Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
The part that insists that specified complexity can derive from random chaos unguided by a priori information.

Where does it state that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics infers that "specified complexity" cannot arise? I am not aware of any physics text or resource that says this is what the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states.

If the entropy of a system does not decrease more than the entropy of the system's environment increases, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is not violated. Period. If the bricks organized in your diagram are offset by a greater increase in entropy in the environment, the 2nd Law is not violated. Any amount of organization can be achieved in a system, as long as the overall entropy, including the entropy of the evironment, without violating the 2nd Law.

You've demonstrated that life requires organization (i.e. a decrease in 'entropy'). No one disagrees with this. Now, what process (or processes) required by evolution requires a decrease in entropy of a living system (or systems) that cannot be offset by a greater increase in the entropy of the environment? If no such process exists, then the 2nd Law isn't violated.

I haven't seen anyone refer to such a process in specific terms. That's what is necessary to show that the 2nd Law is violated. Where does the 2nd Law cause a violation? Where's the net 'information increase', when the environment of the organism is included as part of the system? This can't be ignored when thermodynamics is considered.

A lot of people make blanket statements about thermodynamics and evolution. I'm waiting for someone to show how biological evolution requires a net decrease of the system of organisms plus the environment?

Are you sure the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics can be applied in this manner? Maybe the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics has nothing to do with this, and you're talking about some other law of science. If so, that's okay, but it's not the 2nd Law, and maybe you should refer to a different limiting law instead.

309 posted on 07/15/2007 10:34:42 AM PDT by ok_now ((Huh?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies ]


To: ok_now
the bricks organized in your diagram are offset by a greater increase in entropy in the environment, the 2nd Law is not violated. Any amount of organization can be achieved in a system, as long as the overall entropy, including the entropy of the evironment, without violating the 2nd Law.

They can't be offset in a closed system. The bricks need specific guided information and energy to be ordered into a neat stack. When it occurs without guided energy (i.e. work) total entropy decreases and therfore the the second law is violated.

The second law mandates that the system must go, on average, to higher states of entropy or remain in equilibrium (i.e. max entropy) sans an outside influence.

In an open system, on the other hand, a worker can come in and place the bricks in a neat stack. Information and energy are brought in from the outside. And the second law is not violated. But for a neat stack to occur randomly is impossible.

Those who argue that the second law is not violated usually use the excuse that it's because the earth is an open localized system. But they ignore the importance of information which guides energy. And although the earth is indeed an open system (at least in a local temporal sense) the universe is not.

359 posted on 07/15/2007 12:19:50 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (NY Times: "fake but accurate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson