quote:

The Second Law of Thermodynamics allows for a local decrease in entropy, provided there is an equal or greater increase in entropy elsewhere.

When you consider the builder and the sand, the net result of the building of a sand castle is an increase in entropy. As essentialsaltes said, evolution does not require a suspension of any of the Laws of Thermodynamics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Yes, and if you kick over a sand castle, it becomes less ordered.
And if a raindrop freezes into a snowflake, it becomes more ordered.
And if a snowflake melts into a raindrop, it becomes less ordered.

So we have established that the entropy of a non-isolated system can either increase or decrease.

Thus, getting back a bit closer to the OP, evolution does not require a suspension of this 'law' of entropy.

Not so fast there hoss.

A snowflake's crystalline structure may be the product of a localized decrease in entorpy, but a sandcastle is not - it's the product of the application of intelligence utlizing machinery to do work. The question ID asks of course, is whether there a difference in terms of the sorts of structures that result from either situation. What we need to know is, with all the energy continually being applied to beaches around the world, why don't sandcastles regularly arise as is the case wiuth snowflakes?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Yes, and if you kick over a sand castle, it becomes less ordered.
And if a raindrop freezes into a snowflake, it becomes more ordered.
And if a snowflake melts into a raindrop, it becomes less ordered.

So we have established that the entropy of a non-isolated system can either increase or decrease.

Thus, getting back a bit closer to the OP, evolution does not require a suspension of this 'law' of entropy.

Not so fast there hoss.

A snowflake's crystalline structure may be the product of a localized decrease in entorpy, but a sandcastle is not

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

The Second Law of Thermodynamics allows for a local decrease in entropy, provided there is an equal or greater increase in entropy elsewhere.

When you consider the builder and the sand, the net result of the building of a sand castle is an increase in entropy. As essentialsaltes said, evolution does not require a suspension of any of the Laws of Thermodynamics.

Tat may be the 'net result', but that is not an explanation for how sandcastles arise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

The Second Law of Thermodynamics allows for a local decrease in entropy, provided there is an equal or greater increase in entropy elsewhere.

When you consider the builder and the sand, the net result of the building of a sand castle is an increase in entropy. As essentialsaltes said, evolution does not require a suspension of any of the Laws of Thermodynamics.

Tat may be the 'net result', but that is not an explanation for how sandcastles arise.

quote:

Snowflake formation is not a decrease in entropy. It is an increase. Heat is transfered from the water vapor. Whenever heat is transfered, entropy increases.

Entropy is not strictly the same as disorder.

quote:

That's fine. All we're establishing is that neither snowflakes nor evolution contradict the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

quote:

You take a bucket and fill it with wet sand, then you turn the bucket upside down on the beach. Drizzle some wet sand to make towers. Use a stick or piece of shell to make designs.

Hope that explains it.

quote:

How sandcastles arise has nothing to do with the laws of thermodynamics.

quote:

When you consider the builder and the sand, the net result of the building of a sand castle is an increase in entropy. As essentialsaltes said, evolution does not require a suspension of any of the Laws of Thermodynamics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

You take a bucket and fill it with wet sand, then you turn the bucket upside down on the beach. Drizzle some wet sand to make towers. Use a stick or piece of shell to make designs.

Hope that explains it.

Sure it does - of course I said it to begin with in Post 16.

quote:

How sandcastles arise has nothing to do with the laws of thermodynamics.

Funny - you were the one who first contended it did:

quote:

When you consider the builder and the sand, the net result of the building of a sand castle is an increase in entropy. As essentialsaltes said, evolution does not require a suspension of any of the Laws of Thermodynamics.

You need to make up your mind here, you are debating with yourself again.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

That's fine. All we're establishing is that neither snowflakes nor evolution contradict the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

Well, if they were thought to be the same sort of process, you might have a point.

quote:

How they arise has nothing to do with thermodynamics. No matter how they arise, there is an increase in entropy.

quote:

Thermodynamics may not be a fruitful way to treat evolution, but it is drmark who insists on doing so. Insofar as these processes are thermodynamic processes, they are closely analogous, and neither contradicts the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

quote:

Take a person, some sand and water, and put them in a closed system. A box for instance. It will be dark in there, so you can give him a flashlight too I guess. Now he starts building a sandcastle. You can see the entropy inside the box as all the energy that can no longer be used, since you will need more energy to convert it to usable energy. For instance, the person in the box is using up the oxygen, creating CO2. He does this so that he can release energy, which he then uses to build the sandcastle. Once this is done, some of it will be in the form of CO2 floating around, and some as heat. The grains stacked on top of each other will have more potential energy as well.

The amount of energy that is made unavailable by the system (sancastle builder) is the entropy. Can you see that the heat energy, potential energy in the sand, and the heated up air inside the box can no longer be used by the system?

That is all the second law of thermodynamics is talking about. In a closed system, the total amount of energy that is no longer available to the system can only increase.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Thermodynamics may not be a fruitful way to treat evolution, but it is drmark who insists on doing so. Insofar as these processes are thermodynamic processes, they are closely analogous, and neither contradicts the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

In actuality it may have nothing to do with evolution (particularly as that process is questionable to begin with) but it would seem to have relevance to the origin of life from non-living matter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

How they arise has nothing to do with thermodynamics. No matter how they arise, there is an increase in entropy.

So now you are saying entropy has nothing to do with thermodynamics?

quote:

That's right. Previously, we established that the entropy of a non-isolated system can either increase or decrease. Therefore, thermodynamics does not preclude abiogenesis.

quote:

That's not what I'm saying at all. Read my post again. If you still don't understand, I'll try to reword it for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

That's not what I'm saying at all. Read my post again. If you still don't understand, I'll try to reword it for you.

Well if there is increase in entropy, wouldn't that be a thermodynamic measure?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veritas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

That's not what I'm saying at all. Read my post again. If you still don't understand, I'll try to reword it for you.

Well if there is increase in entropy, wouldn't that be a thermodynamic measure?

Yes.

According to the Second Law of Thermodynamics there is no process that results in a decrease in entropy. This holds whether a mind, machine, mechanism, any, all or none is involved. This includes, but is not limited to, the processes of evolution and the building of sand castles.

If anyone is under the impression that evolution has a problem with the Second Law of Thermodynamics, that person does not understand evolution or thermodynamics or both.

Entropy never decreases.

quote:

Yes.

According to the Second Law of Thermodynamics there is no process that results in a decrease in entropy. This holds whether a mind, machine, mechanism, any, all or none is involved. This includes, but is not limited to, the processes of evolution and the building of sand castles.

If anyone is under the impression that evolution has a problem with the Second Law of Thermodynamics, that person does not understand evolution or thermodynamics or both.

Entropy never decreases.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

They are wrong to say that 'entropy may therefore decrease...'?

quote:

ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

They are wrong to say that 'entropy may therefore decrease...'?

No. This is why the distinction of an isolated or closed system is so important to correctly understanding the 2nd Law.

Veritas did not explicitly state it, but meant that in an isolated system the total entropy always increases. T.O. confirms that by noting that any local decrease in entropy is more than made up for by the increase in entropy in its environment (from which it is not isolated). Combined together, the sum total change in the entropy increases.