Re: Policy asked to investigate entropy-claim in website of Turku University in Finland

In message <HRFOh.10126$JZ3.6836@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Perplexed in Peoria <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes

"Mark Iredell" <im.back@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1175132372.307658.168890@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Perplexed in Peoria wrote:
> "John Vreeland" <vreejack@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message >news:vvrk03tsgh2sjadh08a1cnqkno4t56lo6s@xxxxxxxxxx
> > On 28 Mar 2007 05:42:07 -0700, "Kari Tikkanen" <ktikkane@xxxxxxxxx>
> > opined:
> >
> > >Finnish Newspaper Turun Sanomat has an article about it on 27 March
> > >2007.
> > >
> > >(Following are partly my words: The paper says some-one, doesn't say
> > >"creationist" but we know he is creationist..).
> > >A Finnish creationist has asked police to inquiry website. There is
> > >"unscientific claim" about entropy that creationist claim is againt
> > >university law.
> > >(We know the creationist: his name is Raimo Lonka).
> > >According to website (Tuorla website, Unic of Turku) extra energy from
> > >sun decreases entropy on earth. Creationist claim that extra energy
> > >from sun increases entropy on earth. Professor Mauri Valtonen from
> > >Tuorla Observatory comments that
> > >-"we'd need internationial Nobel-level researcher committee to solve
> > >entropy. So if police could do it, then it would be really great
> > >scientific achievement."
> >
> > This was amusing, but I feel guilty laughing at the stupidity of my
> > fellow human beings.
> >
> > Then again, I wish people like Lonka would wear a warning sign:
> > "DANGER HIGH STUPIDITY"
>
> Well, if the quoting of the claim on the website is correct, and if the
> quote from Professor Valtonen is accurate, maybe all Finns should wear
> the warning sign. Because the way thermodynamics is used by US chemists
> and engineers, energy from the sun DOES increase entropy on Earth. And
> we don't need international Nobel-level researcher committees to do
> the math for us. Nor assistance in our enquiries from the police.

The sun radiates Earth with high-energy photons, while Earth in turn
radiates to space with low-energy photons. Earth's net energy change
through this process is zero (neglecting the small amount of heating
coming from the Earth's core), but the net entropy change is NEGATIVE.
That is, the net radiative effect of the sun truly DECREASES the
Earth's entropy. As we know, the biosphere makes good use of this
source of negative entropy.

You are using rather creative 'accounting rules' to reach this conclusion.
For example, the idea that those low-energy photons which the Earth radiates
to space at night should be counted as something that the sun does to Earth.

Your rationale seems to be that (in order to be fair) we need to analyze
a steady state system. Ok, if that is the approach you wish to take, I
would ask just how long you think the Earth has been in a steady state with
its entropy decreasing.

Furthermore, the sun shines mainly in the tropics where it's already
hot. This further decreases entropy. I can't say if the biosphere uses
this extra source of negative entropy, but the atmosphere sure does.

Ok, that almost makes some sense. Your accounting rules now have the sun
pouring photons on the hot tropics, and the cold polar regions radiating
the same total amount of heat (at lower temperature) to space. And the
negentropy drives convection - palpable work is being done. Ok, but
then you are apparently not accounting for the entropy generated by
the frictional resistance to the convection.

So your position seems to be that by choosing the accounting rules cleverly,
we can say anything we want about thermodynamics. Gee, don't tell the
creationists about this! They might get ideas. And use this creative
accounting dishonestly!

If you'll pardon me offering a 3rd alternative, it seems to me that, neglecting internal heat production in the Earth and the like, the entropy of the Earth is approximately constant. Low entropy energy is imported from the sun, and high entropy energy exported to outer space, supporting a dynamic equilibrium of nearly constant entropy. (There is an annual variation in atmosphere variation, corresponding, inversely, to an annual variation in plant biomass; one suspects that there is a corresponding annual variation in entropy.)
--
alias Ernest Major

.

Relevant Pages