Second Law of Thermodynamics

Untrue. Carbonyl sulfide, a common gas in volcanos, has been found to facilitate polymerization of amino acids into at least pentamers in water solution. That's not even considering drying-out puddles, a slightly more brute-force way to polymerize them.TSRI - News & Views

Does transferring random noise over wires get considered thermodynamically different than transferring Shakespeare assuming the same amount of energy is transferred in the same time period? We are not talking about infodynamics but thermodynamics. The two have analogies but they are not the same. As such information is out of scope of this discussion. Feel free to open a new topic on it, its an interesting subject. We are talking about energy transfers, and problems that evolution might face. So we need to find an energy transfer that is forbidden by THERMOdynamics. What's yours?Mine is that

quote:

---

Amino acids in hot water form proteinoids, protenoids which have been in hot water then cooled form microspheres. Microspheres grow, and 'replicate', and can form nucelic acids and polypeptides.

---

Heheheh... nice. In case you didn't know certain members of the ID movement believe information should be treated exactly the same, and one in particular (Dembski) makes claims as if he has come up with a new law (2LoT turned into 2LoI). Just wanted to make sure you know where some of this might be coming from.

---

holmes
"What you need is sustained outrage...there's far too much unthinking respect given to authority." (M.Ivins)

Yeah - I've heard that before. Hell, I debated with the great and glorious Jerry.The equations and maths has many analogies but the problem seems to arise when people (esp IDers) try and cross the terms over. I'm no expert in either area, but I can smell something fishy when the bass is frying.

First you fail to note that the amino acids produced were not those required for proteins, enzynes, nucleic acids and DNA. Second the amino acids were as always and forever racemic mixtures of levo and dextro forms which are absolutely useless for making the polypeptides that make up the molecules of life. There was no hint of how this separation or creation of all lefthanded or righthanded versions of the twenty acids could be naturally effected. There is nothing new here other than a different set of carefully crafted reaction conditions crreated by scientists. Let alone how the products could be used for life prcesses. The molecules formed are racemic mixtures of both forma and absolutely useless for the problem at hand.

I never said they were the same. The Braxton paper makes the differences clear and the analogies clear. It also accounts for the entropic work necessary to order and sequence the optically pure acids into chains suitable for carrying the genetic code or instuections/information necessary for life as we observe it and theoretically contenance it.Chemistry unaided by codes and interpretive processes cannever explain the operation of a human cell.Codes and interpretive systems never arise randomly.

There have been some great discussion on this.Try: Message 168or Message 151both threads are still open, so you can still contribute!

This is a very common misapprehension; so common that Talkorigins has a page on it:

quote:

---

1. The amino acids that are used in life, like most other aspects of living things, are very likely not the product of chance. Instead, they likely resulted from a selection process. A simple peptide replicator can amplify the proportion of a single handedness in an initially random mixture of left- and right-handed fragments (Saghatelian et al. 2001; TSRI 2001). Self-assemblies on two-dimensional surfaces can also amplify a single handedness (Zepik et al. 2002). Serine forms stable clusters of a single handedness which can select other amino acids of like handedness by subtituting them for serine; these clusters also incorporate other biologically important molecules such as glyceraldehyde, glucose, and phosphoric acid (Takats et al. 2003). An excess of handedness in one kind of amino acid catalyzes the handedness of other organic products, such as threose, which may have figured prominently in proto-life (Pizzarello and Weber 2004).

​

2. Amino acids found in meteorites from space, which must have formed abiotically, also show significantly more of the left-handed variety, perhaps from circularly polarized UV light in the early solar system (Engel and Macko 1997; Cronin and Pizzarello 1999). The weak nuclear force, responsible for beta decay, produces only electrons with left-handed spin, and chemicals exposed to these electrons are far more likely to form left-handed crystals (Service 1999). Such mechanisms might also have been responsible for the prevalence of left-handed amino acids on earth.

​

3. The first self-replicator may have had eight or fewer types of amino acids (Cavalier-Smith 2001). It is not all that unlikely that the same handedness might occur so few times by chance, especially if one of the amino acids was glycine, which has no handedness.

​

4. Some bacteria use right-handed amino acids, too (McCarthy et al. 1998).

---

from CB040: Left-handed amino acids

Two examples would be the ETSI peo

Most of the above is information related and would be a good start in an thread based on same. PNT?Do you have any information (heh) with regards to some kind of energy transfer that is forbidden by thermodynamics that is required for evolution?

Since the naturalistic separation of racemic mixtures of amion acids from basic monommers has been the most problimatical issue in the theory anyone who could propose a realistic primal environment and demonstrate such would win the Nobel prixe. It has not been done.There is no evidence that the first replicator could possible be as simple as described. That is another fairy tale.

Am I a potted palm? Funny, I don't feel like a potted palm. I thought I was a mighty moderator, but maybe not. I thought members feared my every word, but maybe I'm actually just a houseplant! If I were really a moderator no member would ever consider ignoring even the merest hint that perhaps this isn't the right thread for this discussion.Seriously, folks, this thread was just the old familiar assertion that evolution violates 2LOT because everything runs down, not up. Evopeach is jumping from 2LOT to information theory because there are theoretical transformations between the two. That doesn't make them the same topic in this moderator's opinion. If someone would like to propose a new topic I'll try to approve it as soon as I can, but I'm closing this one down.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director