Maybe the progression of complexity that is human life is just following a natural law to speed up the dispersal of energy.
Or maybe there's more to the picture than we understand.
Either way, for someone to use the 2nd law to either prove or disprove the existence of "creation by god" seems a bit far fetched in both cases.
| Solon_Poledourus wrote: | ||
I don't disagree. Maybe the progression of complexity that is human life is just following a natural law to speed up the dispersal of energy. |
Of course it is. Otherwise, it would be impossible.
Related topics
 |