Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Latest Physics Theories May Help Challenge Evolution
ECR/Technology Review ^ | 30 Mar 10 | EC

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 ...


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: evolution; physics; quantum; thermodynamics
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last
To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

What I reject is the false choice you present. Chance in which genes combine does NOT make a random system and does NOT make random mutation. Every single time a creationist throws the “random mutation” phrase out there they lie.


41 posted on 03/30/2010 10:31:22 AM PDT by discostu (wanted: brick, must be thick and well kept)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Tao Yin

Either the Bible is True or it isn’t.

All of it.

It takes Faith to believe that.

It also takes Faith to believe in the ever changing arcturian landscape of evolutionary fairy tales.

They weren’t there.

God was.

And I believe He had it written just as He intended in Genesis.

Why do we have 7 days in a week?

Why do you wear clothes?

Genesis.


42 posted on 03/30/2010 10:41:04 AM PDT by Westbrook (Having more children does not divide your love, it multiplies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
“The article refers to “work” energy. Not “heat” energy.” Ahhh, since when was there a difference?

You caught that. You know your physics.

However in the authors context he means directed useful mechanical energy not random energy dissipated as useless (heat). On a macro scale he makes sense.

Work = Force x mass x acceleration x distance. But work's byproducts are wasted energy, thru friction etc.

43 posted on 03/30/2010 10:43:42 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin "the Thrilla from Wasilla")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj
But suggesting that we don't ever see signs of order arising from chaotic situations is equally fatuous. Take a look at a snowflake sometime.

You are correct. The organizing (directing factors) in the case of the snowflake are the physical laws. In the case of biological organisn it's the DNA. (specified information).

44 posted on 03/30/2010 10:48:57 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin "the Thrilla from Wasilla")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: discostu
Chance in which genes combine does NOT make a random system.

Im not saying that. I am saying neoDarwinism theory posits genetic random mutation followed by natural selection as the pathway of evolution.

Sort of like the word "pwned" randomly muted from the word owned and survived as a useful word on internet blogs.

45 posted on 03/30/2010 11:13:29 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin "the Thrilla from Wasilla")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

Which neoDarwimism? The 115 year old post dated and largely forgotten stage of evolutionary theory? Of the Creationist version that has a bunch of strawman fake theories that aren’t actually part of evolutionary theory?

There was nothing random about pwned, it’s no more random than any other part of l33t, and no more useful.


46 posted on 03/30/2010 11:18:52 AM PDT by discostu (wanted: brick, must be thick and well kept)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: discostu

google it.


47 posted on 03/30/2010 11:32:50 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin "the Thrilla from Wasilla")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

Ahh, almost.

“Work = Force x mass x acceleration x distance”

Let’s see

F = MA (Force = mass X acceleration)
w = FD (Work = force x distance [over which the force is applied]

so w = MAD (mass X acceleration X distance). Since MA is “force” you don’t need to have it again.

Now energy:

E = 1/2MV^2 (Energy [kenetic] = 1/2 mass X velocity squared)

A force applied to a mass accelerates it. Its velocity times the mass divided by 2 (because the final velocity is the average of initial velocity and final velocity) will equal the work done to produce that acceleration. In other words, kinetic enegy of a moving body equals the work done to produce the velocity of that body.

So work and energy are different ways of looking at the same energy, right?

Hank


48 posted on 03/30/2010 11:43:54 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
So work and energy are different ways of looking at the same energy, right?

all types of energy can be expressed in the same energy unit thru conversion factors. they are equivalent but not the same.

49 posted on 03/30/2010 12:25:40 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin "the Thrilla from Wasilla")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
Second Law of Thermodaynamics: In any system, entropy (chaos) is always increasing, and any decrease of entropy (chaos) inside a system requires work (intelligence) to be added to the system.

First of all, the stuff inside the parenthesis isn't part of the second law of thermodynamics. And while work is mentioned specifically, by definition entropy is about heat flow. Which brings me back to my original question, what does heat flow have to do with evolution?

50 posted on 03/30/2010 12:38:44 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

There’s nothing to google. Every time a creationist mentions neodarwinism they’re erecting a strawman using things that at best haven’t been part of the evolutionary theory for 50 years, and often never were.


51 posted on 03/30/2010 12:45:29 PM PDT by discostu (wanted: brick, must be thick and well kept)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan; discostu; nysuperdoodle
The "Creationists" I've talked to understand that neo Darwinism envolves both randomness (chance) and an organizing principle. (i.e.natural selection).

Evolutionary theory most importantly is based on physics and chemistry, which Creationists always neglect to mention, but they mention randomness so often it would make a parrot hoarse.

And why they have an issue with randomness I don't know. It's all over God's creation, and we're all the result of a random combination of our parents traits, which seems to be noncontroversial.

52 posted on 03/30/2010 12:50:35 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: nysuperdoodle
PRESENTING, old used up arguments so stupid and even OTHER creationists warn you against using them lest you look like a fool.

According to the same idiotic criteria, LIFE ITSELF defies the second law of thermodynamics. Of course it doesn't, as there is a constant influx of energy from the Sun; and neither does evolution, for exactly the same reasons.

53 posted on 03/30/2010 12:54:55 PM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed. So how could it be re-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
Prov 16:33 The dice are cast into the lap, but every result is from the Lord.

Yes, creationists who make a big stink about randomness apparently know as little about the Bible as they do about science.

54 posted on 03/30/2010 12:57:19 PM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed. So how could it be re-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62

I know exactly why they love randomness, because so few things are truly random (and really the more we know about sub atomic particles and how they interact it’s starting to seem likely that absolutely nothing is random) and the word has a connotation things happening without impetus (”just a random occurrence”) that once you manage to stick the label on anything complex people won’t believe it. So they try to get people to think that evolutionary theory says humans “randomly” came into being and therefore evolutionary theory is unbelievable. They carefully ignore the very much not random arms race that is survival of the fittest and performs the meat of the evolutionary process.


55 posted on 03/30/2010 12:58:47 PM PDT by discostu (wanted: brick, must be thick and well kept)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
And while work is mentioned specifically, by definition entropy is about heat flow.

Your understanding of entrophy is narrow. Entrophy and the second law has a much broader meaning than the narrow mechanical usage of mere energy flow.

56 posted on 03/30/2010 1:06:51 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin "the Thrilla from Wasilla")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: discostu

google neo darwinism


57 posted on 03/30/2010 1:08:07 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin "the Thrilla from Wasilla")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62
And why they have an issue with randomness I don't know.

Randomness is a theological/philosophical issue. Its associated with the concept of predestination.

58 posted on 03/30/2010 1:14:43 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin "the Thrilla from Wasilla")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
Your understanding of entrophy is narrow. Entrophy and the second law has a much broader meaning than the narrow mechanical usage of mere energy flow.

The definition of entropy in thermodynamics is precise. If you want to use some other meaning, then don't call it thermodynamics.

59 posted on 03/30/2010 1:16:43 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
Randomness is a theological/philosophical issue. Its associated with the concept of predestination.

If you want to use it within that context, fine, but don't expect to get away with it when you're attacking science.

60 posted on 03/30/2010 1:18:14 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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