Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yet big differences in forms are not due to genes.
Just think of the development of the DNA as the body from dust-evolution-then God breathed the breate of life, which directly became the spirit of man, into that body about 6000 years ago and when it made contact with the body the soul life was created. You see all men have two lives: the soul life and the spirit life.
Yet big differences in forms are not due to genes.
As a guy with a degree in physics maybe I can try to clear up something about the second law of thermodynamics.
It states that total entropy on a closed system will increase over time.
That is ALL it states.
Why does this not prevent mutations?
Because your cells (and their genes) are not closed systems. Your body is constantly gaining energy, and the vast majority of it is from the sun. Plants get energy directly from the sun, animals get energy from plants and we get energy from both.
This energy is "stored" in chemicals that our bodies can break down. This energy is used to reproduce cells -- and in the copying of DNA, there are often small uncorrected errors. Note that when I say "error" it doesn't mean "less information." The new DNA strand still codes for SOMETHING -- just something DIFFERENT. Often it's damaging or helpful to the organism, but even more often it's initially neutral.
Alternately, radiation or some chemicals can cause mutations by applying energy directly to the DNA. This is where many point mutations come from.
Anyway, I'm getting a bit off track -- these are important points, but we're talking about thermodynamics here. Remember that the second law only states that entropy increases in a CLOSED system. That means a system in which no energy can enter or leave. Since we get most of our energy directly or indirectly from the sun, the Earth is NOT a closed system.
If you look at the total entropy of the solar system, it's increasing at a MUCH higher rate than any entropy on Earth is decreasing. Quite simply, 99.999+% of the energy emitted by the sun is spread out into space while only a tiny fraction is used by Earth to reproduce organisms.
There is no violation of the second law if entropy decreases in one place as long as it increases as much or more in another place.
The rest of your discussion about mutations is very valid, but just try to understand that the second law of thermodynamics is NEVER violated on Earth -- not because entropy always increases on Earth (it doesn't) but because it always increases in the solar system.
About Smidlee -- he's throwing red herrings all over the place. You're welcome to debate with him too, but just be aware that he's not representing mainstream creationist OR evolutionist ideas. He keeps claiming that DNA has very little to do with an organism's form and that an organism's consciousness can change it's genes whenever it likes. Note that this doesn't just apply to humans -- he's talking about some undefined and unobserved consiousness held by all plants and animals... Needless to say, it's not mainstream ANYTHING -- more of a conspiracy theory since it's claiming that absence of evidence of this conscioiusness is evidence FOR the crazy idea.
I thought mutations, were supposed to happen in small increments but from what I have learned so far it looks like it would take nothing less than a very large amount of genetic code to produce an appendage useful enough to kickstart the selection process. And if that is true, the odds that such a large amount of coherent code could arise nearly spontaneously would be astronomical. So to suggest that this has happened countless times with all of the species of life on earth just boggles my mind. How is it possible? Does any body know?
Now consider a large box filled with air, a nice high entropy system. In the corner is a small container of salt water, again fairly high entropy Na+ and Cl- spread throughout the solution. The lid is removed. Come back a week later and there has been a big increase in entropy, with the water evaporated and its molecules scattered throughout the box as water vapour.Thanks for the response. Perhaps you can help me to better understand how the second law of thermodynamics applies to evolution.
Here are two thought experiments that should demonstrate how I understand the basic principle of the law:
Scenario A (the closed system):
Imagine a box, separated by a partition directly down the center which divides it into two portions. Now one side contains particles of gas moving about at a constant velocity (for simplicity's sake) and the other is a complete vacuum. If we were to remove the partition, the particles would spread out within the entire space of the box and the entropy of both halves would reach equilibrium. If the partition were to be slid back into place, the entropy of the two halves should remain the same.
Scenario B - the open system:
Ok now think about the same box but without the center partition. Inside the box there are a small number of gas particles at low concentration and low temperature (low entropy) and outside the box there is a much higher concentration of particles at higher temperature (high entropy). In this scenario we can consider the box's surroundings to be an infinite reservoir. Remove a side of the box and the entropy within and without will reach equilibrium irreversibly just as in scenario A.
I'd suspect that the most formal sources of information on this law apply specifically to thermodynamic systems and the transmission of heat only. However, what is clearly shown in these demonstrations is that the law describes the principle of irreversibility which is intuitively applicable in other ways whether that be the transmission of heat, the process of osmosis or even the unquantifiable phenomenon of a defiant toddler mixing together different colors of play dough (It doesn't matter how many times you tell him not to do it, you know that play dough is gonna get mixed).
Think of two people playing dice. The game is fair, the dice aren't loaded, you would think the game would remain in equilibrium each person with about the same amount of money. In fact sooner or later one will clear the other out. While the probability of winning 10 or 20 games in row is quite low, if they keep playing, sooner or later one of them will have a winning streak and the other will be out of the game.Ok so 2LoT should then apply even to open systems right? But how is it that life can exist? Because of Maxwell's demon. Life pushes entropy out of itself, for a while and then it is consumed irreversibly.
Should I just jump to conclusions now and say that evolution can't work because it would violate the 2nd law? It doesn't seem that way to me...
Think of a species of black birds that becomes completely isolated in a perfect environment for its survival. Given time and chance, it may be possible that one or more birds develops a small minute change in its genetic code which alters the color of its feathers to yellow. Now, since the environment is already ideal the color yellow does not affect the bird's chance of survival one bit. It lives and breeds at its normal rate (assuming that color has no bearing on courtship). But how does this affect the population? Well, according to the principle of irreversibility the differences of genetic information between the black birds and yellow birds should somehow move toward equilibrium, and since there is a very small population of yellow birds as compared to black birds, it should hardly make a dent. The majority would remain black. Given enough time, however, and enough variation and the colors might even become mottled.
Now, let's add in Maxwell's demon by isolating the black bird population in a scorching hot desert region. Suddenly the change in feather color might be just enough to turn the tables in favor of yellow birds.
So... what's the point? Survival of the fittest should easily cause change and reduce entropy within the genetic information of a population, but can it produce increased complexity? Certainly only if a change were significant enough to fuel selection.
I hope I won't offend you by saying this, Deamiter, but personally I don't think the argument that "Earth is an open system, therefore 2LoT doesn't hold" is at all helpful.
I do get your point that in a roundabout way, invalidating the 2LoT by emphasizing that Earth is an open system does give information about DNA (namely where does the energy to mutate DNA come from?) but AFAIK it would be more useful to emphasize that thermodynamic entropy is simply not a concept that you can naively apply to bio-information.
Thanks for the response. Perhaps you can help me to better understand how the second law of thermodynamics applies to evolution.
Here are two thought experiments that should demonstrate how I understand the basic principle of the law:
Scenario A (the closed system):
Imagine a box, separated by a partition directly down the center which divides it into two portions. Now one side contains particles of gas moving about at a constant velocity (for simplicity's sake) and the other is a complete vacuum. If we were to remove the partition, the particles would spread out within the entire space of the box and the entropy of both halves would reach equilibrium. If the partition were to be slid back into place, the entropy of the two halves should remain the same.
Scenario B - the open system:
Ok now think about the same box but without the center partition. Inside the box there are a small number of gas particles at low concentration and low temperature (low entropy) and outside the box there is a much higher concentration of particles at higher temperature (high entropy). In this scenario we can consider the box's surroundings to be an infinite reservoir. Remove a side of the box and the entropy within and without will reach equilibrium irreversibly just as in scenario A.
Ok so 2LoT should then apply even to open systems right? But how is it that life can exist? Because of Maxwell's demon. Life pushes entropy out of itself, for a while and then it is consumed irreversibly.
Think of a species of black birds that becomes completely isolated in a perfect environment for its survival. Given time and chance, it may be possible that one or more birds develops a small minute change in its genetic code which alters the color of its feathers to yellow. Now, since the environment is already ideal the color yellow does not affect the bird's chance of survival one bit.
It lives and breeds at its normal rate (assuming that color has no bearing on courtship). But how does this affect the population? Well, according to the principle of irreversibility the differences of genetic information between the black birds and yellow birds should somehow move toward equilibrium, and since there is a very small population of yellow birds as compared to black birds, it should hardly make a dent.
Now, let's add in Maxwell's demon by isolating the black bird population in a scorching hot desert region. Suddenly the change in feather color might be just enough to turn the tables in favor of yellow birds.
So... what's the point? Survival of the fittest should easily cause change and reduce entropy within the genetic information of a population,
but can it produce increased complexity? Certainly only if a change were significant enough to fuel selection.
I thought mutations, were supposed to happen in small increments but from what I have learned so far it looks like it would take nothing less than a very large amount of genetic code to produce an appendage useful enough to kickstart the selection process.
And if that is true, the odds that such a large amount of coherent code could arise nearly spontaneously would be astronomical. So to suggest that this has happened countless times with all of the species of life on earth just boggles my mind. How is it possible? Does any body know?
No. It can be said, as Gluadys noted, that every open system is part of a larger closed system, but the 2LoT includes the stipulation that entropy increases in a closed system.Ok so 2LoT should then apply even to open systems right?
Just think of the development of the DNA as the body from dust-evolution-then God breathed the breate of life, which directly became the spirit of man, into that body about 6000 years ago and when it made contact with the body the soul life was created. You see all men have two lives: the soul life and the spirit life.
Doesn't Gen. 2:7 say the body from dust? Thus before there was no man, so how could he take on a life if he is not created yet to be made in God's image (Gen. 1:26,27)? I don't think gap says there was man made in God's image before? It is dust-evolution-to form the body. Thus, before, there was no spirit, since God had not yet breathed His Spirit into the body formed from dust, and there was no soul since the soul requires the coming together of the spirit and the body. There is no old and new, just man made in God's image about 6000 years ago.What you are saying sounds like Gerald Schroeder's creation theory. As far as man having evolved and then 6,000 years ago God breathed life into him. So man took on a life he did not have before. The GAP theory says the same thing, there was man here before but he took on a new life 6,000 years ago. So you have old and new, spirit and soul.
Didn't I just show you the connection? How does TE show a connection? If the connection you just tried to make is what you mean, then that would be a false connection, since there was no man made in God's image before about 4000 BC.The GAP theory does not look for a connection, where TE trys to show a connection.
Now consider a large box filled with air, a nice high entropy system. In the corner is a small container of salt water, again fairly high entropy Na+ and Cl- spread throughout the solution. The lid is removed. Come back a week later and there has been a big increase in entropy, with the water evaporated and its molecules scattered throughout the box as water vapour.
However in the small container we find salt crystals, highly ordered and low entropy. While the entropy of the whole system has increased, the entropy of the salt has decreased dramatically.
Think of two people playing dice. The game is fair, the dice aren't loaded, you would think the game would remain in equilibrium each person with about the same amount of money. In fact sooner or later one will clear the other out. While the probability of winning 10 or 20 games in row is quite low, if they keep playing, sooner or later one of them will have a winning streak and the other will be out of the game.
Your black and yellow genes are playing dice each generation. Of course there are different games between all the different combinations of homozygous and heterozygous, but if you play long enough, and the smaller the population, the less time it will take, sooner or later one will have a winning streak and clear the other out. So without any environmental pressure, you can end up with a population of pure bred yellow crows in that isolated environment while the rest of the crow population outside that area is black. As more neutral mutations occur in the isolation population, a percentage of them are fixed in the group the same way. Slowly, the isolated crows change from the main population until we have a completely different species. It is called genetic drift.
An increase in order in one part of a system is not a problem for the second law because overall entropy still increases.Interesting thought but I'm afraid it's a bit too complex for me to see how you want to apply that to evolution.
Mottling would require further genetic changes, if we simply had genes for black or yellow, the offspring would be either black or yellow. I don't think it would be too difficult to think of an environment where black and yellow are both equally advantageous, It could be a desert with yellow sand and black rocks, or simply an odd region with black and yellow stripesRight. This is why I suggested that the species over time might become mottled rather than purely yellow. If we start out with all black birds in a color-neutral environment, what's to say that the chances of green, red, or blue are any more or less likely to arise within the species than yellow? However, I'm not exactly sure but I think that yellow happens to be the color that is most reflective of sunlight. It's when extreme heat and sunlight are introduced that we should see the population being sorted out.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?