Jump to content


Photo

The 2nd Law Of Thermodynamics


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
510 replies to this topic

#21 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 03 August 2009 - 08:15 AM

Because he asked me whether it was my opinion that it would increase. That made me jump to the conclusion that he was of another opinion. Sorry i was too fast!

View Post

I would say you were. Please consider apologizing to deadlock. When debating someone with a different worldview, questions are a customary way of bridging intellectual gaps.

You unfairly maligned deadlock's intelligence by jumping to a conclusion.

#22 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 03 August 2009 - 02:13 PM

When discussing thermodynamics, the distinction between any old energy and useful energy is important. Bombs are known to raze buildings; bombs are not known to raise buildings.

#23 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 03 August 2009 - 02:21 PM

Bombs are known to raze buildings; bombs are not known to raise buildings.

View Post

Very good example. Did you come up with that on your own or is that borrowed from another brilliant mind?

#24 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 03 August 2009 - 03:17 PM

Very good example. Did you come up with that on your own or is that borrowed from another brilliant mind?

View Post

I think it's mine, but I can't rule out the possibility that it's been lurking in my subconscious for years. My memory isn't what I wish it was.

#25 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 03 August 2009 - 08:01 PM

Consider this; The earth and the moon are both within the same proximity to the sun but the moon's state on the surface is clearly at a state near maximum entropy compared to the earth. What does this tell us?

The amount of blind faith it takes to believe that the living systems, that are capable of taking the sun's energy (which is coming from an object that is itself is heading towards a state of maximum entropy) to do work the way it is accomplished on this planet, by billions of years of random haphazard events that only have the illusion of intelligent design is beyond me.

View Post


The moon never had early Earth's reducing atmosphere. It's size prevents it from holding onto smaller elements. It's just that simple.

A car driving down the road is subject to the 2nd law of thermodynamics. To move, it burns fuel. A violation of the 2nd law would be the gas tank magically getting filled with fuel rather than consuming fuel while going down the road.

As a car goes along between fillings its entropy is increasing because it is running out of fuel. The moment that you refuel, its entropy is decreased.


A violation of the 2nd law would be a reversal of the combustion reaction. The presence of the fuel actually creates an open system and keeps entropy from increasing.

Personally, I hate this subject. I remember listening to my physics professor in college, with a PhD from MIT no less, having trouble explaining entropy. :huh:

#26 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 04 August 2009 - 05:07 AM

The moon never had early Earth's reducing atmosphere.  It's size prevents it from holding onto smaller elements.  It's just that simple.

View Post

I think you miss the point. The point is that heat alone doesn't provide the answer for how entropy is occurring. Even an open system which is receiving heat can be at near maximum entropy. That's the point.

A violation of the 2nd law would be a reversal of the combustion reaction.  The presence of the fuel actually creates an open system and keeps entropy from increasing.

View Post

That's a good example too but it's more difficult to conceptualize. The drive-train is a closed system. If you want to nit-pick about it, yours is an open system too the moment it produces an air fuel mixture that has to go somewhere.

This is actually a great parallel to Boyle's Law. The evolutionists here are quick to reject the signs of entropy because it is best described in a closed system but visible and comprehensible in an open system.

While Boyle's Law is demonstrated and calculated in a closed system it shows attributes of gasses that are undeniable and must still be considered conceptually in an open system.

(I think Albert Einstein would be disgusted at how poorly people conduct thought experiments. ;) )

Personally, I hate this subject.  I remember listening to my physics professor in college, with a PhD from MIT no less, having trouble explaining entropy. :D

View Post

I love this subject. In fact, I think I may work at splitting it off of this thread.

#27 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 04 August 2009 - 08:51 AM

Tharock220 got me to thinking. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is an interesting thing to contemplate through movie magic. We can conceptually violate the 2nd Law through imagination and illusion. Making a clip run backwards and look natural is a difficult trick because you have to understand thermodynamics, in order to hide it, while producing a clip that runs backwards and yet still looks natural.

The reason backwards videos look so weird is because you are seeing an illusion of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, which is naturally perceived by everyone, running backwards:

LbkNxYaULBw

This guy wanted to demonstrate that he did sing that song backwards by showing you things that are obviously wrong when the song sounds right because you are witnessing the 2nd Law violated or reversed.

#28 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 04 August 2009 - 09:29 AM

Here is another one just for fun:



These guys did a good job. It looks like this video would have been fun to produce. Often the certainty of increasing entropy can be hidden because the effects of entropy aren't always readily visible.

If you take a short walk, you can't observe entropy taking its toll. So if you make a video of yourself walking backwards and are careful regarding how you perform the movements, you can run it backwards and fool people into thinking you're walking forward. Then at the end (or the beginning rather) you could pop a water balloon or something to give the illusion that you're walking along just fine and then suddenly a water balloon forms in your hand from water on the ground.

Entropy is necessarily reversed in such a video based on the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics but it's not apparent but inferred. An inference which is reasonable from the data, unlike evolution and all the pet myths surrounding it. ;)

I really need to split this topic off this thread. :D <Done>

#29 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 04 August 2009 - 10:12 AM

I have to add this one too. This guy is committed:

http://www.break.com...kward-song.html

;)

#30 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 04 August 2009 - 11:40 AM

Alright, this is the last one:

http://www.metacafe...._ft_skoty_boi1/

Really, is anybody bored with these? ;)

How cool are these videos? I think this slow motion one is my favorite so far.

#31 A.Sphere

A.Sphere

    AKA st_dissent

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Interests:physics, mathematics, history, bicycling, hiking, traveling, cooking, the Korean language (Han Gul)
  • Age: 29
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Mississippi

Posted 06 August 2009 - 12:50 PM

The evolutionists here are quick to reject the signs of entropy because it is best described in a closed system but visible and comprehensible in an open system.


Not at all. What creationists here are failing to understand is the link between energy and entropy. By adding energy to a system entropy can be decreased. Creationists here seem to believe that entropy always increases for all systems. The 2nd law can be reformulated to say that entropy always increases for isolated systems. That is the only absolute statement the 2nd law makes. Other than that the 2nd law simply tells us how much energy we must put into a system to lower the entropy or how much energy must be given up by the system to increase the entropy. Mathematically it is written:

deltaQ < TdS

For an isolated system deltaQ = 0 so TdS > 0 => dS > 0. Which means that in an isolated system entropy must always increase or stay the same (because the change in entropy is positive). This is the situation which creationists here seem to believe generally applies to all situations. I tried to argue earlier that the absolute statement of the 2nd Law for isolated systems does indeed approximate the behavior of an open system that isn't given enough energy to lower its entropy.

Because deltaQ can be heat transfered to the environment from the system or from the environment to the system so it can change signs. This means that dS can be negative which is a decrease in entropy. So entropy change can be positive or negative - it depends on how much energy (and thus work) is added or subtracted from the system.

#32 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 06 August 2009 - 01:09 PM

Hi A.Sphere,

What creationists understand is increasing energy is'nt an escape from 2LT.Does over driving a 100 watt bulb increase it's life expectancy?Did the Hiroshima bomb help escape the effects of 2LT?It sure was a whole lot of energy all at once.


Enjoy.

#33 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 06 August 2009 - 10:50 PM

I think you miss the point. The point is that heat alone doesn't provide the answer for how entropy is occurring. Even an open system which is receiving heat can be at near maximum entropy. That's the point.


I've never heard of maximum entropy. What is that??? Is the moon's entropy increasing. Are there any of sources of heat on the moon.

You like the car thing, so let's go with that. If you're driving in your car, your gas is being converted to usable energy and heat by the engine which you obviously know. This decreases the entropy of the system in question, the car and its surroundings. Turn off your engine, and the entropy of the system increases.

In reference to the Earth, her only source of energy is not the Sun. The Earth's interior also has radioactive elements that are producing heat.

You're overthinking the entropy thing man.

That's a good example too but it's more difficult to conceptualize. The drive-train is a closed system. If you want to nit-pick about it, yours is an open system too the moment it produces an air fuel mixture that has to go somewhere.


You're making it more difficult. :o

This is actually a great parallel to Boyle's Law. The evolutionists here are quick to reject the signs of entropy because it is best described in a closed system but visible and comprehensible in an open system.


Again, your overanalyzing entropy. It's a word used to describe properties of a system. If those properties change entropy changes.

While Boyle's Law is demonstrated and calculated in a closed system it shows attributes of gasses that are undeniable and must still be considered conceptually in an open system.


Is this about dust clouds???

#34 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 07 August 2009 - 02:17 AM

You're overthinking the entropy thing man.

View Post

You're making it more difficult. :D

View Post

Again, your overanalyzing entropy.

View Post

Personally, I hate this subject.

View Post

:o

#35 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 07 August 2009 - 08:00 AM

I've always loved pointing out the 2nd law problem in Miller Urey. They got chains of 3 or 4 amino acids, but not longer... why? Classic 2nd law energy problem.

#36 A.Sphere

A.Sphere

    AKA st_dissent

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Interests:physics, mathematics, history, bicycling, hiking, traveling, cooking, the Korean language (Han Gul)
  • Age: 29
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Mississippi

Posted 07 August 2009 - 11:10 AM

Hi A.Sphere,

What creationists understand is increasing energy is'nt an escape from 2LT.Does over driving a 100 watt bulb increase it's life expectancy?Did the Hiroshima bomb help escape the effects of 2LT?It sure was a whole lot of energy all at once.
Enjoy.

View Post


?

I just lowered the entropy of water in my freezer by freezing it. I can do this because my freezer recieves enough energy from an external source to lower the temperature of the water. A system can have a local decrease in entropy if it recieves enough energy - it doesn't mean that it will - just that it can.

#37 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 07 August 2009 - 02:12 PM

?

I just lowered the entropy of water in my freezer by freezing it.  I can do this because my freezer recieves enough energy from an external source to lower the temperature of the water.  A system can have a local decrease in entropy if it recieves enough energy - it doesn't mean that it will - just that it can.

View Post

Your freezer requires a specific form of energy input: the kind it was designed to accept. It won't work if you try another form, say beating on it with a sledgehammer. And it doesn't matter how hard or how long you beat it - you'll only increase its entropy.

I guess there's nothing so obvious we don't need to point it out.
  • FaithfulCenturion likes this

#38 A.Sphere

A.Sphere

    AKA st_dissent

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Interests:physics, mathematics, history, bicycling, hiking, traveling, cooking, the Korean language (Han Gul)
  • Age: 29
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Mississippi

Posted 08 August 2009 - 01:11 PM

Your freezer requires a specific form of energy input: the kind it was designed to accept. It won't work if you try another form, say beating on it with a sledgehammer. And it doesn't matter how hard or how long you beat it - you'll only increase its entropy.

I guess there's nothing so obvious we don't need to point it out.

View Post



Hence why I said:

A system can have a local decrease in entropy if it receives enough energy - it doesn't mean that it will - just that it can.


The system (that is the refrigerator) has no means to convert the energy imparted on it by the bat to usable energy so that it may do work.

#39 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 08 August 2009 - 02:41 PM

Hence why I said:
The system (that is the refrigerator) has no means to convert the energy imparted on it by the bat to usable energy so that it may do work.

View Post

Likewise with DNA. No amount of sunlight or electrical shocks will create it, despite sunlight and electrical power having an overabundance of energy to do it.

#40 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 11 August 2009 - 01:59 AM

Please disregard - duplicate post.

Edited by CTD, 11 August 2009 - 02:02 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users