Re: Entropy (was Re: Human Designers vs. God-as-Designer)

From: DNAunion@aol.com
Date: Mon Oct 23 2000 - 14:05:47 EDT

  • Next message: DNAunion@aol.com: "anti-IDist asks who is DNAunion?"

    >> DNAunion: All life requires that it actively maintain itself far above
    thermodynamic equilibrium. For an acorn to grow into an oak, it must fight
    against, and "overcome", entropic tendencies at every moment along the way.
    This example does not contradict my statements.

    >>FMAJ: Exactly. This far for equilibrium thermodynamics is exactly what
    drives evolution and creation of completity. So what does this show?

    DNAunion: It shows that there *is* something that opposes matter's being
    organized in complex ways, which must be continually fought: when it is
    battled, it *can* be "overcome".

    How many times do I have to explain this. I am *not* stating that increases
    in order or complexity *cannot* occur, just that in order for them to occur,
    that entropy must be *overcome*. Entropy *is* something that opposes
    matter's being arranged in organized and complex ways.

    Let me try an analogy. Is there something that opposes matter's rising from
    the Earth's surface instead of falling towards it? Yes, gravity. Does that
    mean that matter cannot rise from the Earth's surface? No. Look at the
    eruptions of volcanoes and geysers, or helium-filled or hydrogen-filled
    "blimps", or airplanes, or the projectiles from cannons, or a the space
    shuttle, or "water" when it evaporates. But it would still be wrong to say
    that matter has *nothing* against rising from the Earth's surface.

    Is there something that opposes matter's moving away from other matter? Yes,
    gravity. But does that mean that one piece of matter cannot move away from
    another piece of matter? No. The electrostatic charge you get from rubbing
    a comb through your hair can overcome the gravitational tug of the Earth on a
    small piece of paper. Also, most of the galaxies in the universe are
    spreading out further and further from each other as universal expansion
    continues. But it would still be wrong to say that matter has *nothing*
    against moving away from other matter.

    [...]

    >>>DNAunion: Hurricanes are not organized, just ordered. Being organized is a
    higher state than being ordered, as organization implies multiple parts
    operating together as a whole. A pile of leafs is ordered, but not organized.
    A car's engine (or a cell) is both ordered and organized.

    >>>FMAJ: Where in the SLOT is it concluded that organization is a relevant
    term?

    DNAunion: The 2nd law? Nowhere. But your original claim used the word
    *organized* so it is part of the discussion.

    [...]

    >>>FMAJ: So show how specified complexity cannot be formed by evolutionary
    pathways?

    >>>DNAunion: I already gave a general example: the latest issue of "Origins
    of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere".

    >>>DNAunion: No response here by David Bowman?

    >>>FMAJ: As Wesley has shown evolutionary algorithms can generate specified
    complexity that cannot be distinguished from what Dembski seems to refer to
    as actual specified complexity. So where is the evidence that evolutionary
    pathways cannot generate exactly this specificity?

    DNAunion: I already explained my example of the latest issue of "Origins of
    Life and Evolution of the Biosphere". It is an example of specified
    complexity that cannot be produced in the real world by undirected,
    purely-natural processes. If you would care to take a stab at showing
    otherwise, be my guest.

    FMAJ: […]

    "ev : Evolution of Biological Information by Tom Schneider, Nucleic Acids
    Research, 28(14): 2794-2799, 2000. Not directly commenting upon Dembski, but
    it does directly contradict Dembski's claims concerning information increase
    via evolutionary computation. "

    DNAunion: I already addressed this work at this site. It does not show that
    IC can be produced (which was the author's claim, not yours) nor that CSI as
    defined by Dembski (500 bits of information) could be.

    […]

    >>>DNAunion: Now David. I have provided several biological examples that
    clearly show that there *is* something that opposes matter's becoming
    organized in complex ways in relation to biology. Proteins decomposing
    spontaneously; amino acids not polymerizing spontaneously; monosaccharides
    not linking spontaneously;

    >>>FMAJ: There are similarly plenty of examples where spontaneous reactions
    occur in either direction.

    DNAunion: Irrelevant. My point is that there *is* something that opposes
    matter's being organized in complex ways. I have demonstrated that. It does
    not matter if this something can be overcome, it still exists.

    >>>FMAJ: But what you have to show is what happens at far equilibrium. Here
    interesting things happen: complexity increases.

    DNAunion: Which is irrelevant to my point, and which I already "conceded",
    several times.

    >>>FMAJ: That you have found instances in which there is an opposite trend
    is hardly surprising, life is full of generation and decay. Why focus only on
    the latter one?

    DNAunion: Because you claimed *it* didn't exist, that there is *nothing*
    that opposes matter's being arranged in organized and complex ways. And I
    have "conceded" that "generation" can occur, if entropy is "overcome", which
    is NOT impossible and does in fact occur.

    [...]

    >>>DNAunion: If so, then you would still be agreeing that there is
    something that opposes matters
    being organized in complex ways, just that that something is not
    *thermodynamic entropy*. Or have I overlooked a possibility?

    >>>FMAJ: There are instances where complexity increases are opposed just
    like there are instances that the opposite happens. Since evolution takes
    place at far equilibrium you should focus on such processes.

    DNAunion: I am not directly addressing evolution, and in fact have stated
    that entropy does not prevent evolution, and that the overcoming of entropy
    can allow for evolution to occur. Would my "opponents" please stick to my
    *actual* statements, instead of what they *wish* I had stated.

    >>>FMAJ: "The formation and evolution of patterns is a typical manifestation
    of selforganization processes, arising in far from equilibrium complex
    systems. Besides its relevance in the study of such systems at a basic level,
    the analysis of selforganization phenomena is also relevant in several
    applications such as, physicochemical processes, information transmission and
    biological systems. The project aims to the study of development and
    behaviour of patterns in reaction-diffusion systems. "

    DNAunion: Key words, "…far from equilibrium…". That means that entropy
    (that *something* that opposes matter's being arranged in organized and
    complex ways) is continually being battled against.

    […]



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 23 2000 - 14:06:23 EDT