Hello Beautiful!

It looks like you're new to The Community. If you'd like to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Second law of thermodynamics

I would REALLY like to know what some of you people that believe in evolution think of the second law of thermodynamics.

For those that do not know what that is, it is a law, I believe developed first by Einstein.It has been proven true countless amounts of times by many scientists.

This law states that everything must break down. Everything rots over time, everything gets older. Things go from complex to simple. It states that my guitar will one day be firewood or garden compost, either one. Now, I believe that this can be altered or slowed down slightly with a proper lifestyle (raw food). Jsut like aging can be slowed down, but it cannot be eliminated.

So, if this Second law of Thermodynamics is true, and it is, then it disproves the evolution theory which states that everything went from simple (matter) to complex (you).

Evolutionism states that you came from a boiling broth known as probiotic, premedial or organic soup. The soup came alive and then it rained on the rocks for millions of years. This created the oceans. In time, the life became more and more complex. Soon it was sea creatures which came on land….this could be a book, lets keep it short

Basically, great great great great great grampa, was soup. A rock too at that.

Not trying to throw flames, at all, but I would like some talk about this… and about the second law of thermodynamics.

«1

Comments

  • CarmentinaCarmentina Raw Newbie

    Don’t know a thing about thermodynamics, but here in Italy, strangely in the seat of Catholicism, evolution is not considered a THEORY. Indeed it is taught as fact! And interestinly I haven’t read reports of the Church trying to change that either. I’m no theologian but it just seems logical that things evolve, they adapt. I don’t see why that should be contested. That’s my two cents. And I love differences of opinion. Actually I love differences, that’s why I love traveling and meeting people – broadens my horizon. Love and peace to all. :)

  • I’ll preface this by saying that I am merely an armchair philospher regarding this topic- I’ve not done too much reading or research on the topic.

    However, I think the Law and the theory can co-exist. Darwin’s theory of evolution states that genetic mutations get passed on to a creature’s off-spring, and if they provide a biological advantage, will continue to be passed along through the generations. So over time, the bacteria evolved through a series of beneficial genetic mutations into all the creatures today. Biologically disadvantagous mutations will not make it through very many generations, because those possessing the mutation will die.

    I think this co-exists with the Second Law of Thermodynamics because a specific bacteria did not change through billions of years to become me. I was not once a bacteria. However, a bacteria’s genetically mutated offspring’s offspring’s offspring’s, etc., etc., etc. evolved to become me and you. That original bacteria is long gone.

    I’m not sure how well I explained that, but it makes sense in my head… hehe. My question is, if you don’t believe in evolution, how do you think humans (and billions upon billions of other species) came about, since they did not inhabit the planet at the time of the Big Bang (or whatever created Earth)? And what happened to all the species that no longer exist?

    Please, anyone with more knowledge about these topics, feel free to correct me.

  • Seems as if by talking about this… you are throwing science out the door. Science tells otherwise. Far as I know, bacteria does not mutate to a beneficial state. it cannot change into living, live, like you. I have seen mutations…..tell me of a beneficial mutations. This is what is needed for evolution to be true.

    I know what you believe about evolution, as I said above. Now, let me tell you how I believe we came about. In order to do so, I have to talk about the bible.

    First, I am a born again true Christian. A child of the living God. I know this because he has shown himself to me. I have repented, I have turned to him and he has delivered me and saved me. (might sound weird to a non believer but I can give you my testimony if you want).

    I believe in the bible. I believe that God created everything in six days, like the bible says. I believe in God (obviously). And I believe that he is very powerful as he has shown me.

    Many species that no longer exist…. died out. After the flood, the living conditions were not as good. People killed dinosaurs for meat and because they were a pest. As Scientists have found, some animals have been frozen alive, standing up with food still in their stomachs (flood?).

    So, yeah. I believe that God created everything and therefore, God created time as well. You believe that time created everything. Both are religious.

    Hope that helps.

  • iknikn

    I’m with Carmentina there because I don’t know much about thermodynamics either. (it does ring a bell though, but it’s been a while since I took chemistry and physiscs). I just finished the book Intelligent Design. It was written by one of the researchers who helped to map the human dna. It is really interesting. I also read Darwin on Trial.

    I do believe in intelligent design, a creator, God, however we want to call it. I also think that there is a limited evolution but not the way it is tought. Under evolution I don’t mean that new species would evolve, rather just adopting to outside environmental changes, making the basic design better. I ‘m rumbling here, but you get the idea…

  • rosehebrewrosehebrew Raw Newbie

    I personally do not believe in evolution but I do believe in adaptation. There are many scientists that agree with me but they are censored and fired if they contest it. There are many examples in nature that make the whole evolution thing an impossibility. So if people really want both sides they have to seek it out as you will not get it in the institutions. One of the reasons that I do raw is my belief that there truly was an Adam and an Eve and after the fall they were as I call re-created to live in this fallen world. God gave us a wonderful self-healing body if we give it the proper tools and I believe that part of that is raw food as it was given to man in the garden explained in the book of Genesis. When they come up with all these different approaches to the raw food diet I always weigh it with that situation in mind. I was very sick and unable to function and the Lord gave me the knowledge in an instant to eat raw food. I had never heard of it before and I did get well when I did it very quickly. I know many people will not believe me because of a number of their own perceptions and reasons but it is the truth and I am not ashamed of my relationship with my God so I will continue to proclaim it.

  • I copied this from Wikipedia:

    “Mutations create variations in the gene pool. Less favorable (or deleterious) mutations can be reduced in frequency in the gene pool by natural selection, while more favorable (beneficial or advantageous) mutations may accumulate and result in adaptive evolutionary changes. For example, a butterfly may produce offspring with new mutations. The majority of these mutations will have no effect; but one might change the color of one of the butterfly’s offspring, making it harder (or easier) for predators to see. If this color change is advantageous, the chance of this butterfly surviving and producing its own offspring are a little better, and over time the number of butterflies with this mutation may form a larger percentage of the population.”

    Billions of beneficial mutations accumulate to create entirely different species. These mutations are nearly always tiny or relatively insignificant, but add up over time. You’re right, the bacteria you culture in a lab is not going to be bacteria one day and a kitten the next. However, evolution is continual. Billions of years from now, humans will probably not be the same as they are today, or they may be extinct if the planet changes too rapidly for them to evolve.

    I hope that made sense. I still don’t see how the Second Law of Thermodynamics makes evolution implausible.

  • “I also think that there is a limited evolution but not the way it is tought.”

    I believe you are right. This is called macro-evolution. It has been tested and has been proven to be true. This is the only type of evolution, that I can say for a fact, is true. This theory is basically, how life changes. I mean, like… over time. Basically, if you breed a Dog with a dog, you might get a big dog or you might get a little dog BUT, you will still get a dog. Farmers depend on this. When they plant corn they expect corn. Scientists have been breeding flies for years….they still have flies. They have flies that cannot fly, no wings, double wings, this problem and that problem BUT it is still a fly. All these mutations are mutations, but they are not beneficial. Show me a beneficial mutation.

  • Hehe- According to the second law of thermodynamics, everything rots and gets older over time, going only from complex to simple. Therefore, everything I know about my childhood and past is an illusion since I only came to exist at the age when I started to rot… I was never a tiny little fetus and no part of me ever became more complex before the point where it started rotting, oh wait, nope, I just grew a few new cells, so I guess the second-old version of me didn’t exist either…

    shgadwa, I’m definitely not trying to negate your beliefs. I have my value system and you have yours, but you may want to do some reading on the second law, because knowing nothing about it beyond what I remember from (I don’t remember)th grade science, your argument defeats itself. In fact, if your interpretation of the second law were accurate, the theory of evolution would be one of many tools used to easily disprove it.

    I’m not trying to dispute your belief system, just saying you may want to research it a bit more before you start using it to discredit another (strongly accepted) theory.

    Oh- and a scientific theory cannot be proven. It can be dis proven, or it can be accepted as fact (or scientific law) until someone is able to find an instance in which the theory/law fails to be true.

  • I was very sick and unable to function and the Lord gave me the knowledge in an instant to eat raw food. I had never heard of it before and I did get well when I did it very quickly. I know many people will not believe me because of a number of their own perceptions and reasons but it is the truth and I am not ashamed of my relationship with my God so I will continue to proclaim it.

    GOOD for you!!! Yes, people will not believe you and will make fun of you. I have found this out for myself. Like, many say it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for someone to be fully ADDICTED to porn, lust, masturbation, according to God, sin, and then repent and be delivered and never do those things again. This is my story. I have not masturbated in well over a year now. It is all because I was possessed and Jesus saved me! To Go be the glory!

  • benificial mutation – one in a species

    evolution- species as a whole

    here’s a great example of evolution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evol…

  • Hehe- According to the second law of thermodynamics, everything rots and gets older over time, going only from complex to simple. Therefore, everything I know about my childhood and past is an illusion since I only came to exist at the age when I started to rot… I was never a tiny little fetus and no part of me ever became more complex before the point where it started rotting, oh wait, nope, I just grew a few new cells, so I guess the second-old version of me didn’t exist either…

    shgadwa, I’m definitely not trying to negate your beliefs. I have my value system and you have yours, but you may want to do some reading on the second law, because knowing nothing about it beyond what I remember from (I don’t remember)th grade science, your argument defeats itself. In fact, if your interpretation of the second law were accurate, the theory of evolution would be one of many tools used to easily disprove it.

    I’m not trying to dispute your belief system, just saying you may want to research it a bit more before you start using it to discredit another (strongly accepted) theory.

    Oh- and a scientific theory cannot be proven. It can be dis proven, or it can be accepted as fact (or scientific law).

    The second law of thermodynamics IS a law. This means it HAS been proven. This means that it is true. You should read about it. Also, I am not talking from the 8th grade…. I READ about this stuff, throughly. And watched videos.

    What the law states is that you will one day die. Yeah, you have memories…. they will eventually be gone when you die. The law is talking from a physical standpoint, not mental.

    YES! I agree with you, a theory cannot be proven. many say that evolution IS proven, it cannot be proven, I believe it can be disproved scientifically but many will not accept the evidence.

  • rosehebrewrosehebrew Raw Newbie

    shgadwa, As with many addictions, sexual addiction is very real and can be very destructive. For anyone with hurts, hang-ups and addictions I would recommend Celebrate Recovery. It is a Christian based fellowship that guides people in letting God heal those big problems. Most people have them but we can be over-comers in Christ. I have put in my first year in CR and am starting my second one now. I had such heavy abuse sense infancy and continuing on in my life that psychiatrists had just given up hope of helping me but CR was my answer for healing. It is in some churches in communities across the world. I hope you continue to heal and if you fall don’t beat yourself up just keep moving on.

  • MeditatingMeditating Raw Newbie

    SHGADWA – Thanks you for posting this interesting question. This is the type of stuff that I enjoy spending my time thinking about. I never thought evolution was at odds with scientific laws/theories or even the christian story of creation. Personally, I never believed the story of creation even when I was a devout christian. Who was I to decide what process god used when creating heaven and earth? Why should I assume that a day in the life of a mere man was equivalent in time to the day in the life of god? The scientific evidence for evolution is solid. If god gave me a brain, shouldn’t I at least use it and not spend my time trying to be the MC for god’s word?

    I respectfully disagree with your proposition. Please know this is an academic discussion and not a personal attack. This is how we all learn, which includes both you and me.

    Bravo to RAWPERASINGERS for articulating a valid point based on the underlying purpose of evolution, which is to continually improve the species. She certainly wasn’t throwing science out the door. Her response was dead on its doorstep. You seem to have expanded the definition of the law of thermodynamics (LOT) to now state that everything which reproduces must decline (decay) from its previous generation. This is a misstatement of the LOT.

    I believe your perspective is flawed from the start because you are comparing the LOT to a topic better addressed by disciplines like psychology, sociology and the scientific theory of emergence. The LOT may be applicable to a human body but it is inapplicable to a human being or almost any other biological species that possesses consciousness, whether or not we can recognize the degree of consciousness. The LOT is limited to matter. Consciousness is not matter or, if it is, it is subject to an entirely different set of rules that we have yet to define due to our pale understanding.

    While a human has a physical body, a person is not wholly defined by their physical body. To see a person as a biological machine negates most of what defines personage. Could you really explain what a human being is by limiting that definition to their physical container? Are we nothing more than a collection of tissue and bone? Are we humans no different than a rock but for our physical structure? I don’t think so.

    Physics deals with matter. On the other hand, psychology deals with our understanding of human consciousness which we (today) understand to be absent in a rock. We can’t stop there. Sociology is a discipline that deals with the dynamics of humans. Groups of a biological species take on behaviors that allow the group to operate very much like a new, individual species. It is a well noted fact that these behaviors are emergent (therefore the theory of emergence). There is a synergy whenever biological species group together much like we see when elements and chemicals come together and the sum of their parts is greater than that of the individual members.

    Thank you again for this interesting discussion. I am including a link to a brief NOVA presentation on EMERGENCE, which can get you started on recognizing the principles upon which biological species achieve, sometimes ever-increasing complex patterns of behavior (and perhaps even what we like to define as “intelligence”). The narrator begins the program with a statement of how many get stuck when comparing emergence to the LOT. There is just so much to learn and not enough time. I hope you enjoy the video. I have watched it several times to help wrap my hand around this complex subject.

  • YES!

    God is good and he has saved me. It is amazing. Absolutely amazing!

  • Who was I to decide what process god used when creating heaven and earth? Why should I assume that a day in the life of a mere man was equivalent in time to the day in the life of god? The scientific evidence for evolution is solid. If god gave me a brain, shouldn’t I at least use it and not spend my time trying to be the MC for god’s word?

    All I can tell you is God told us how he has created everything and everyone. That is why you should believe it, but I will not at all push you.

    Me telling what the LOT is or says, I guess, will not work. Let me do some studying and give you some quotes from wikipedia when I get time later.

  • The Second Law of Thermodynamics is a series of statements developed by Carnot in the nineteenth century, and built upon by many others, the most commonly cited of whom are Clausius and Kelvin. There are three basic statements of the Second Law that address irreversibilities in the universe:

    The Entropic Statement tells us that any process will increase the total entropy of the universe; any time you slide a block along a plane, there will be friction, which is unrecoverable work.

    The Clausius Statement says that energy in the form of heat cannot flow from cold to hot without a work input—for instance, an air conditioner has to have a compressor for it to work, theoretically and practically.

    The Kelvin-Planck Statement says that heat cannot be entirely converted to work; a heat engine needs a heat sink to which energy is rejected and is not recoverable.

    Entropy (disorder, unrecoverability, irreversibilty) will always increase in the universe with any process. I do not see the connection to evolution.

  • That makes a lot of sense, Benny. Thank you.

  • I think my original post may have come off more offensive than I intended. My point was that the context with which the LOT (I’ll use Meditating’s abbreviation) seemed to be being introduced out of context.

    The LOT, as I understand it, refers to an entire system (the universe, or an ecological system within for instance). It does not apply to a specific species within the system, or even the whole of all species within the system and therefore does not contradict the theory of evolution.

    To try to use one scientific theory or law as disproof for another goes against the study of science in general. You could try to use the knowledge of one law to create a circumstance in which another law fails to hold true. But since no law or theory can ever be universally “proven” (they can only fail to prove false), a specific instance would have to be observed in which one or the other did not hold true.

  • No Kathryn, you did not offend me AT ALL.

    I really do appreciate this conversation though and there is some things I can say… but I have to do dishes. I might not respond until tomorrow in fact.

  • OK

    there are many websites you can read on the LOT. I personally do not like wikipedia, only because anyone can change what it says. I could go on there and say that the LOT states that tuna fish is eternal, if I wanted to.

    Here is one websites I got….

    Second Law of Thermodynamics – Increased Entropy The Second Law of Thermodynamics is commonly known as the Law of Increased Entropy. While quantity remains the same (First Law), the quality of matter/energy deteriorates gradually over time. How so? Usable energy is inevitably used for productivity, growth and repair. In the process, usable energy is converted into unusable energy. Thus, usable energy is irretrievably lost in the form of unusable energy.

    “Entropy” is defined as a measure of unusable energy within a closed or isolated system (the universe for example). As usable energy decreases and unusable energy increases, “entropy” increases. Entropy is also a gauge of randomness or chaos within a closed system. As usable energy is irretrievably lost, disorganization, randomness and chaos increase.

    taken from http://www.allaboutscience.org/second-law-of-thermodynamics.htm

  • Basically, the law talks about concepts of every day life. You cannot create more heat without work. Things like that.

    It states that the quality of matter deteriorates over time. Things break down.

    It does state that things cannot go from simple to complex.

  • I think you are missing the point others are trying to make. While the LOT states that things break down, it has nothing to do with the development of a species. It has nothing to do with reproduction. While I’m sure you understand the LOT, you are making a connection that is not there.

    Reproduction is not matter going from simple to complex. It is two creatures creating a creature slightly different from them. Thus a species can adapt/evolve/whatever you want to call it.

  • Unfortunately what creationists fail to recognise is 2 characteristics in the 2nd law of thermodynamics which allows for the progression of life and order on planet Earth.

    1. Entropy (unusable energy) increases in a CLOSED system resulting in disorder, chaos, decay. Now then PLEASE understand what a closed system is – it is a system which is not affected by an outside external force, the universe is a CLOSED system. Earth IS NOT a closed system. It is being directly affected by 2 major energy sources. 1 THE SUN.2 The Internal Thermal Energy of the Earth’s Core.

    2. Read this statement and be sure you understand it. “Order” cannot increase, unless energy is spent to accomplish it.

    (By analogy, your house cannot become clean, unless somebody does the work.)

    The creationist fallacy is to ignore everything after the “unless” in this statement.

    As long as there is a source of energy to draw from, any amount of order can be created, even spontaneously. On the surface of the Earth, we have two major energy sources available to us: the sun, and the thermal energy in the core. Without either of these, life surely could not arise here.

  • MOTHMOTH Raw Newbie

    Thanks, Shadow.

  • “Laws of science may, however, be disproved if new facts or evidence contradicts them.” That is a quote out of a physics book I have.

    Shadow-demon took the words out of my mouth though on this subject.

  • I thought it had been determined that this is not GoneG-d? Aren’t these religious debates supposed to just happen in the Christian and Aethiest threads? Maybe that is the proper forum for speaking about being SAVED BY G-D PRAISE HIS GLORY, and that way those of us clicking on links to divert ourselves from work for a few minutes and think about raw food topics don’t end up feeling ONCE AGAIN bombarded by Jesus talk. I feel like I have to scrutinize every topic before entering if I hope to avoid JESUS JESUS JESUS. Using a raw food forum site to try to argue that there is no evolution amongst species is off-topic at best and inappropriate and offensive at worst. Have some respect for those of us who do not want your claimed messiah and accompanying book shoved down our throats. There must be an ilovejesus.com or some site to go speak to people about this stuff without innocent minding-their-own-business jews having to deal with it every day. but i guess preaching to like minded people isn’t quite as exciting as prosyltizing to heathens like me.

  • ZanzibarrrZanzibarrr Raw Newbie

    lol. Ah. yey. Dagny… LMAO… you REALLY sure you not from CAsablanca?

    xx

    John Galt

  • Dagny! Amazing, you just made my day!

  • I second that emotion. Dagny Taggert is a woman who calls it as she sees it. :)

  • I agree. What does this have to do with the raw vegan lifestyle? Shgadwa, I appreciate your desire to talk about your religion but I really feel there are more appropriate forums than this. IMHO. Peace, Karuna

Sign In or Register to comment.