Re: Entropy in crystalization: up or down?

Bloopenblopper@xxxxxxxx wrote in
news:1192716757.594202.325880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

In "The Second Law of Thermodynamics, Evolution, and Probability,"
Frank Steiger writes:

"Failure to understand that in thermodynamics probabilities are not
fixed entities has led to a misinterpretation that is responsible for
the wide- spread and totally false belief that the second law of
thermodynamics does not permit order to spontaneously arise from
disorder. In fact, there are many examples in nature where order does
arise spontaneously from disorder: Snowflakes with their six-sided
crystalline symmetry are formed spontaneously from randomly moving
water vapor molecules. Salts with precise planes of crystalline
symmetry form spontaneously when water evaporates from a solution.
Seeds sprout into flowering plants and eggs develop into chicks."

In "Thermodynamics vs. Evolutionism," Timothy Wallace responds:

"The "order" found in a snowflake or a crystal has nothing to do with
increased information, organization or complexity, or available energy
(i.e., reduced entropy). The formation of molecules or atoms into
geometric patterns such as snowflakes or crystals reflects movement
towards equilibrium-a lower energy level, and a more stable
arrangement of the molecules or atoms into simple, uniform, repeating
structures with minimal complexity, and no function. These are not
examples of matter forming itself into more organized or more complex
structures or systems (as postulated in evolutionist theory), even
though they may certainly reflect "order" in the form of simple
patterns.

Steiger fails to recognize the profound difference between these
examples of low-energy molecular crystals and the high-energy growth
process of living organisms (seeds sprouting into flowering plants and
eggs developing into chicks). His equating these two very different
phenomena reveals a serious misunderstanding of thermodynamics (as
well as molecular biology) on his part, and he perpetuates this error
in the balance of both his essays, as we shall see.

[...]

Steiger's blurring of the distinction between these two phenomena can
logically be attributed only to either indefensible ignorance or a
willful misrepresentation of the facts."

I can't figure it out either way. The questions on my mind are: Does
crystallization represent a decrease in entropy or no? I think it does
and Wallace is incorrect, but not sure. Does it represent an increase
or decrease in *energy?* And does the 2nd law make any statement about
organization, complexity, organized complexity, etc? Thanks for any
help. Can someone recommend me a rescource on thermodynamics that
would give me the answer?

The confusion comes from a failure by creationists to differentiate between
two definitions of the word "entropy"

In thermodynamics, entropy refers to the amount of energy in a system which
has become unavailable to do work. Basically, some energy is always lost
to such inefficiencies as heat and noise and if you want the system to
continue to be able to do the same amount of work, you have to keep putting
new energy in. In the absence of an energy source, entropy will either
stay the same or increase until all the energy in the system is unavailable
for work. This is the form of entropy the second law of thermodynamics
refers to. See here for an intro to the topic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

In information theory, entropy refers to the degree to which a message has
deviated from the original after having been copied/transmitted. It is
commonly considered to be a measure of how much information a message has
lost, but "information" refers solely to the *intended* message. Depending
on what kind of change has occurred in the message, it may still contain
the same *amount* of information in the conventional sense, but still
deviate significantly from the intended message, thus having lost a lot of
information in the information theory sense. For example, "My favourite
insect is my pet red bug." -> "My favourite insect is my pet bed bug." A
single change in one letter changes the message fairly significantly, but
both sentences convey the same amount of information about me. According
to information theory, the second version has entropy since it has deviated
from the original message (and is wrong!) but it's still a valid sentence
of the same form and containing the same amount of information as before.
See here for an introduction:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_entropy

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Time. /My opinion./
    ... Henry Poincare named the conception of "entropy " ... entropy monotonous increasing law remains open ". ... in which he called " The energy conservation law" as ... " The first law of thermodynamics". ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Entropy in crystalization: up or down?
    ... increased information, organization or complexity, or available energy ... (i.e., reduced entropy). ... phenomena reveals a serious misunderstanding of thermodynamics (as ... continue to be able to do the same amount of work, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics - Irrelevant to Origins
    ... in all of physics. ... during the development of thermodynamics. ... Sadie Carnot gave the Second Law quite correctly in 1824, ... `A Guide to Entropy and the Second Law,' by Elliot Lieb ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Turbulent transition for fluids
    ... state of low entropy on its own. ... We're used to thinking of systems in terms of pure thermodynamics (a ... reduces to the compression of information. ... the system has a computational complexity of zero (there is ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Entropy in crystalization: up or down?
    ... "Failure to understand that in thermodynamics probabilities are not ... Salts with precise planes of crystalline ... (i.e., reduced entropy). ... structures with minimal complexity, and no function. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading