|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
 Posted - 02/15/2006 : 07:08:37
|
I am studying the theory of evolution and came across something that maybe someone here can help me with. When studying the second law of thermodynamics it occurred to me that there may be something to this law precluding evolution.
If the earth is looked at as an open system, energy from the sun can pass the boundary and entropy would be reduced on the earth to increase the complexity of life but entropy would be increased overall in the sun/earth system to satisfy the second law. But doesn't the earth need a mechanism in which to use the energy to make more organized life from less organized life? What is the mechanism that does this in the evolutionary theory?
For example, if we have a steel tank filled with air to 80 psia sitting outside and we opened a valve at the bottom of the tank, the air would rush out and the pressure would equalize to atmospheric pressure. Energy is released and entropy is produced in this process, but if we had the tank initially at atmospheric pressure and opened the valve at the bottom the tank and put the same amount of energy back in the tank that was released, air would not rush in to pressurize the tank back to 80 psia. The energy would need to be added to the system through a compressor to accomplish this. Let's say it takes 850 Btu's of energy to do this with a compressor. If the same 850 Btu's of energy are put through a toaster or blender connected to the system somehow, the energy would be wasted and the pressure would not go back to 80 psia. It's the compressor that makes the energy useful to organize the system.
What is the mechanism (i.e. the compressor) that allows evolution to form more organized life forms from lesser organized life forms? Energy allowed to cross the boundary of the system is not enough to do it alone. It seems to me that mutations don't have the organizing mechanism to do it; drift, natural selection and migration all depend on mutations to happen. Is this correct or is something wrong with my thinking.
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
 Posted - 02/15/2006 : 11:26:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Robb, long time, no see. Welcome back.
You aren't the first to think that the second law of thermodynamics precludes evolution. It is, however, a wrong conclusion.
Sources:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_1.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_2.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_3.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_4.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_5.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF005.html
This is basically my question from this web page http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_5.html
quote:
Claim CF001.5:
Energy inflow into a system is not enough to make that energy useful. There must also be an energy conversion mechanism. Without that system, evolution cannot work.
Source:
Yahya, Harun, 2003. Darwinism Refuted, Evolution and thermodynamics. http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/thermodynamics_01.html
Response:
1. Any atom can be an energy conversion mechanism. Atoms routinely convert between light energy, thermal energy, and chemical potential energy. The energy conversion mechanism is ubiquitous.
Just because atoms convert energy from one form to the next does not mean the energy is or can be directed in the proper way to cause macroevolution. I can convert potential to kinetic energy by dropping an object, but if I don't have the proper machine it will do no useful work.
quote:
2. A lack of an energy conversion system would not only invalidate evolution; it would invalidate life itself. Evolution requires only reproduction, natural selection, and heritable variation, all of which are observed in life. The conversion of energy is a quality of life, so the conversion system exists for evolution to work with.
I am not disputing energy conversion; I want to know what the mechanism is that converts the energy to be used for evolution not to sustain life.
I may be misunderstanding what is being said here. Any comments on this would be appreciated.
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
 |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 11:40:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Robb, long time, no see. Welcome back.
You aren't the first to think that the second law of thermodynamics precludes evolution. It is, however, a wrong conclusion.
Sources:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_1.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_2.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_3.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_4.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_5.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF005.html
This is basically my question from this web page http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF001_5.html
quote:
Claim CF001.5:
Energy inflow into a system is not enough to make that energy useful. There must also be an energy conversion mechanism. Without that system, evolution cannot work.
Source:
Yahya, Harun, 2003. Darwinism Refuted, Evolution and thermodynamics. http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/thermodynamics_01.html
Response:
1. Any atom can be an energy conversion mechanism. Atoms routinely convert between light energy, thermal energy, and chemical potential energy. The energy conversion mechanism is ubiquitous.
Just because atoms convert energy from one form to the next does not mean the energy is or can be directed in the proper way to cause macroevolution. I can convert potential to kinetic energy by dropping an object, but if I don't have the proper machine it will do no useful work.
quote:
2. A lack of an energy conversion system would not only invalidate evolution; it would invalidate life itself. Evolution requires only reproduction, natural selection, and heritable variation, all of which are observed in life. The conversion of energy is a quality of life, so the conversion system exists for evolution to work with.
I am not disputing energy conversion; I want to know what the mechanism is that converts the energy to be used for evolution not to sustain life.
I may be misunderstanding what is being said here. Any comments on this would be appreciated.
OK. Macroevolution is actually a whole bunch of microevolutionary stages piled up on top of one another until it becomes a new species.
Mutation (imprecise copying) of genetic code (resulting in change, not data loss) is the mechanism for change. I am a bit fuzzy on genetic mutations as they happen for myriad reasons. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 11:55:28 [Permalink]
|
Robb said:
quote:
I am studying the theory of evolution
Are you taking a biological evolution course at a university? Or by "studying" do you mean you have a stack of "information" provided by an anti-evolution group? Pardon me if I think you are doing the latter, rather than the former.
The creationist nonsense about the 2dn law of thermodynamics is not only old, it is so obviously, blatantly flawed that one can only wonder at the depth of delusion anyone must suffer from in order to believe the creationist tripe about it.
In very layman-ish terms:
1. The second law states that total order, in a closed system, cannot increase.
2. It does not say that some parts of a closed system cannot have a local increase in order.
3. The earth is not a closed system.
4. The entire universe may be a closed system, but even that is unknown at the present.
Conclusion- The argument about the 2nd law prohibiting evolution on earth, because order cannot increase, is a deliberate lie made by people trying to sell you their religion.
As for the rest of your post...
quote:
What is the mechanism (i.e. the compressor) that allows evolution to form more organized life forms from lesser organized life forms?
You do realize that your question has absolutely nothing to do with thermodynamics? For us eukaryotes photosynthesis is probably the main mechanism of incorporating incoming energy and making it available as chemical energy to do work.
Try the uniresity class on evolution. You clearly don't have a grasp on even the fundamentals. You will probably be required to start off with some basic chemistry, basic physics, and basic biology courses before you meet the prereqs for an evolution class. It would be well worth your time, however. Just make sure to leave the creationist pamphlets at home.
But, to answer your question, evolution does not necessarliy invlove any transition from less complex to more complex. Just take a look at domain Archaea and domain Bacteria. The prokaryotes outnumber, and outmass, all other life on this planet by a significant ammount.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
| Edited by - Dude on 02/15/2006 19:07:57 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 12:22:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
I am not disputing energy conversion; I want to know what the mechanism is that converts the energy to be used for evolution not to sustain life.
I may be misunderstanding what is being said here. Any comments on this would be appreciated.
There is no energy being "used for evolution." Such an idea implies a mechanism separate from life itself which drives evolutionary processes, and there simply is no such mechanism.
What drives evolution is, instead, things like random cosmic ray hits destroying a single DNA base-pair (which gets repaired incorrectly), or a toxin which modifies protein expression, or any of a number of other possible mutation sources. If such mutations allow individuals to reproduce better than their non-mutated cousins, the mutations are likely to spread throughout the population. And that process takes no more energy than regular reproduction, because it is just reproduction. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 12:37:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
OK. Macroevolution is actually a whole bunch of microevolutionary stages piled up on top of one another until it becomes a new species.
Thanks, I may be misunderstanding how macroevolution happens. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 13:24:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Are you taking a biological evolution course at a university? Or by "studying" do you mean you have a stack of "information" provided by an anti-evolution group? Pardon me if I think you are doing the latter, rather than the former.
I am trying to study on my own using the internet, textbooks and other people that know more about it than I do. I really am trying to learn about it so I can make my own descisions about it. Isn't this what everybody here preaches?
quote:
The creationist nonsense about the 2dn law of thermodynamics is not only old, it is so obviously, blatantly flawed that one can only wonder at the depth of delusion anyone must suffer from in order to believe the creationist tripe about it.
In very layman-ish terms:
1. The second law states that total order, in a closed system, cannot increase.
2. It does not say that some parts of a closed system cannot have a local increase in order.
3. The earth is not[/b] a closed system.
4. The entire universe may be a closed system, but even that is unknown at the present.
Conclusion- The argument about the 2nd law prohibiting evolution on earth, because order cannot increase, is a deliberate lie made by people trying to sell you their religion.
I think if you would have read my post without jumping to conclusions you would have discovered that I agree with everything you stated here.
quote:
As for the rest of your post...
quote:
What is the mechanism (i.e. the compressor) that allows evolution to form more organized life forms from lesser organized life forms?
You do realize that your question has absolutely nothing to do with thermodynamics? For us eukaryotes photosynthesis is probably the main mechanism of incorporating incoming energy and making it available as chemical energy to do work.
Work, energy, entopy etc. have nothing to do with thermodynamics? Without a mechanism for energy to be used it will not do any useful work. I have already admitted that this may be wrong thinking that evolution needs a mechanism to use energy for evolution to occur. Please educate me on this.
quote:
Try the uniresity class on evolution. You clearly don't have a grasp on even the fundamentals. You will probably be required to start off with some basic chemistry, basic physics, and basic biology courses before you meet the prereqs for an evolution class. It would be well worth your time, however. Just make sure to leave the creationist pamphlets at home.
I may not have a grasp on the fundamentals, but why don't you help me? If you want to get people like me to understand evolution then explain it in terms that I can understand. I have a BS in mechanical engineering, I have taken advanced chemistry, advanced physics as well as basic biology. Can I start to learn about the theory now? Or is it only for people with graduate degrees?
quote:
But, to answer your question, evolution d |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 13:44:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
I am not disputing energy conversion; I want to know what the mechanism is that converts the energy to be used for evolution not to sustain life.
I may be misunderstanding what is being said here. Any comments on this would be appreciated.
There is no energy being "used for evolution." Such an idea implies a mechanism separate from life itself which drives evolutionary processes, and there simply is no such mechanism.
What drives evolution is, instead, things like random cosmic ray hits destroying a single DNA base-pair (which gets repaired incorrectly), or a toxin which modifies protein expression, or any of a number of other possible mutation sources. If such mutations allow individuals to reproduce better than their non-mutated cousins, the mutations are likely to spread throughout the population. And that process takes no more energy than regular reproduction, because it is just reproduction.
This makes sense and I can agree with this. I am caught up on the idea that energy is needed to be transferred from a lower quality to a higher quality for evolution (work) to occur requiring some mechanism. I am beginning to see that this may not be the case. Thanks for the input. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
nescafe
New Member
USA
19 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 17:35:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Response:
1. Any atom can be an energy conversion mechanism. Atoms routinely convert between light energy, thermal energy, and chemical potential energy. The energy conversion mechanism is ubiquitous.
Just because atoms convert energy from one form to the next does not mean the energy is or can be directed in the proper way to cause macroevolution. I can convert potential to kinetic energy by dropping an object, but if I don't have the proper machine it will do no useful work.
Virtually all the energy used to drive evolution comes from the Sun, via photosynthesis.
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
2. A lack of an energy conversion system would not only invalidate evolution; it would invalidate life itself. Evolution requires only reproduction, natural selection, and heritable variation, all of which are observed in life. The conversion of energy is a quality of life, so the conversion system exists for evolution to work with.
I am not disputing energy conversion; I want to know what the mechanism is that converts the energy to be used for evolution not to sustain life.
I may be misunderstanding what is being said here. Any comments on this would be appreciated.
No extra energy is required to power evolution, any more than it takes extra energy for your computer to crash. |
Insert witty saying here. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 18:33:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
This makes sense and I can agree with this. I am caught up on the idea that energy is needed to be transferred from a lower quality to a higher quality for evolution (work) to occur requiring some mechanism. I am beginning to see that this may not be the case. Thanks for the input.
Yeah, Dave's comments were pretty spot on, as always. Basically if SLOT worked the way you think it did, life wouldn't even be possible, let alone evolving life. However, since we are surrounded by living things, that obviously cannot be the case. And once those living things start having babies, they can evolve.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 18:53:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by nescafe
Virtually all the energy used to drive evolution comes from the Sun, via photosynthesis.
Energy provided via photosynthesis drive life. Mutations are random and requires no extra energy.
Mutations can also happen by a carbon14 decay.
The problem is that it's easy to misapply the laws of thermodynamics. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
| Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 02/15/2006 18:54:13 |
|
|
|
nescafe
New Member
USA
19 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 19:14:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by nescafe
Virtually all the energy used to drive evolution comes from the Sun, via photosynthesis.
Energy provided via photosynthesis drive life. Mutations are random and requires no extra energy.
Mutations can also happen by a carbon14 decay.
The problem is that it's easy to misapply the laws of thermodynamics.
/me nods. That is where the second sentence in my earlier reply came into play, and the use of the word "virtually". I apoligize for the lack of "knowingly self-ironic" and "tounge firmly in cheek" tags. (to say nothing of the missing "passive-agressive" and "trolling" tags). |
Insert witty saying here. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2006 : 20:02:38 [Permalink]
|
Robb said:
quote:
I am trying to study on my own using the internet, textbooks and other people that know more about it than I do. I really am trying to learn about it so I can make my own decisions about it. Isn't this what everybody here preaches?
If you are serious about it, spend the $90 on this book.
Or, PT has a great post today with a list of recommended reading on the topic of evolution.
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/02/a_book_list_for_1.html#more
I recommend anything by Mayr, Gould, or Dawkins.
quote:
I may not have a grasp on the fundamentals, but why don't you help me? If you want to get people like me to understand evolution then explain it in terms that I can understand. I have a BS in mechanical engineering, I have taken advanced chemistry, advanced physics as well as basic biology. Can I start to learn about the theory now? Or is it only for people with graduate degrees?
Help you? Ok. If you are serious, Follow these steps:
1. Put down the creationist propaganda.
If you can manage that step, then you can move on to the rest.
2. Read the Talk Origins site.
3. Read one of the Futuyama texts on evolution (you should be able to handle either of his texts if you have taken basic biology and chemistry classes as you say).
4. Pick up some books by Dawkins, Gould, and Mayr (from the PT link I put above, there are links to several online booksellers for each of those books).
At that point you should have a fair grasp of the concept.
quote:
I think if you would have read my post without jumping to conclusions you would have discovered that I agree with everything you stated here.
Was I wrong about the ultimate source of your "concern" about SLOT and evolution? Creationists are the only source I know of who bring up SLOT with arguments against evolution.
quote:
Work, energy, entopy etc. have nothing to do with thermodynamics? Without a mechanism for energy to be used it will not do any useful work. I have already admitted that this may be wrong thinking that evolution needs a mechanism to use energy for evolution to occur. Please educate me on this.
Yeah, change your question. Nice. Let me remind you of how you stated it in the OP.
quote:
What is the mechanism (i.e. the compressor) that allows evolution to form more organized life forms from lesser organized life forms? Energy allowed to cross the boundary of the system is not enough to do it alone. It seems to me that mutations don't have the organizing mechanism to do it; drift, natural selection and migration all depend on mutations to happen. Is this correct or is something wrong with my thinking.
As you have taken those "basic biology" classes you are already familiar with the well known mechanisms that life uses to produce energy available |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2006 : 07:25:45 [Permalink]
|
Maybe this could help to clarify some more. What is needed for evolution is life. We already concluded that life is possible due to the energy input from the sun.
Now, how is more 'complex' (without defining the term really) life differ from less complex life? Mainly by having more cells, or specialized cells. But these all work in the same way as non differentiated cells or cells of unicellular organisms. By converting energy that has been stored in chemicals and ultimately converted from sunlight.
From the above you can see that, for the appliance of the SLOT, more 'complex' creatures aren't different from less 'complex' creatures. If it lives, it will evolve, and whether it will become more or less 'complex' is not relevant for the workings of the SLOT. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
