Skip to comments.Latest Physics Theories May Help Challenge Evolution
Posted on 03/30/2010 8:53:37 AM PDT by nysuperdoodle
The latest theories on the nature and origin of gravity are generating lots of interest from those looking to unify the various systems (Einsteinian, Newtonian, Quantum, String Theory) of looking at our universe, and bringing to the forefront the importance of the second law of thermodynamics as an organizing principle in our universe. The problem is that the second law of thermodynamics and evolution are pretty much incompatible, as EC explains...
(Excerpt) Read more at evilconservativeonline.com ...
> The problem is that the second law of thermodynamics and > evolution are pretty much incompatible
Let’s see what loophole modern physics can provide for the evolutionist.
How is the flow of heat incompatible with evolution?
No. The second law of thermodynamics and evolution are not in any way incompatible. Evolution is consistent with the 2nd law because energy is being added to the earth’s ecosystem, which allows a locally more complex system such as life to be added because the overall entropy (state of disorder) for the solar system as a whole increases. This particular aspect of science does not by itself refute evolution, but neither does it prove evolution. Evolution is consistent with other scientific theories; the question is whether the theory matches the facts.
Thus, over time the universe should eventually become a homogenius mass of atoms - but that is not what we observe. We see that left on their own, atoms attract each other and form Nublae, stars, planets and moons. This seems to indicate that the universe seems to create order from chaos.
The same thing could be said about 'evolution'. No one would agrue that early reptiles had inferior circluatory systems compared to their modern equivalent. Each generation of sports stars exceeds records established just a few years prior. Go figure.
Not necessarily. I can throw a bunch of watch parts into a pan and heat them on my stove, and the parts won't increase in order merely because the overall entropy of the stovetop is increasing.
For this particular evolutionist argument to work, they need to take into account that the addition of energy to the earth's ecosystem must undergo the application of organisation, which is what life does. However, it is completely inadequate to explain where that organisation came from in the first place. At best, this attempt by evolutionists to get around the thermodynamics problem for evolution does nothing more than simply point out the tautology that already-existing life uses energy to increase and expand its organisation.
No loopholes are required. An open system is different than a closed system.
You can not prove that God created everything because that would negate faith. God requires faith.
I'm not saying that evolution happened, but that you'll never be able to disprove it. Looking for the fingerprints of God is trying to set yourself up as superior to God. Good luck trying to find a fault in His perfect creation.
In order for the universe to have order, it must, by definition, be a non-contained system. Who or what is adding energy (work) to this system to give it order? I see three possibilities: 1 - it just magically happens and we should stop asking questions 2 - the Second Law of Thermodynamics is wrong. 3 - God
Not only is the 2nd law of thermodynamics not incompatible with Darwinian evolution, it’s actually a necessary component.
No entropy = no mutations = no diversity = no natural selection = no Darwinian evolution.
Dumb matter & energy breaking down to simpler forms - Entropy.
Conscious life working in an environment, making decisions to benefit it - Enthalpy.
I always thought that Evolution came from the “Big Boink!”
It’s not yet been proven that speciation exists. This is problematic.
Arguing that things go from lower to higher organisation is contrary to the 2nd Law, unless of course you have something coming in and adding things which isn’t a part of darwinian evolution.
No, the problem is that creationists don't understand thermodynamics.
When solar energy is added to the earth, the sun’s entropy increases (via fusion) by more than the added organization from life on the earth causes entropy on earth to decrease. There is no conflict here. [And, no, I don’t want to get into the mathematical definition of entropy - look it up if you’re curious and skilled with math.]
I thought the word went out long ago to stop using the 2nd Law argument against evolution because it just makes creationists look silly.
Are you submitting that it is impossible for life to have the ability to evolve?
No, it is inconsistent with the second law.
Entrophy is decreased only with a particular type of energy i.e. work. Random energy, in the context of biological evolution, cannot reduce entrophy, it can only increase entrophy.