|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 5054 days) Posts: 125 From: Brooklyn, New York Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Truth About Evolution and Religion | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dkroemer Member (Idle past 5054 days) Posts: 125 From: Brooklyn, New York Joined: |
Dear PhD in Physics:
What is wrong with my argument? Do you agree that there is no explanation for the big bang, the origen of life, and common descent? Isn't true that the problem with explaining the evolution of life from random mutations comes from of the second law of thermodynamics? Doesn't the second law state that it is impossible to get four perfect bridge hands in 13 billion years?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi dkroemer, you're just repeating yourself ...
... even after being shown to be wrong. Again.
With this in mind, the probability of getting a protein from a soup of amino acids is the reciprical of 20600. Except that it isn't, and you should know this now, as it has been demonstrated that your calculation does not calculate the probability properly\correctly. See Message 305 quote: and Message 312 again.
quote: And even this does not model all the ways that such a molecule can be formed by natural processes. Nor does it model the chemical limitations on which bonds can form and which cannot. If A never bonds with C due to chemical limitations, then including AC in any other set of combinations to calculate the total possible variations means these calculations are false\wrong\incorrect\bogus. These are simple concepts to understand. Understanding them means that you won't repeat the nonsense that the probability is in any way calculated by 20600. Because it is silly to keep repeating false information. Enjoy. we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Dear PhD in Physics: What is wrong with my argument? Do you agree that there is no explanation for the big bang, the origen of life, and common descent? Isn't true that the problem with explaining the evolution of life from random mutations comes from of the second law of thermodynamics? Doesn't the second law state that it is impossible to get four perfect bridge hands in 13 billion years? The word "no" comes to mind.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1254 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
I estimate that the odds of a Ph.D. in physics having such a gross misunderstanding of the 2LoT are 1 in 10^7. I further estimate that the odds of a Ph.D. not being able to spell the word origin are 1 in 10^5. Thus, I estimate the odds that you are actually the holder of a Ph.D. are roughly 1 in 10^12.
What is wrong with my argument? All available evidence demonstrates that you are unable to understand the answer to this question, given the multiple times that it has been explained to you in this thread by multiple participants. The only real question now is why anyone should continue the attempt, other than their own mental masturbation. Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
fizz57102 Junior Member (Idle past 4006 days) Posts: 17 Joined:
|
dk,
In my post I am not addressing your overall argument, just two statements you made in your post no. 324. These statements presumably have something to do with your overall argument (otherwise, why did you make them?), so it makes sense to examine them in some detail before proceeding to the argument in its entirety. I can summarise the conclusions of my post in the following two statements: - the 2nd law of thermodynamics is not inconsistent with a local decrease of entropy, given an interaction with an external system; and: - the 2nd law of thermodynamics is not inconsistent with a local evolution (in the physical sense) from a probabilistically more likely situation to a less likely one, again given an interaction with an external system; If you disagree, please post your rebuttal of my post no.328; if you agree, please say so and we will go on from there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
dkroemer writes:
Shall we take you as claiming that no starlight gets in, and no energy from the sun ever leaves?The Earth and sun taken together is a closed system, so the second law applies. Granted, starlight is relatively small. But this is mostly beside the point. Nobody is denying that the sun will eventually "burn out", and when it does then the conditions for life and evolution on earth will no longer exist. That does not support what you have been claiming.
dkroemer writes:
That may be the probabilty of getting a specific protein. However, it is not the probability of getting a protein, and it does not have the significance that you seem to think it has.With this in mind, the probability of getting a protein from a soup of amino acids is the reciprical of 20600. Edited by nwr, : spelling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
dkroemer writes:
What you have posted in Message 326 only shows that Darwinism will stop working in 5 billion years time, or so. It has no relevance to what is currently happening.
I explain why Darwinism is inconsistent with the second law of thermodyamics in post # 326.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Isn't true that the problem with explaining the evolution of life from random mutations comes from of the second law of thermodynamics? Doesn't the second law state that it is impossible to get four perfect bridge hands in 13 billion years? Of all the stupid ... wait ... Buzzsaw, is that you? Edited by AZPaul3, : spelin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Isn't true that the problem with explaining the evolution of life from random mutations comes from of the second law of thermodynamics? I have no doubt you'll ignore me, but just in case there is some part of you that is still possesses the capacity for understanding I'll say it anyway. Could you tell me how much work life does? The second law tells us that we cannot take the workable energy from the sun, perform 100% efficient work with it to evolve a population, recapture the energy with 100% success and use it to perform work with which to evolve a population. Evolution does not claim to be an efficient process. So what's the problem here? I'll put it simply: Is it impossible for 2 x 1023 Joules of energy to be applied to generate complexity? That's how much energy life has (conservatively) to work with...per year.
Doesn't the second law state that it is impossible to get four perfect bridge hands in 13 billion years? No. It states that things will tend towards thermal equilibrium. It doesn't mention Bridge. Nor is Bridge a system that does work. Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peepul Member (Idle past 5018 days) Posts: 206 Joined: |
quote: I think you are overrating the spelling ability of physics Ph.D's!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
The Earth and sun taken together is a closed system, so the second law applies. Let's assume this is correct, which it isn't as has been pointed out, but we'll take this as axiom. The laws of thermodynamics then require that the amount of energy available for useful work within this system decrease over time. There are two sources of thermal energy for this planet. The sun is by far the largest. It produces an enormous amount of energy that flows out into the system becoming ever thinner (inverse square rule) until a local equilibrium is reached in the outer reaches of the system; no thermodynamic excess for useful work. The sun is a mega-entropy producer. On this planet, however, the amount of the sun's energy we receive is well beyond the point of local equilibrium. The other source of thermal energy is our spinning planetary core. This also produces an enormous amount of thermodynamic excess. Between these two sources we exist within an enormously huge thermodynamic excess. Now please pay attention since you have missed this in your one-sided treatment of thermodynamics. The laws of thermodynamics not just allow but require that in areas of thermodynamic excess, useful work, structure and order, a decrease in entropy has to occur. This is why we have plate tectonics, clouds, Hagen-Dazs Ice Cream and life. So you can consider the sun-Earth system as thermodynamically closed yet still have the local thermodynamic excess required for life to form, evolve and play bridge. BTW, no matter the order of the deck, just the existence of the deck of cards is a decrease in entropy. The thermodynamic excess we enjoy allowed their manufacture, which, when viewed in total is balanced by the increase in entropy (use of work) caused by the manufacturing process. Your view of thermodynamics is errant. It has nothing to do with the mathematical probabilities of card order or molecules bumping into one another but everything to do with the flow of energy, excess, useful work to make decks of cards and put and keep the molecules together. Edited by AZPaul3, : i wanted to Edited by AZPaul3, : again
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dkroemer Member (Idle past 5054 days) Posts: 125 From: Brooklyn, New York Joined: |
If the molecules of a gas in a container move to one side, that side may or may not heat up. What if all the low kinetic energy molecules move to one side of the container? I don't know about the temperature. There is no interaction with an outside system in this thought experiment. Such a movement of gas molecules violates the second law of thermodynamics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2106 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Such a movement of gas molecules violates the second law of thermodynamics. What is it with creationists and the 2nd law? Can't you see the massive evidence that shows there was no violation of the 2nd law? Things like genetics, the fossil record, etc.? Or are you going to claim that those are flawed also? Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dkroemer Member (Idle past 5054 days) Posts: 125 From: Brooklyn, New York Joined: |
The chance of getting four perfect bridge hands is 52 factorial. If everyone on Earth played bridge for 3.5 billion years, the chance of getting a perfect bridge hand is less than 0.0000000001 percent. This is the kind of calculation you have to understand in order to do statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. This is the basis of the second law of thermodynamics.
Darwinists--not trained biologists-- say evolution comes about because of chemicals jumping around chemically. Just like a deck of cards.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
The chance of getting four perfect bridge hands is 52 factorial. If everyone on Earth played bridge for 3.5 billion years, the chance of getting a perfect bridge hand is less than 0.0000000001 percent. This is the kind of calculation you have to understand in order to do statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. This is the basis of the second law of thermodynamics. I have a deck of cards. I have just arranged them into suits and number order. Have I increased the order of the deck of cards? Have I violated the 2nd law of thermodynamics?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024