Thermodynamics

[axeplayer]

Forgive me again if this has already been addressed, but I just wanted to bring to the attention of the evolutionists and everyone else that evolution breaks not one but two laws of thermodynamics. The first law is the conservation of energy. It basically says that energy/mass cannot be created or destroyed. So, the big bang is impossible, which proves Genesis to be correct, and then it dismantles the entire farce of evolution. The second law of thermodynamics is entropy. Entropy basically says that all things move toward disorder and chaos. Evolution starts chaotic, or disorderly if you dont like chaotic, and eventually becomes more orderly/complex. As said by Sir Arthur Eddington, in reference to the theory of evolution, "If your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics [entropy] I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation."

[Gollum]

The technical term for your statements is CRAP!

Who says that the big bang created or destroyed matter or energy? Certainly not evolutionists! And even if it did, how does that leave the mythology of Genesis (several impossible things before lunch!) in command of the field?

The second law says that total enthropy increases in a closed system. With energy arriving at and departing from the earth constantly, it is definitely not a closed system. If your theory were in fact the case then life itself, regardless of origin, could not exist because living things impose order upon disorder. You are alive (though possibly not sentient) aren't you?

[Nyril]

The technical term for your statements is CRAP!

Although I disapprove of the language, Gollum is absolutely 100% correct. In these kinds of debates, it is expected that the other party will at the very least learn the other sides position, and I'm doubtful at this point you've even read more then a few pages of creationist literature.

Even Answers in Gensis, an organization bent on proving the 6000 year old Earth and the truth of the bible has asked creationists to stop using that argument.

TO however, has the best argument I've seen on it.

The second law of thermodynamics says no such thing. It says that heat will not spontaneously flow from a colder body to a warmer one or, equivalently, that total entropy (a measure of useful energy) in a closed system will not decrease. This does not prevent increasing order because


the earth is not a closed system; sunlight (with low entropy) shines on it and heat (with higher entropy) radiates off. This flow of energy, and the change in entropy that accompanies it, can and will power local decreases in entropy on earth.
entropy is not the same as disorder. Sometimes the two correspond, but sometimes order increases as entropy increases. (Aranda-Espinoza et al. 1999; Kestenbaum 1998) Entropy can even be used to produce order, such as in the sorting of molecules by size (Han and Craighead 2000).
even in a closed system, pockets of lower entropy can form if they are offset by increased entropy elsewhere in the system.
In short, order from disorder happens on earth all the time.


The only processes necessary for evolution to occur are reproduction, heritable variation, and selection. All of these are seen to happen all the time, so, obviously, no physical laws are preventing them. In fact, connections between evolution and entropy have been studied in depth, and never to the detriment of evolution (Demetrius 2000).

Several scientists have proposed that evolution and the origin of life is driven by entropy (McShea 1998). Some see the information content of organisms subject to diversification according to the second law (Brooks and Wiley 1988), so organisms diversify to fill empty niches much as a gas expands to fill an empty container. Others propose that highly ordered complex systems emerge and evolve to dissipate energy (and increase overall entropy) more efficiently (Schneider and Kay 1994).

[axeplayer]

The technical term for your statements is CRAP!

Who says that the big bang created or destroyed matter or energy? Certainly not evolutionists! And even if it did, how does that leave the mythology of Genesis (several impossible things before lunch!) in command of the field?

The second law says that total enthropy increases in a closed system. With energy arriving at and departing from the earth constantly, it is definitely not a closed system. If your theory were in fact the case then life itself, regardless of origin, could not exist because living things impose order upon disorder. You are alive (though possibly not sentient) aren't you?

Anyone who claims that the "big bang" didnt create energy or matter is lying. Where did the matter come from if it wasnt created? Has it always been around? If it has always been around, it would have undergone heat death from loss of energy. It had to have been created from nothing for the big bang to have any ground whatsoever.

Also, your claim that entropy only happens in a closed system is bogus.
The sun's rays never produce an upswing in complexity without teleonomy. In other words, energy from the sun does not produce an orderly structure of growth and development without information and an engine. If the sun beats down on a dead plant, it does not produce growth, but rather speeds up decay. If, on the other hand, the sun beats down on a living plant, it produces a temporary increase in complexity and growth. So, the second law of thermodynamics deos not allow evolution to take place.

[ST88]

Anyone who claims that the "big bang" didnt create energy or matter is lying. Where did the matter come from if it wasnt created? Has it always been around? If it has always been around, it would have undergone heat death from loss of energy. It had to have been created from nothing for the big bang to have any ground whatsoever.

This is the wrong way of thinking about it. At the moment before the Big Bang and even a very short while afterwards, there were no physical laws as we know them. In essence, there was no time, no space, no thermodynamics, nothing. As a logical exercise, we can say that if there were no laws, then there were no laws that could be violated.

But there is another problem with your statement. One common misconception about the Big Bang is that the theory requires that all of this matter arose from nothing. This is not true. There are myriad pre-Big Bang models ranging from super strings to hyperinflation to a previous universe collapsing in on itself. There are also alternative theories to the Big Bang that explain current observations, and I'm sure there will be other theories cropping up from time to time.

The main point here, though, is that no one is metaphysically wedded to any particular version of Big Bang theory (aside from fellowships, I suppose), and if future observations suggest a different theory, that one will become more acceptable. If Big Bang theory is ever proved false -- and there are several potential conditions under which it might be proved false -- this does not automatically mean that the God model is correct.

Also, your claim that entropy only happens in a closed system is bogus.
The sun's rays never produce an upswing in complexity without teleonomy. In other words, energy from the sun does not produce an orderly structure of growth and development without information and an engine. If the sun beats down on a dead plant, it does not produce growth, but rather speeds up decay. If, on the other hand, the sun beats down on a living plant, it produces a temporary increase in complexity and growth. So, the second law of thermodynamics deos not allow evolution to take place.

I don't see what this has to do with the second law of thermodynamics, or with evolution for that matter. I think you are applying both principles incorrectly. Nyril referenced the Creationist retraction from Second Law violations. This is because evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics -- not even in principle. Plain and simlple.

[tbpckisa]

Entropy basically says that all things move toward disorder and chaos

The net entropy does increase in a closed system, but it does not increases ubiquitously.
A better definition would be the amount of usable energy for work decreases in a closed system. Some people misinterpret the meaning of increasing disorder. They try to apply it where it is not applicable. I wonder who that might be?

heat death from loss of energy

Heat death is not from loss of energy, its from entropy increasing to its maximum. A closed system can't lose energy anyways.

Also, your claim that entropy only happens in a closed system is bogus

Entropy increases do happen all the time. Entropy is only guaranteed to never decrease in a closed system. The earth is not a closed system. So your application of the 2nd law of thermodynamics to biological evolution on earth, is bogus. If the earth were a closed system no life would ever be able to sustain itself. The earth would suffer a heat death.

The entropy argument is an obviously horrible argument. It seems like most creationist don't even back it anymore.
You should check out the other thread on thermodynamics that is a little ways down on CvE.

[otseng]

You should check out the other thread on thermodynamics that is a little ways down on CvE.

The existing thread on thermo is at second law of thermodynamics (its an easy one) .

Continue discussions in the above thread and I'll be closing this thread.