That's one way to state it. There are many more.
but you are correct, in some cases an 'increase in entropy' can also mean an increase in order
But it didn't cause an increase in in order, as by definition order decreased. We only appreciate a lattice as order, beauty in the eye of the beholder and such.
For it not working at the molecular level, I don't know why. A lot of our regular physical laws don't apply at various microscopic sizes. Quantum physics tries to explain things down there, and Quantum physics makes your brain hurt.
I think you meant 'Entropy does decrease' - not increase. I.e., the material exposed to the sunlight has become more 'complex'
No, it increases. The planets may experience decreases in entropy, but at the cost of vastly increased entropy in the Sun. The overall effect must be an increase in entropy in the system.
Sure, sunlight evaporates water. It condenses into clouds, and then recirculates as rain... I don't see the decrease in entropy in this system
Think of the hydrological cycle as a machine for moving water around. The 2nd Law states no machine can be 100% efficient, there must be some loss of heat, an increase in entropy. But the Sun provides so much heat that doesn't really matter.
I don't understand this point...
The 2nd Law is a bunch of equations used by engineers and physicists to get their jobs done. Those are the correct definitions of the 2nd Law for their application. What we say in English is just a loose translation of what the equations accomplish. I know such translations aren't really correct because I've been with mathematicians talking together and it all goes right over my head. When I ask, I can see the gears shifting as they try to slow down and translate it to dummy so I can understand (and I'm pretty good at math), but I can't completely understand because I don't know the math at that level.
If you value your sanity and don't like Tylenol, stay away from math PhDs and quantum physicists.
OK - you got me on that one. Entropy decreased -- but I said that the 'order increased'. You're right, 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder'.
Yeah, I'm definitely laying off the Quantum stuff. I actually enjoyed the two courses I took on Quantum Mechanics -- but that was an eon ago (the equivalence of 'billions and billions of years' as far as my gray matter is concerned), and it would definitely make my brain hurt. But with respect to simple chemical reactions - e.g., the formation of the chemical bond between two amino acids requires energy - I have to believe that the 2nd Law still works. That is, 'nature' would have a tendency to 'pop' the bonds (and release the energy), rather than absorb energy to build more bonds .... But if your reference was to sub-atomic particle reactions... I would not be surprised if the 2nd Law didn't apply (just the general law of weirdness and probabilities)...
No, it increases...
Got it
...If you value your sanity and don't like Tylenol, stay away from math PhDs and quantum physicists.
Hah! I can't disagree with you on that point.
Nonetheless, we have to express these equations and processes in words - lest they become no more useful than 'Suduko' puzzles. Mentally stimulating, but pretty useless...You are obviously no dummy, so if your math PhD friends can't explain what these equations/processes mean in English, I'd begin to think that they've crossed the other side into 'useless theory' land (Maybe I'm 'poisoned' because I've spent the last 30 years working in 'High Tech' engineering and if someone can't translate their theory into words they get a public stoning ... In retrospect, I probably should've switched my major to quantum physics)