Reason for 2nd law of thermodynamics and evolution

[URAIN]

The second law of thermodynamics expresses that things tends to go from order to disorder as time progresses. Yet, the evolutionist says that this law must be violated billions of time.

 

 

On this discussion topic I would like to know (and would like to discuss)

 

1) What is the reason for disorder (or increase in entropy) according to second law of thermodynamics?

 

 

2) How can we apply this second law of thermodynamics to the evolution and cyclic universes?

 

 

3) What is the reason for not converting, potential energy into 100% kinetic energy in internal combustion engine?

Edited November 14, 2011 by URAIN

[Mystery111]

''1) What is the reason for disorder (or increase in entropy) according to second law of thermodynamics?''

 

The reason for disorder is simply the fact of the evolution of objects. You imagine the first instant of time; the objects cannot remain the way they were, this would violate the uncertainty principle, so disorder, the movement of objects in a space happens because to avoid the violation of physical principles.

 

''2) How can we apply this second law of thermodynamics to the evolution and cyclic universes?''

 

Time doesn't appear to be cyclic. It's an often misused concept, along with time's arrow and the flow of time, even time reversibility which would be involved in cyclic universe theories. Anyway, the evolution of a collection of particles is the idea their dymanics change with each passing measurement made on the system. Not just an idea in fact, it is a measured observable fact.

 

You can reverse entropy, but you can't reverse time as we know it. Say you have a box with a very small amount of particles, let's say [math]10^6[/math] particles. Eventually those particles may or may not end up in the states they began. This is an example of reversing entropy but not time itself.

 

''3) What is the reason for not converting, potential energy into 100% kinetic energy in internal combustion engine?''

 

Why a 100% Can you define your question again please. Why is that important for instance?

[Ophiolite]

The second law of thermodynamics expresses that things tends to go from order to disorder as time progresses. Yet, the evolutionist says that this law must be violated billions of time.

No knowledgeable evolutionist would ever make such a claim. If you disagree then justify your disagreement with a quotation from an established researcher in any part of the evolution field, published in a peer reviewed journal.

[thedarkshade]

1. I believe that fundamentally it has to do with the natural tendency of physical systems to reach 'a lower energy state', that is a more stable one. Disorder is just the word we seem to use to describe it when we see no elegance while the process is under way.

 

3. Reality is not ideal I guess

[Mystery111]

No knowledgeable evolutionist would ever make such a claim. If you disagree then justify your disagreement with a quotation from an established researcher in any part of the evolution field, published in a peer reviewed journal.

 

 

Agreed.

 

1. I believe that fundamentally it has to do with the natural tendency of physical systems to reach 'a lower energy state', that is a more stable one. Disorder is just the word we seem to use to describe it when we see no elegance while the process is under way.

 

3. Reality is not ideal I guess

 

 

But many systems are already in a ground state order. In fact, systems will always tend to be in a state which will cost the least amount of energy due to the principle of least action. If particles could have their way, they wouldn't move at all to conserve as much energy as possible! But this isn't the case and can never be the case.

 

In fact, I will add to this, that the big bang could have been in a ground state as well, so this cannot account for disorder.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Mystery111

[URAIN]

Why a 100% Can you define your question again please.

 

When I was in high school, It was taught that in internal combustion engine, the potential energy (like petrol, diesel) fully not used by engine to perform work.

 

Did I had posted wrong question? Is there any mistake? What is your opinion?

 

Why is that important for instance?

 

 

May be there is a link in between this law and performance of engine. I have not any perfect opinion or idea about it. (I would like to perfect in my understanding)

[Mystery111]

 

When I was in high school, It was taught that in internal combustion engine, the potential energy (like petrol, diesel) fully not used by engine to perform work.

 

Did I had posted wrong question? Is there any mistake? What is your opinion?

 

 

 

 

May be there is a link in between this law and performance of engine. I have not any perfect opinion or idea about it. (I would like to perfect in my understanding)

 

Start with the dynamical stuff, simple explanations than worrying about complex systems friend. You can understand everything you need to know about thermodynamics in the most simplest sense which, quantum mechanics has provided us. It's a wonderful history quantum mechanics. The concepts are a walk over the mountains. The walk into mathematics is even more brighter and adventurous.

 

I can give you a brief example of evolution in the respect of matrices and quantum mechanics if you wanted.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Mystery111

[URAIN]

No knowledgeable evolutionist would ever make such a claim. If you disagree then justify your disagreement with a quotation from an established researcher in any part of the evolution field, published in a peer reviewed journal.

 

OnlyI would like to gain the knowledge from of experts. I will only see,what will goes in the discussion. If any doubts arise then I will ask question. I don’t havefull perfect idea about it.

 

When I was visited the websites, in searching of this subject, I found this opinion.

 

 

[Mystery111]

OnlyI would like to gain the knowledge from of experts. I will only see,what will goes in the discussion. If any doubts arise then I will ask question. I don't havefull perfect idea about it.

 

When I was visited the websites, in searching of this subject, I found this opinion.

 

 

 

 

Form your own opinion, rather than the dogma, just so long as your opinion isn't clouding the scientist in you. There are many scientific subjects friend which do not settle on one opinion alone. Study all concepts, leave yourself no room for interpetation when many may exist, and you will make a brilliant scientist.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Mystery111

[URAIN]

 

I can give you a brief example of evolution in the respect of matrices and quantum mechanics if you wanted.

 

This topic has started to know about this. YES ("If possible" in short and sweet)

[Mystery111]

This topic has started to know about this. YES ("If possible" in short and sweet)

 

I will do. Give me around 15 mins to type it up. Latex requires a bit of time.

 

Ok... the simplest way to envision an evolution in a matrix, or the way we describe it is by ''up-dating'' the system to another moment in time. We will not use a time variable expressed as [math]t[/math], we will simply depend on the matrix evolution involving a matrix times a vector, which can be a row vector or a column vector. In the most simplest way demonstratable is given as

 

[math]\begin{Vmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \end{Vmatrix}[/math]

 

You may take this simple 4 by 4 matrix and multiply it with let us example, a column vector given as:

 

[math]\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}[/math]

 

This matrix is trivial. You can have the 1 placed in any compartment. Anyway, when you multiply these two together, you will find:

 

[math] = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}[/math]

 

This ''1'' has now moved down 1 step in your column matrix. This is the power of matrix evolution This represents your fourth state as an up-dated example of your initial setup. You may describe the evolution of a system in such ways.

 

Another example is the quantum motion of particle which can describe evolution. Usually the quantum textbook definition of describing a motion in a time contrained sense is

 

[math]i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \Psi(x,t) = \hat{H}\Psi(x,t)[/math]

 

where [math]\Psi[/math] is your state vector, the wave function governing the entire system and x is your choice of position coordinate and [math]i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t}[/math] is your energy operator.

[URAIN]

I will do. Give me around 15 mins to type it up. Latex requires a bit of time.

 

 

It's OK. But please keep in mind, the above three question . Where it required give solution to the above questions.

 

 

 

[Moontanman]

The second law of thermodynamics expresses that things tends to go from order to disorder as time progresses. Yet, the evolutionist says that this law must be violated billions of time.

 

First of all there is no such thing as an EVOLUTIONIST..... Secondly I have never heard a scientist say that evolution violates the laws of thermodynamics...

 

 

On this discussion topic I would like to know (and would like to discuss)

 

1) What is the reason for disorder (or increase in entropy) according to second law of thermodynamics?

 

The reason for it? This is just my opinion but I would think that disordered states are more likely to occur than ordered states.

 

 

2) How can we apply this second law of thermodynamics to the evolution and cyclic universes?

 

Evolution does not violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics, cyclic universes have nothing to with biological evolution and cyclic universes are not part of currently accepted theory...

 

 

3) What is the reason for not converting, potential energy into 100% kinetic energy in internal combustion engine?

 

 

 

In an Internal combustion engine you have many loses of efficiency due to friction and waste heat, these loses are unavoidable and cannot be completely eliminated.

[CaptainPanic]

The second law of thermodynamics expresses that things tends to go from order to disorder as time progresses. Yet, the evolutionist says that this law must be violated billions of time.

No, they do not say that. Please show a reference when an evolutionist says this gets violated.

 

Sure, life creates order from disorder (a plant seems a pretty ordered structure compared to the water and CO2 that are the building blocks). But at the same time, elsewhere the disorder is increased. If you look at the whole picture (including everything), then disorder increases.

 

On this discussion topic I would like to know (and would like to discuss)

 

1) What is the reason for disorder (or increase in entropy) according to second law of thermodynamics?

Statistics of molecular motion.

Particles have a random motion (because they bump into each other). That just leads to disorder.

 

You can test this at home:

Take 2 types of marbles, of identical weight and size, but a different color, and place them in a bucket. Put all the marbles of 1 color at the bottom, and all the other ones at the top. Close the lid, and shake.

I guarantee that before long, they're pretty nicely mixed... and that is what we call disorder.

 

So, the reason is pretty basic: it's because particles move. The particles find an equilibrium, which (usually) is the situation where they're well mixed.

 

2) How can we apply this second law of thermodynamics to the evolution and cyclic universes?

I dunno. I don't know much about astronomy, or cyclic universes.

 

3) What is the reason for not converting, potential energy into 100% kinetic energy in internal combustion engine?

To put it really simply: you are left with some heat that you cannot use efficiently. Heat is still energy, but when something gets close to the room temperature (= when the difference between the hot material and the outside environment is really small), it becomes pretty useless.

Edited November 14, 2011 by CaptainPanic

[Mystery111]

Everyone calm down. I'm not a mod, but clearly this guy is in need of education, so take his OP with a pinch of salt.

 

It's OK. But please keep in mind, the above three question . Where it required give solution to the above questions.

 

 

 

 

I have done. Please look to the previous post to this one. I have now explained, in the most simplest sense a matrix evolution including a quantum evolution.

[URAIN]

I will do. Give me around 15 mins to type it up. Latex requires a bit of time.

 

Ok... the simplest way to envision an evolution in a matrix, or the way we describe it is by ''up-dating'' the system to another moment in time. We will not use a time variable expressed as [math]t[/math], we will simply depend on the matrix evolution involving a matrix times a vector, which can be a row vector or a column vector. In the most simplest way demonstratable is given as

 

[math]\begin{Vmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \end{Vmatrix}[/math]

 

You may take this simple 4 by 4 matrix and multiply it with let us example, a column vector given as:

 

[math]\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}[/math]

 

This matrix is trivial. You can have the 1 placed in any compartment. Anyway, when you multiply these two together, you will find:

 

[math] = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}[/math]

 

This ''1'' has now moved down 1 step in your column matrix. This is the power of matrix evolution This represents your fourth state as an up-dated example of your initial setup. You may describe the evolution of a system in such ways.

 

Another example is the quantum motion of particle which can describe evolution. Usually the quantum textbook definition of describing a motion in a time contrained sense is

 

[math]i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t} \Psi(x,t) = \hat{H}\Psi(x,t)[/math]

 

where [math]\Psi[/math] is your state vector, the wave function governing the entire system and x is your choice of position coordinate and [math]i \hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t}[/math] is your energy operator.

 

Thank you.

 

At first time I am knowing example of evolution in the respect of matrices. It is maths. Now how you relate it with physical transformation. Square matrix represent what? And what represents vector matrix physically?

What has existed before big bang? How?

 

 

 

[Moontanman]

Thank you.

 

At first time I am knowing example of evolution in the respect of matrices. It is maths. Now how you relate it with physical transformation. Square matrix represent what? And what represents vector matrix physically?

What has existed before big bang? How?

 

 

At this point in time no one knows what existed before the big bang and some say no one ever will know, think of it as trying to measure what is south of the south pole on the Earth....

[Mystery111]

At this point in time no one knows what existed before the big bang and some say no one ever will know, think of it as trying to measure what is south of the south pole on the Earth....

 

Though to be fair, some maintream physicists do believe they have the ''answer'' to what happened before the first instant.

 

One approach in Ekpyrotic Theory... (did I spell that right?)

 

Anyway, this theory dictates that there is such a thing as a cyclic universe (which I don't agree with), where the universe remained frozen for eons. It wasn't until a local brane (that is another branch universe) collided with our own, causes the big bang as we know it.

 

Thank you.

 

At first time I am knowing example of evolution in the respect of matrices. It is maths. Now how you relate it with physical transformation. Square matrix represent what? And what represents vector matrix physically?

 

What has existed before big bang? How?

 

 

 

 

I'm glad to help

 

Yes there are some theories, like the Ekpyrotic Theory, a kind of inflamable theory of creation exists where the universe before the big bang existed for many many many years.... Probably longer than what it has currently been in progress for.

[CaptainPanic]

Though to be fair, some maintream physicists do believe they have the ''answer'' to what happened before the first instant.

 

One approach in Ekpyrotic Theory... (did I spell that right?)

 

Anyway, this theory dictates that there is such a thing as a cyclic universe (which I don't agree with), where the universe remained frozen for eons. It wasn't until a local brane (that is another branch universe) collided with our own, causes the big bang as we know it.

As far as I know, we cannot measure anything about that... so it's just a theory, but unfortunately a theory that we cannot test.

 

In my opinion, that makes it no better than a fairy tale.

[Mystery111]

As far as I know, we cannot measure anything about that... so it's just a theory, but unfortunately a theory that we cannot test.

 

In my opinion, that makes it no better than a fairy tale.

 

Not so.

 

There is such a thing as cosmic bruises. Not absolute evidence, but evidence nonetheless.

[Moontanman]

As far as I know, we cannot measure anything about that... so it's just a theory, but unfortunately a theory that we cannot test.

 

In my opinion, that makes it no better than a fairy tale.

 

 

I agree with what you say but I am not comfortable with these ideas being called theory in the scientific sense, more like hypothesis...

[Mystery111]

I agree with what you say but I am not comfortable with these ideas being called theory in the scientific sense, more like hypothesis...

 

I've shown he was wrong. Don't speculate something which has been proven incorrect.

[swansont]

You can test this at home:

Take 2 types of marbles, of identical weight and size, but a different color, and place them in a bucket. Put all the marbles of 1 color at the bottom, and all the other ones at the top. Close the lid, and shake.

I guarantee that before long, they're pretty nicely mixed... and that is what we call disorder.

You can also take different sized of marbles and do the same experiment, and the shaking will sort the marbles, with the largest on top, even if they are more massive (the popcorn or Brazil-nut effect).

 

The second law of thermodynamics expresses that things tends to go from order to disorder as time progresses. Yet, the evolutionist says that this law must be violated billions of time.

No, it doesn't — entropy can't decrease for isolated systems but that's not true in general — and no, they don't. Straw man.

 

 

3) What is the reason for not converting, potential energy into 100% kinetic energy in internal combustion engine?

 

All engines have to reject heat.

[URAIN]

Not so.

 

There is such a thing as cosmic bruises. Not absolute evidence, but evidence nonetheless.

 

( I have Asked earlier, again I am asking) Mystery, Please answer. In example of evolution in the respect of matrices, how you relate matrices with physical transformation during evolution.

 

 

Square and vector matrices represents what ?

 

What represent the 1 and 0 at evolution as a physical entity? (Does -1 has not existed)

 

 

At the end of the topic, I could collectively write the common things, which is in the members answers, for three questions.But till other members may also can give answers to it. Hence I will wait.

 

( I have intended to write my opinion after writing common answer of all members.)

 

 

Now I think it is better to write final common opinion of members to the first paragraph of my first post.

 

 

Final common thing : The second law of thermodynamics must be violated billions of time. This is not a statement of evolutionist else it is statement of "Pseudo Evolutionists" ( Objection may posted with proof of scientific rules)

 

 

Mystery you had used Uncertainty principle and (violation of) physical principles, when answering first question. Please explain it widely. (What are these in particular as a answer for this question).

Edited November 14, 2011 by URAIN

[Mystery111]

( I have Asked earlier, again I am asking) Mystery, Please answer. In example of evolution in the respect of matrices, how you relate matrices with physical transformation during evolution.

 

 

 

Square and vector matrices represents what ?

 

What represent the 1 and 0 at evolution as a physical entity? (Does -1 has not existed)

 

 

 

At the end of the topic, I could collectively write the common things, which is in the members answers, for three questions.But till other members may also can give answers to it. Hence I will wait.

 

( I have intended to write my opinion after writing common answer of all members.)

 

 

 

Now I think it is better to write final common opinion of members to the first paragraph of my first post.

 

 

 

Final common thing : The second law of thermodynamics must be violated billions of time. This is not a statement of evolutionist else it is statement of "Pseudo Evolutionists" ( Objection may posted with proof of scientific rules)

 

 

 

Mystery you had used Uncertainty principle and (violation of) physical principles, when answering first question. Please explain it widely. (What are these in particular as a answer for this question).

 

Of course -1 exists. If you wanted, you can plug in some imaginary numbers in there.

 

The second law of thermodynamics must be violated billions of time. This is not a statement of evolutionist else it is statement of "Pseudo Evolutionists" ( Objection

may posted with proof of scientific rules

 

not true. none of the physical principles are violated.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Mystery111