Talk:2nd law of thermodynamics prohibits evolution (Talk.Origins)
Re: "The only processes necessary for evolution to occur are reproduction, heritable variation, and selection. All of these are seen to happen all the time, so obviously no physical laws are preventing them. ..." "Clearly this is a reference to micro evolution, which is just variation within kinds of animals."
No, it isn't. Evolutionary theory require any process in addition to those three even for macroevolution. A creationist that considers extra processes are required for macroevolution might only be referring to microevolution, but the author of the quote was definitely referring to both micro- AND macroevolution.
Re: "The origin of life represents a major local decrease in entropy,"
No justification is given for this claim. Since there is no consensus among non-creationists about exactly how abiogenesis might have occurred, there cannot possibly be any justification for this claim. The author is essentially stating that they have calculated the thermodynamic properties of a sequence of chemical reactions without knowing what those reactions were.
There are other less obvious problems with the article, but these two should definitely be corrected. Roy
I agree with Rthearle that the author intends the statement to refer to both micro- and macro-evolution. However, the statement is very general about what is required. For goo-to-you evolution to occur, there needs to be a source of new genetic information. I doubt that many readers would realise that this is included (if indeed it is meant to be) in "heritable variation". That term could be understood to refer to variation within the pool of existing genetic information, which is probably why Charles wrote the answer he did.
I don't agree with Rthearle's second objection. If (to use a different example) we have observed a transfer of heat from one object to another, we can confidently say that there has been an increase in entropy even if we are unaware of the method of heat transfer. If (and I realise that Rthearle may dispute this) complexity is related to entropy, then an decrease in entropy can be claimed on the basis of an increase in complexity even if the methods involved are not known.
Charles, Talk.Origins gave the source of the claim as Scientific Creationism. Have you checked what that book says? A couple of your responses relate to the brevity of the wording, but I wonder if that wording is not lifted from Scientific Creationism but is actually Talk.Origins' summary of the argument? I can't check my copy until the middle of next week, but I'm suspect this to be the case simply because Talk.Origins give the reference as pages 38-46. If it was a direct quote, I assume that they would list the precise page the quote is from. Even if it is a precise quote, it is obvious from the reference that Morris gives a lot more detail about the argument than just the one sentence quoted, and therefore suggesting that the claim is inadequate is unfair if in fact the quote is just a summary statement of a larger argument.
Philip J. Rayment 02:01, 29 Oct 2004 (GMT)
Philip, genetic information in this sense is almost entirely a creationist concept, and rarely used outside the creation/evolution debate - "many readers" would not consider there was anything else that had to be included. Thus "heritable variation" does include the duplication and subsequent modification of inherited genetic sequences.
I understand your comment on my second objection, but have to point out that we have yet to observe a change in entropy from non-living to living and so cannot confidently say anything. The problem is not that the methods are unknown, but that the prior and subsequent states are also unknown.
The claims described in the t.o list are summarised; I doubt that the wording of the claim is an exact quote. Roy
rthearle, Your first objection made a good point and I have corrected it.
With regards your second objection. True, we have not actually observed a change in entropy from non-living to living, that is because such a process has never been observed, but the reverse; living to non-living; is observed all the time. The process from a living thing to totally decayed remains involves a considerable increase in entropy, that is true even for a single cell. So to get a living cell from its basic components would require an equivalent reduction in its entropy.
Charles
I've fixed some typos, but I didn't know what the following was meant to be:
is the of equivalent equally probable configurations.
Charles or someone else will need to fix that one. Philip J. Rayment 02:04, 3 Nov 2004 (GMT)
I have corrected it.
Charles
Charles, are you seriously suggesting that the entropy shift involved in abiogenesis is the reverse of the entropy shift involved in a modern organism dying?
Re: "Much of heritable variation needed for macro evolution requires a decrease in entropy,"
What does this mean? Does it mean that (taking take birds evolving from feathered dinosaurs as our example of macroevolution) that chickens somehow have less entropy than velociraptors? WHy does evolution of wings and beaks require a decrease in entropy? What are you measuring the entropy of, anyway? The creature? The creature's DNA? The creature and its surroundings? The entire species? The universe?
Re: "The key mechanism proposed for evolution is mutations. Macro Evolution requires many decreases in entropy. There are four main types of mutations: duplications, substitutions, additions, and deletions. Of the four, only deletions have a clear way of increasing the entropy of the surroundings. When a deletion results from radiation a particle of DNA can be sent flying. The other three have no apparent way of increasing the entropy of the surroundings, so a decrease in entropy by any of these mutations would seem to violate the 2nd law."
First, mutations usually arise during DNA duplication. Deletions are caused when a section of the parent DNA strand is omitted during construction of the daughter DNA strand. Second, all four types of mutations have been observed without any violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics occurring. Finally, cell operations are fuelled by energy obtained by the organism from e.g. eating, which is an 'apparent way of increasing the entropy of the surroundings,'
