Is there more than one definition of natural selection?

Allopatrik, you replied to my question:HM wrote:Do you think thermodynmaic entropy should be included in the concept of biological evolution?Allopatrick: No. It has little, if any relevance to the understanding of evolutionary principles.But then you replied differently to another question:HM: Is there any reason why biological evolution should obey thermodynamic laws?Allopatrick: Who says it doesn't?Why the 180?There is no 180.
In the second answer AP is simple saying that as chemistry and physics the underpinnings of biology obey the laws of thermodynamics.This first is saying that knowing that has little or nothing to do with understanding evolution. I guess an analogy might help. (sometimes they do :S)I know that the combustion in my car obeys the laws of thermodynamics. However, I would not spend much or any time on that if I wanted to help you understand how my car works. I could just say "The pistons are moved by the expanding gases from the combustion of fuel". After that I would have to spend a long time explainiing how that is converted to forward motion; why there is a tranmission; what the ignition timing does; the behavior of a differential and on and on. The fact that the expanding gases have behavior following the rules of thermodynamics never has to come up.There is no 180.

Quantum mechanics, thermodynamics etc. all apply of course.The point is that you may just accept that stuff as under there somewhere. Above it is the chemistry of DNA etc. For the most part you may ignore that too. It is just the background.Evolution is based on inherited variation. That variation may come from quantum mechanical uncertainty or whereever. An understanding of evolutionary processes does NOT require that this be given any consideration.