Well, I decided it would be best to address this in one big post. Incorrect understandings of the famed second law of thermodynamics has led to the wide spread argument of “Evolution (biological or cosmological) is a violation of thermodynamics”. How this was put forth, I have no idea. Actually, I do, from people who do not comprehend thermodynamics! In all honesty though, I can see how thermodynamics is not high on most people’s list of things to learn. So to rectify this misunderstanding (at least on these boards), I feel an explanatory post in layman’s terms is in order. Now, complete layman’s explanations will most likely be impossible, so hopefully everyone who wants to learn more has some basic math and physics abilities.

Part 1. Definitions of the formal and not so formal kind.

Quick notation being used
▲ delta, meaning difference (Example: S₁- S₂)
Σ sigma, meaning to sum (Example: 1+2+3+4 etc)
Q: Heat (expressed in Joules, J)
T: Temperature (expressed in Kelvins, K)
S: Entropy
Š: Entropy of the universe
↑/↓: increasing/decreasing

Entropy (S), Just what the hell is it?
Entropy is a function of the state or condition of a given system. We can say, entropy is a measurement of a given system’s energies inability to perform work, due to a loss of energy, “wasted energy” that occurs when a transition in the state of the system occurs.

Often you hear people talk of the Clausius-Boltzmann concept entropy, a relation to order. Which is really a poor definition of entropy, but if we want to really simplify entropy we can think of it as a “measure of disorder present in a system”. Again, this is a poorly expressed view of entropy. Ideally, we should think of entropy as a scale that tells us how close a system is to equilibrium.

Mathematically we can define entropy as:

▲S=Q/T (Eq. 1)

(Sorry for the poor delta sign)

Two important points about entropy;
Reversible processes do not alter the total entropy of the universe.
Meaning, the entropy of one part of the universe may change because of a reversible process, but the entropy of another part changes in an equal and opposite manner. Mathematically, ▲S = 0 J/K



Irreversible processes increase the entropy of the universe
In other words, the entropy of the universe is greater than 0 J/K, ▲S> 0 J/K.


The Second Law of Thermodynamics:
Knowing those two important points about entropy, we can state the second law with respect to entropy. In fact, it is our logical conclusion from above: Since reversible process cause no change in net entropy and irreversible ones cause a net increase, then the net entropy in the universe is only ever increasing.

What does this say about our measure of equilibrium? The universe, like a good system, is constantly approaching equilibrium.

One minor note to sort out all this order, or lack thereof business.

↑S, then we ↑ disorder and move closer to a state of equilibrium
Conversely, ↓S, then we ↓ disorder and ↑ order.



Part 2. Some conceptual explanations.

Now that we are experts on entropy and the second law (from now referred to as SLT), we can put our knowledge to use in understanding our world and universe.

Lets start simple to make sure we have a handle on this whole entropy thing. Let’s envision an ice cube. Let’s say we set this ice cube out on the table. Eventually, the ice cube melts. Now we can think of this in terms of ordered structure to ascertain just what is going on in a thermodynamical sense.




The ice cube, which at the molecular level, is very ordered. Its structure is very defined. As the ice cube melts, order decreases. Liquid water is amorphous and much more disordered than water. So in our picto-example, we have gone from a state of greater order to less order. Meaning we,

↑ disorder and ↓ order.

This fits fine with our understanding that the net entropy of the universe is always increasing. So according to the argument proposed by creationists/IDers ice should not be able form (A violation of their version of the SLT). We know this however is untrue. We make Ice cubes in our freezer and we see ice made in nature around us.
In other we see,

↓ disorder and ↑ order.

We stated that for a reversible process (ie; water↔ice); ▲S = 0 J/K

So lets do some arbitrary number calculations.

We know that the latent heat of water at 273 K is 3.35 x 10⁵ J/Kg

Let’s say we have a 1 Kg block of ice and wish to calculate our change in ▲S for such a block.

If the block were melting (that is its gaining heat) we would calculate (using Eq.1)
▲S= {3.35 x 10⁵ J/Kg * 1.0 Kg}/273 K = +1.2 x 10³

If the block were freezing (that is its loosing heat) we would calculate (using Eq. 1)
▲S= {3.35 x 10⁵ J/Kg * 1.0 Kg}/273 K = -1.2 x 10³

So for the universe,

Š= ▲S= +1.2 x 10³ + (-1.2 x 10³)= 0 J/K


Which is supports the second law.

This is an extremely simple example, I am sure the engineers are pulling their hair out of the simplicity, however this is to help the “layman”.

Biological molecules can be thought of as our ice cube. Their formation is a reversible process. And we know now that reversible processes do not reduce the entropy of the universe and so pose no problem for the second law of thermodynamics.

Hopefully this will help clear up any misconceptions you may have. If anyone has any questions, thoughts or comments, feel free to add to the thread and as usual I will answer to the best of my ability.

And apologies to Apostle for this taking so long to post, been real busy lately.

Nobody who misunderstands evolution is going to comprehend, or take the time, to read all that.


You could just say that the nature of things is to move towards disorder, but this is only without the application of energy. Then point to the sun.

Maybe not, but I am going to file that on my computer. Next time someone tells me Evolution is a violation of thermodynamics I am going to whip that puppy out. Maybe I'll put it in my walet, just in case. Thanks for the explanation, I understood it.

Dang! Looks like you put a fair amount of effort into this post. Kudos.

This thread doesn't deserve to die, bump it back up to the front page.

Really interesting stuff, kinda confusing though lol had to read it a few times.

not to be stupid but whipping out numbers makes it more complicated for smaller minds
i liked the diagram but forgot what you said by the time i got here.
so reread

all i get from it is that matter cant be destroyed because it just reorganizes [no loss]

but matter can be created [net gain]

thus a law being absolute on all levels so it also applies to life

life can be created and not destroyed as well [if it dies it is broken into the componets for another life and new matter increases potential for new life]

thus proving evolution is connected to matter in the universe.

but it does not prove or disprove anything

it just simply states the "essence" of nature

I think thats all it is supposed to do, he said that Creationists (some) state that evolution goes against the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, and this was just to show that they are wrong.

You're right, he's just stating what happens, but in doing so he's disproving a claim many creationists often come up with, saying that evolution is impossible because "evolution requires an increase of order, but entropy says everything must decrease in order". The short answer is that, when order increases here on Earth, it decreases elsewhere. The Earth isn't a closed system.

thanks the relation makes sense now

all i really saw was data and was ignoring it trying to find the opposing point for comparison

hope my lapse of insight will help smooth this out for others

I plan on adding some thermodynamics of systems when I get the chance, feel free to add it though if you are comfortable with your thermodynamics! (Time, it turns out, seems to have become something I have little of lately).

Camflax excellent post, so very gracious of you to try the explain approach.... the ideas that threaten dogma's the most are the ones that are attacked the most, Religion is a buisness seeking to stay in business...those that push the box the most are attacked the most.. many are intimidated by those that think for thenselves, as you do... ..Don't take any of it personal, or allow it to become personal...Just stick to the facts they speak for themselves...

I hope that some of the creationist out there read this excellent post and try to argue against it!

I could take a shot, but I don't think I could explain as well you as you.



They won't, they outright ignore any actual facts which contradict them. As soon as this thread begins to die down you can be sure a Creationist will start using their false argument again; then they'll disappear as soon as someone links them to this thread, and the cycle of ignorance continues...

It threatens a complete lifestyle, that many become attached to much like a loved one, often so many will stick with a construct to avoid making some authority in their life wrong,( remember this deity is taught to be all knowing what is there to question or disagree with) also not having approval by the staus quo is very difficult for many...Being the 'other' has been stigmatized..( again the relgious canon insists all do exactly the same thing beleive the same way, even those that call themselves 'open' are careful to do it in a way that they do not compromise social approval)


The key to insight is to see from as many pov as possible, make decisons based in this. Not to exclude any/all paths in favor of one this is dogma and its difficult to let go of once it takes root...

the evolution debate is kind of like Noah's ark.

in which one side is told to do something and the other side mocks them

i hope we're building the ark.

So, you are saying that evolution is a reversible process? If the universe's entropy is not reduced by this, then how does evolution even help us in the long run? We are talking about the existence of humanity and all life in the universe. Isn't that what Darwinism is about; the hope that humanity will evolve into a better and more ordered species? If you put a reason to our survival, then you put a designer to life. Darwinism claims that mindless laws of nature created and developed life.

The universe sprang up from something outside of its realm of existence, whereas life sprang up within the universe. Life, even though it may evolve, falls victim to entropy. We age, then we die. Now, I believe that, though we can manipulate forces, that does not prevent entropy. We can freeze an ice cube, but the electricity can run out, the fridge shut off, and the ice melt. The poles can freeze and then the sun melts them. The sun can die and earth gets sucked into the sun. Either way you look at it, entropy seems to take over.

Perhaps I'm still ignorant to this issue, but it does appear to be the case to me.

Darwinism is nothing to do with being a better more ordered species. Darwinism makes no claims on how life was created. Maybe you need to go back and learn what evolution and the theory of evolution is.

Perhaps, and I'm open to more information. Care to inform me? From what I've been taught about it, Darwinism explains that all complex organisms evolved from a single-celled organism. I don't think I was wrong in saying this. I'm just taking it to the basics. Where did we come from and how did we get here? If evolution is not about being a better and more ordered species, then why are so many people so concerned about it? If it does nothing for us today, then why are we so wrapped up in it?

Evolution is important because it is the cornerstone of biology, it explains why life on the planet got to how it is and the relationships between animals and allows us a better understand of our world and everything in it. It is important in medicine as viruses and bacteria evolve extremely quickly and of course the study of cancer. It is important to farming as they use selective breeding.
Evolution is the process of change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. It does not have to get more complex it just has to change, that is it.
The theory of evolution is the (and this next word is import to make sure you understand, because it means it is not just a idea, it means it is supported by overwhelming evidence) scientific theory on how life has changed on this planet from the first organism to the variety of species we have now.
It is an observable fact that evolution occurs and contrary to one poster DNA changes.
It is an observable fact that you can form a new species from an old one.
We know what the driving forces are behind evolution (natural selection, selective breeding, genetic drift, gene flow and mutation).

Also just to point: animals are not subject to the 2nd law of thermodynamics because they are not closed systems.

The law is the entropy of an isolated system which is not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium.

On a side note-I saw a Camlax started thread and thought he had returned, which is great because he is very intelligent, but nay I was wrong.

Evolution has 'helped' us because it has been the driving force for us to become us. There is no 'purpose' in evolution in the sense of directing organisms to evolve, it is simply the interaction of the environment with organisms and the subsequent reaction of the organism(s) [in a species sense] to be successful.

Darwinism is then, as you can see, not about 'evolving into a better and more ordered species', but simply about being successful in the environment the organism lives in.

When speaking of how we (and all life) are affected by entropy it is worth highlighting the enormous difference in scales between the energy stored in our biosystem compared with the energy of our solar system - let alone the entire universe. While it is true the universe is (we presume) a closed system, within that closed system there are many quasi-open systems such as the biosphere of Earth in which entropy can be (apparently) held at bay. While this might seem to be true on the smaller (biosphere) scale, we can see it is not true on the larger (cosmic) scale.

Entropy the old creationists favourite ,that runs something like this

The controversy can be summed up as follows:

Creationist: The second law of thermodynamics states that entropy can only increase, resulting in a universal decay of all systems.

Evolutionist: But the mathematical laws of thermodynamics state very clearly that entropy can spontaneously decrease!

Creationist: Well, that is technically true for inorganic systems, but it doesn't apply to living systems.

Evolutionist: So you're saying that entropy can not spontaneously decrease for living systems? Doesn't that mean that living things can only undergo universal decay? How then do you explain the fact they grow and reproduce?

Creationist: Well, we believe that there is a special "energy conversion mechanism" that allows living systems to overcome the laws of thermodynamics.

Evolutionist: First you said the laws of thermodynamics were universal, and now you say they are not. Please explain the discrepancy.

Creationist: God can do anything He pleases.

http://www.fsteiger.com/thermo3.html

Entropy doesn't need a closed system to work. Heat the end of an aluminum rod and see if entropy occurs or not.

Bravo!
Good job on this.

Who is saying it does?

If I could interject something for a moment; evolution is not a reversible process, but the biochemical reactions that govern it are.

I didn't say that it does? I said that the Earth is not a closed system, so entropy is able to decrease without breaking the second law of thermodynamics.