Butchery of the laws of thermodynamics

I've been lurking around for a bit on this forum. While reading over some of the posts, I have become more and more appalled by the complete butchery of the laws of thermodynamics.

It would seem that most of the detractors against evolution who use the argument that the laws of thermodynamics do not support evolution have at least one of these things in common:

1. They will never state what the first or second laws of thermodynamics are when asked what they are.
2. If indeed they do state what they believe are the first/second laws of thermodynamics are, it is immediately shown that are incorrect with their definitions.

Bearing this in mind, I'd like to use this post as a very quick and simple way to help those that don't know what the laws are at least have them spelled out for them - such that the mass confusion that occurs from them are dispelled once and for all.

First let us define the fundamental words of the definitions of the laws of Thermodynamics:

Energy: The ability to do work.
Thermodynamics: The study of Energy.

Now that we have those out of the way, let us define the laws of Thermodynamics so that we can have a common reference. Please read these CAREFULLY!

------------------------------------------------------

First law of thermodynamics The change in internal energy of a system is the sum of the heat transferred to or from the system and the work done on or by the system.

Second law of thermodynamics The entropy -- a measure of the unavailability of a system's energy to do useful work -- of a closed system tends to increase with time.

Third law of thermodynamics For changes involving only perfect crystalline solids at absolute zero, the change of the total entropy is zero.

Zeroth law of thermodynamicsIf two bodies are each in thermal equilibrium with a third body, then all three bodies are in thermal equilibrium with each other.

------------------------------------------------------
source: http://www.alcyone.com/max/physics/laws/t.html
------------------------------------------------------

Now that they have been defined for you. Read them closely. The First law is often confused by creationists as the second law. The first law states that energy is neither created or destroyed in a closed system. Energy may be changed from one form to another (potential, kinetic, etc.), but it is not created or destroyed. The first law is also known as the law of conservation - energy is always conserved in a closed system.

The second law is actually the most misquoted law of them all. I often hear from creationists that the second law says that matter cannot be created or destroyed. That is not stated. What is stated, is that "in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state." (http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/...BookEner1.html).

Bear in mind, that this refers to the energy of a closed system. The Earth is not a closed system, since most of our energy is derived from an outside source - the sun.

The third and zeroth law deal with more specific principles of physics, but as you can see they do not contradict the theory of evolution.

I hope this can clear a few things up, and hopefully, the creationist arguments from a misunderstanding of thermodynamics can lessen a bit thanks to this post. It may not, but either way it's worth a try.

P.S. If anyone wishes to correct this, feel free.

I have noticed Creationists never ever refer to the Second Law, in their "refutations of evolution", as having to do with energy, but instead only in terms of "chaos" and "order". This is a good indication that 1) they don't actually know what the laws of THERMO DYNAMICS (purposeful emphasis) pertain to 2) they got their argument, if one might call it that, from a typical Creationist website, and, like clockwork, descend upon the most accesible website with a forum, eager to spout this new misinformation they have swallowed and quasi-processed.

__________________
“Dangerous? Perhaps. But evil? She acts according to her nature. Is that evil?”
--Dream of the Endless

Precisely. Thermodynamics was never a philosophical issue

Did someone said something about the second law of..... oh... Never mind.

__________________

But isn't the sun also subject to the second law, or is it an open system as well?

__________________

If we see the universe as a closed system, the sun can be seen as a part of that system. The sun may be a local increase in energy offset by a decrease somewhere else in the universe. This would not violate the second law in any way.

__________________

Yes, the sun is subject to the second law. As you may have noticed, the nuclear fusion reaction of the sun gives off lots of heat. Radiated heat is energy that is unavailable for the sun to do useful work. This inceases over time, because eventually, the sun will burn out, and much of the original material of the sun will be dispersed throughout our solar system.

__________________
Veritas omnia vincit.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

This brings up a point I've been pondering for a while.

Suns form when scattered hydrogen molecules are pulled together via gravity to form a condensed ball. If the protostar is massive enough, nuclear fusion is triggered.

The event of scattered hydrogen molecules forming a condensed star (disorder--> order) seems to be a violation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Either my understanding of the law is flawed or there is something I havenet taken into account. My guess is that the law doesn't take into account the ordering effects of gravity.

Any astrophysics/chem majors out there?

The gravitational potential energy has become unusable, increasing entropy

At least thats the explanation I've heard

Personally I don't think 2LoTD applies to everything

I think this explains the conservation of energy, but not how order is arrived from disorder.

Maybe. I'm just hoping that my understanding of the 2nd Law of TD isn't too layman-ish. =/