Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapper John
Refreshing myself with the comments in this thread a couple of things have jumped out me:
(1) A clear bias towards one POV or the other and the attempt to select facts with a misinterpretation of the underlying principle is evident. As a case in point I cite GC's comment (I don't mean to be picking on you, GC, just using this as an example).
The problem here is that entropy is selected out to make the case that the theory of evolution is flawed, i.e violates the third law of thermodynamics. The argument you are making here is specious.
What should be applied here is Gibbs free energy (a relation that incorporates both entropy and enthalpy) and simply states that a system will establish the lowest energy state.
To illustrate this point, and the fallacy in your argument, I would like you to do a little experiment. Half-fill a soda bottle with water, add about 50 ml of vegetable oil. Shake vigorously (after replacing the top of course  ) and observe. You will see the initial conditions of micro droplets of oil randomly dispersed in the water. Disorder - right? After a few minutes you will see the oil aggregate on top and water and oil separated into a two phase system. More ordered -right?
This "apparent" violation of the third law is in fact a representation of a system seeking the lowest free-energy steady state. Entropy is not dominating this process, enthalpy is. Hence, your argument does not conflict with the theory of evolution - it is consistent with it. (Notice that I did not use the word "prove". As I have said before nothing can be proven to be only not be). |
Are you asserting that molecules assembled in such a way as to produce life is the lowest available energy state for those molecules?
(FWIW, the separation due to density provided in your example is an excellent illustration of why plate tectonics is flawed theory)
Here is my illustrative example:
Around the southwest, and especially in Canyonlands National Park, there are these naturally occurring piles of rocks called "cairns".
Typically, there are about 4-6 somewhat flat rocks common to the area neatly balanced in a vertical stack.
Park rangers say that over millions of years, weathering and erosion removed surrounding rock and soil and these rocks "fell" into these neatly ordered stacks.
As luck would have it, they precisely mark trail routes.
The explanation is completely consistent with the laws of physics, and given the explanation, the rocks are at the lowest available energy state.
How many people believe my story?