second law of thermodynamics (its an easy one)

[gf]

Hello.

I spoke to a Creationist, whom stated that the second law of thermodynamics, goes against Evolution. As the Universe decays.


Now, it dawned on me, that this is not a rare event, as most Creationist proclaim this, not at least, a certain Mr Kent Hovind. So i thought we could have a discussion about this.


The second law of thermodynamics does not claim that everything is "winding down" / decays / crumbles / or similar. What it does state is that you get entropy, and it seems that this is where we get a problem. Either most people do not know what this means, or they dont want to know what it means.

To claim that entropy equals decay, is to go from Physics to Opinion.


And this is the important part of it.
The second law of thermodynamics only states, that entropy occurs in different stages.


And this is it. If you claim, state or otherwise say in any way that it "decays", or "improves", you go from Physics, to your own opinion.



So it does not go against Evolution, it rather enhances evolution, as Evolution also, does not mean improve, but means change.



Opinion anyone ?

Perhaps you need some background information about this, but this is more or less the main thing that most Creationist seems to be confused about.

[G-dspeed]

I would agree with both Osteng and Fisher. I don't know why people think a well founded principle of physics plays no part in supporting or debunking various origins ideas and notions in some way shape or form. As has already been stated the reason the second law of thermodynamics is stated in a case against evolution is because it leads to entropy and entropy in turn leads to a finite existence of the physical universe. AND because raw energy (wether in a closed system or not, its irrelevant), as observed today, leads to disorder rather than order. The only exception to this IS a system like a plant or something which has pre built in a mechanism for capturing, converting, storing energy from and in raw form into something useable. The key word of course being USEABLE for whatever its told to do by its DNA. That in turn is subject to entropy which is presented to us in 2nd thermodynamics law.

Yes I know I didn't say anything new, I just wanted to back a few people up was my intention. Also I am not one of those high school kid creationist who blurts out laws of thermodynamics because its popular to say against evolution. On the contrary, thermodynamics become more real to me and more whats the word...I cant think of the word. Well more practical I guess you can say, since in my experiments in electrophysics, they are revealed to me in a personal light.

by the way, I too acknowledge that evolution is change, but horizontal rather than vertical improvement from one species to another I am a firm believer in de-evolution as a sad but true principle at work in life. De-evolution as in the systematic loss of information over time.

[ShadowRishi]

Being the well versed member on the subjects we've been talking about, maybe you could clearly explain how you have refuted an argument that you have claimed not to understand.

I did. Last page, Fish. Quote (which you've proven you're quite good at) mining my conclusions and skipping my supports does not make your argument true or valid.

The burden of proof is on you to refute me and Jose's counter arguments to your theories.

The entire idea is moronic.

So the whole argument, in my personal opinion... Is crap

you either take a science course on thermodynamics, organic chemistry, and evolution, or you should seriously consider realizing that this is a very in-depth topic that makes not good arm-chair philosophy.

Like these?
I'm still waiting for an argument to respond to. All I have heard so far is are a few definitions, a few ad homs, and what someone thinks of junior high science education.

If you feel we do not understand the core of your argument, then the burden of proof is on you to lay out your argument in an understandable format.

Again, I love how you totally skipped the relevant parts in between. Maybe you didn't understand any of it? Either way, if I were you I'd go back over those sections.

Do you or do you not understand:

If the system does not have:

"1. a “program” (information) to direct the growth in organized complexity

2. a mechanism for storing and converting the incoming energy."
I would argue that the 2nd Law would prohibit self organization.

Do you, or do you not, understand that the Second Law says:

"All the thermal energy of a system cannot be completely converted to mechanical energy" =/= "All systems tend towards decay"

I'll give you some help:

DNA =/= thermal energy
Earth =/= a closed system

I would agree with both Osteng and Fisher. I don't know why people think a well founded principle of physics plays no part in supporting or debunking various origins ideas and notions in some way shape or form.

Because one law applies to one part of the universe, another law applies to another part of the universe.

If the law was, you know, valid towards the things we're talking about, then we actually would have something to debate.

Essentially, some one used an incorrect definition of the law (All things tend towards disorder) and then applied it to physical systems (It was only meant to describe thermal energy) because they used an incorrect definition.



To Fish:

I am only repeating this once more for you, Fish:

The Second Law of Thermodynamics ONLY applies to thermal energy


It does not apply to matter. To organisms. To crack cocaine. It applies to thermal energy, and ONLY thermal energy.



This is why I tell you you need to take science courses. If you knew the law, it's implications, and it's uses, you would never have made this blunder.

[G-dspeed]

I thought the thermodynamic laws were universal and could be found any where in the universe, perhaps that is my assumption but could you provide a place in the universe where they are different or altogether discarded? (question directed at shadow btw) (also directed at shadow,) I was thinking about what you had said regarding cocaine and that reminded me of something. All matter has an energy potential from its elemental make up (wether we can tap into it or not is not the point) and so technically the ol saying is true that everything is made from matter and ENERGY. This being said it is also true that the 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to well... thermodynamics lol aka heat. However; it is ALSO true that all energy can transform or change states into a heat energy. This is a concept ive not only study about for years in school and various other places, but have observed in arc weilding. In which you start with an electrical input of 120v 60ac input stepped up into thousands of volts and changing of frequencies and various other changes to not only produce heat for weilding but also produces light, sound, and all sorts of other energy outputs. Bassically speaking you choose to start at a certain rung or step on a ladder to begin with for whatever work you are during in the case of arc weilding its a 120v ac starting point. and through the course of work the useable energy is well...put simply, used up. As it changes into different forms which are no longer congruent to do that paticular work. the result is loss which = entropy FOR THAT TASK or work. Now it can be said then that every form of work has its own unique point at which energy loss = entropy and that its not all the same. But its true that all work does experince entropy. Just not at the same level as other work. So you choose to start at a certain step on the ladder and end up going down hill from there overall.
Back to cocaine, ummm the systems which we could say have "energy at rest" such as cocaine or a rock or whatever, are constantly bombarded by raw energy from all sorts of sources which over time has a negative effect on the item. thats why nails rust, and why colors fade when present in the sun and things go down hill and break.

[ShadowRishi]

I thought the thermodynamic laws were universal and could be found any where in the universe, perhaps that is my assumption but could you provide a place in the universe where they are different or altogether discarded?

The thermodynamic laws are universal (As far as we know), however:

An organism is not thermal energy. Yes, it has thermal energy, but it is not thermal energy.

All systems, if left to themselves, break down because of the entropy. (Their heat energy converts to heat to work, more heat to work, until the only thing left is unusable heat energy. That's why a system decays as far as it's thermal-work energy goes.

The things in the system, however, do not decay. My bonds to not magically break, the compounds do not turn back into atoms... In essence, the longer something is around; it tends to get more complex. The thermal energy (if left alone) will eventually deplete and the system will become incapable of work.

The Earth is not left alone; the sun beats down rays of radioactive energy constantly, which plants pick up. But not merely plants, but everything else. It keeps the planet warm, allows for chemical bonds, releases chemical bonds, melts ice, and other such systems on Earth.

(question directed at shadow btw) (also directed at shadow,) I was thinking about what you had said regarding cocaine and that reminded me of something. All matter has an energy potential from its elemental make up (wether we can tap into it or not is not the point) and so technically the ol saying is true that everything is made from matter and ENERGY. This being said it is also true that the 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to well... thermodynamics lol aka heat. However; it is ALSO true that all energy can transform or change states into a heat energy. This is a concept ive not only study about for years in school and various other places, but have observed in arc weilding. In which you start with an electrical input of 120v 60ac input stepped up into thousands of volts and changing of frequencies and various other changes to not only produce heat for weilding but also produces light, sound, and all sorts of other energy outputs. Bassically speaking you choose to start at a certain rung or step on a ladder to begin with for whatever work you are during in the case of arc weilding its a 120v ac starting point. and through the course of work the useable energy is well...put simply, used up. As it changes into different forms which are no longer congruent to do that paticular work. the result is loss which = entropy FOR THAT TASK or work. Now it can be said then that every form of work has its own unique point at which energy loss = entropy and that its not all the same. But its true that all work does experince entropy. Just not at the same level as other work. So you choose to start at a certain step on the ladder and end up going down hill from there overall.
Back to cocaine, ummm the systems which we could say have "energy at rest" such as cocaine or a rock or whatever, are constantly bombarded by raw energy from all sorts of sources which over time has a negative effect on the item. thats why nails rust, and why colors fade when present in the sun and things go down hill and break.

The Energy-Mass Relations are irrelevant in this case. The 2nd law only applies to thermal energy. The rest of this was explained above.

[Fisherking]

The Second Law of Thermodynamics ONLY applies to thermal energy
It does not apply to .. organisms....It applies to thermal energy, and ONLY thermal energy.

Now we are getting somewhere! Lets talk about the thermal energy organisms use. What do organisms have that allows them to utilize this energy in order to perform work? What do organisms have that gives them the ability to store and convert raw energy into something useful for itself?

[ShadowRishi]

The Second Law of Thermodynamics ONLY applies to thermal energy
It does not apply to .. organisms....It applies to thermal energy, and ONLY thermal energy.

Now we are getting somewhere! Lets talk about the thermal energy organisms use. What do organisms have that allows them to utilize this energy in order to perform work? What do organisms have that gives them the ability to store and convert raw energy into something useful for itself?

No, we're getting no where.


Organisms get their energy from the bonds they break in hydrocarbons during the metabolic processes. The energy comes from, in a nut shell, chemical bonds building or breaking. This has nothing to do with the Second Law, however.

[Fisherking]

All systems, if left to themselves, break down because of the entropy.

The things in the system, however, do not decay.

In essence, the longer something is around; it tends to get more complex.

Could you please clarify?

The Earth is not left alone; the sun beats down rays of radioactive energy constantly, which plants pick up. But not merely plants, but everything else. It keeps the planet warm, allows for chemical bonds, releases chemical bonds, melts ice, and other such systems on Earth.

Do you notice anything different going on in plants compared to ice or a rock?

[Fisherking]

The Second Law of Thermodynamics ONLY applies to thermal energy
It does not apply to .. organisms....It applies to thermal energy, and ONLY thermal energy.

Now we are getting somewhere! Lets talk about the thermal energy organisms use. What do organisms have that allows them to utilize this energy in order to perform work? What do organisms have that gives them the ability to store and convert raw energy into something useful for itself?

No, we're getting no where.


Organisms get their energy from the bonds they break in hydrocarbons during the metabolic processes.

What do organisms have that allows them to break these bonds?

The energy comes from, in a nut shell, chemical bonds building or breaking. This has nothing to do with the Second Law, however.

So the second law has nothing to do with energy being released from chemical bonds building or breaking?

[ShadowRishi]

All systems, if left to themselves, break down because of the entropy.

The things in the system, however, do not decay.

In essence, the longer something is around; it tends to get more complex.

Could you please clarify?

If I have a system, on it's own, and I leave it on its own, eventually you won't be able to get any work from it. In that sense, it 'decays.'

If I have a system, like the Earth, which is not on it's own, because it gets thermal energy from the sun, it will still be able to do work until the Sun quites giving it energy.

If you want to get into more complicated physics terms, I could say that if you have zero power, the system decays, but if you have a positive power, it'll increase.

you notice anything different going on in plants compared to ice or a rock?

Yeah, it's growing, reproducing, and absorbing materials/photons. Point?

[ShadowRishi]

What do organisms have that allows them to break these bonds?

A. Get heat from the sun.
B. Meet another chemical that it can react with.

[quote="Fish]So the second law has nothing to do with energy being released from chemical bonds building or breaking?

Not in the least.


The energy created from the chemical bonds doesn't come from the thermal energy of the Earth, but from the energy given by the Sun. Therefore, any energy given from the sun is what we use, what many chemical reactions used to create life, and et cetera.



Look at it like this:

Earth == materials
Sun == power/energy source

The Second Law doesn't matter, because the energy isn't coming from the Earth (Which would stand alone decay), but the sun. Sun creates power, power causes the system to not decay.