I have heard some apologists argue that evolution runs contrary to the second law of thermodynamics. Very roughly explained, the 2nd law is that entropy (~disorder) in a closed system never decreases, but tends to increase. In evolution, order increases.I am a believer, and I think naturalistic evolution is incorrect. I say that as background. I don't mean to open up a can of worms of guided evolution/old earth/young earth/ID/whatever.However, I worry about creating a stumbling block for scientists because I think the reasoning is flawed. Entropy is not a philosophical idea, but rather a qualitative measure of physical properties. The second law of thermodynamics could be considered an example of some philosophical belief, "Order decomposes into disorder", and then evolution would run contrary to that philosophical belief. But I see no direct contradiction between the second law of dynamics and evolution.Any thoughts?
Thermodynamics and Evolution
- Thread starter Redeemed22
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Theres no basis for evelultion whatsoever, the bible doesnt say that god created monkeys then had them changed into man no. God made us in his image in order to serve the living god and his kingdom evolution is a fairytale designed to deceive people.
Everything in our universe is getting older , wearing out , slowing down , burning out , rusting away and decaying.This can be observed and proven and is agreed to by all scientists. Portions of these observations fall under the umbrella regarding the laws of thermodynamics.In direct contradiction to this is the theory of evolution that claims the opposite .... that everything is evolving to better and higher forms .... getting better ... improving.Most of evolution theory fails the scientific testing , but that is irrelevant to most people. That is because most people wish to eliminate The Creator and evolution fulfills that nicely for them. Evolution is more like a religion than an actual scientific observation.Thus the contradictions.Best regardsMartin
Well, I look at it this way with evolution as an origin and thermodynamics. If we have certain rules that govern the universe, and these rules (conservation of energy, entropy, etc.) had to be violated/reversed/changed in order for the current universe to exit...well doesn't that even on its own suggest God? There is an intelligent decision if I've ever seen one...Regardless, this doesn't fit the box of the current "scientific" community. Unfortunately, both for business and politics, our entire culture has to thrive on the myth that everything is accelerating and improving. Which, as you folks stated, is clearly not evident if you look at things.
Romans 1:28 *And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;i think we could substitute the word "knowledge" with the word "science" here.I really think that is what evolution is all about.A way to get rid of the concept of God.We may suceed in getting rid of the concept but the reality will make himself known sooner or later.As you see if you read on this thinking winds up at Sodom which is where i fear we have about sunken to at present.Al
First Law of Thermodynamics The first law of thermodynamics tells us that the total energy in the universe, or in any isolated part of it, remains constant. In other words, energy (or its mass equivalent) is not now being created or destroyed; it simply changes form. Countless experiments have verified this. A corollary of the first law is that natural processes cannot create energy. Therefore, energy must have been created in the past by some agency or power outside and independent of the natural universe. Furthermore, if natural processes cannot produce mass and energy—the relatively simple inorganic portion of the universe—then it is even less likely that natural processes can produce the much more complex organic (or living) portion of the universe.
Second Law of Thermodynamics If the entire universe is an isolated system, then, according to the second law of thermodynamics, the energy in the universe available for useful work has always been decreasing. However, as one goes back in time, the energy available for useful work would eventually exceed the total energy in the universe, which, according to the first law of thermodynamics, remains constant. This is an impossible condition, implying the universe had a beginning. A further consequence of the second law is that soon after the universe began, it was more organized and complex than it is today—not in a highly disorganized and random state as assumed by evolutionists and proponents of the big bang theory
I am greatfull for the work done by Walt Brown on this subject.He is a creationist who leans heavily on science to make his case.For the full index of his free online book go herehttp://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/IntheBeginningTOC.htmlThis is one of those great educational sites that is free of charge , free of clutter , easy to navigate , and answers the hard questions pertaining to creationism.Thank again to Al (manumuskin) who first introduced us to this site.Martin W.
I appreciate all the posting, but we aren't answering my original question.Thermodynamics has many apologetic uses.I was criticizing a particular one which I think could backfire because I think it is poorly reasoned. I am not supporting evolution, nor am I arguing against all uses of thermodynamics in apologetics.Entropy can be measured/calculated. It is not the philosophical or fuzzy idea of "disorder", and is certainly not "randomness" or "chaos" or "things getting worse". The second law of thermodynamics is not the philosophical idea that things are simple, nor the philosophical idea that things fall apart. Can we show that allegedly evolutionary processes increase entropy? It is not sufficient to say something like "evolution is supposed to make stuff more ordered and more complex, but thermodynamics makes stuff more disordered and simple, thus no evolution".That is kind of like saying 'God is love, God hates sin, hate is the opposite of love, and therefore God doesn't exist.' It is illogical. Can't we do better?
You have much to learn, you can spend a lifetime trying to quantify God, and you'll simply never do it if that's what you're looking to do here.Frankly speaking, you need to rephrase your original question. Entropy is a quantity, but it's generally spoken of in the philosophical manner because the meaning is the same. Take the simple typical example of ice melting to water. You clearly go from an orderly arrangement to that of a clearly less ordered arrangement of loose molecules known as H20. That's not a quantitative statement, but it's true.Simplifying things down because this is not a science forum, the theory that the creation of the universe evolved "unintelligently" (aka the big bang, etc.) still has a major flaw. The flaw is that at some point something placed the energy there. It's fine and dandy if you want to say a closed system sees entropy decrease and explain that that it all started from entropy 0 - how did it begin at 0? I've not seen an answer for that.
I agree with you Denver there has to be a starting point of creation and that starting point begins with God. Isaiah 40:26, Isaiah 42:5, Isaiah 48:12, Isaiah 48:13, Isaiah 40:28 and Psalms 90:2. The begining and end is the lord.
God bless
Similar threads
