From: David_Bowman@georgetowncollege.edu
>I refuse to be drawn into this discussion as I do not have the time to
>devote to it, and because it would quite likely be a waste of that
>unavailable time. However, regarding the side comment that Richard Wein
>mentioned:
>
>>There has been a discussion recently in talk.origins about whether the
>>entropy of the sun is increasing or decreasing. It has been claimed that
>>it's decreasing, because nuclear fusion results in a decrease in the
number
>>of particles. I don't pretend to know whether this is correct, but no
doubt
>>Stephen, with his thorough knowledge of the Second Law, will be able to
>>enlighten us. (Not!)
>
>Even though I am not Stephen, I thought I would chime in here with a
>quick comment about this question. It is clear to anyone who does know
>what entropy is, and who knows what kinds of processes that happen to
>occur in the Sun that the entropy of the Sun *is decreasing* with time as
>Richard reports. What *is* increasing in entropy is a) the
>electromagnetic field which is carrying (and whose elementary excitations
>include) the outbound photons of solar radiation streaming away from the
>Sun, and b) the neutrino field whose excitations include the outbound
>neutrinos which result as a byproduct of the production of the nuclear
>neutrons (in the He-4 product) from the reactant protons.
Thank you, David. That's very interesting. Though I really wanted to leave
it as an exercise for our resident thermodynamics expert, Stephen. ;-)
Anyway, it will serve as a timely example of how a decrease in entropy does
*not* require a "code-driven energy-conversion system". There is obviously
no such system in the Sun.
I think that, if we strip away the misleading talk of "code-driven
energy-conversion systems" and processes "overcoming" the Second Law, what
the objectors are really asking is this: what is the process by which
energy (e.g. from the Sun) drives a decrease in entropy in pre-biotic
structures?
As far as I can see, this question is not directly related to the Second
Law. I suppose it's indirectly related, because it concerns thermodynamic
entropy.
I think the short answer to the question is "through chemical reactions (and
possibly other physical processes) which require heat." Without heat, the
chemical reactions could not take place. Of course, this doesn't just apply
to prebiotic structures. There are all sorts of inorganic structures whose
entropy decrease is driven (directly or indirectly) by heat. Commonly cited
examples are snowflakes, crystals and tornados. But they can also simply be
molecules undergoing chemical reactions to form lower-entropy compounds. If
these can experience decreases in entropy without a "code-driven
energy-conversion system", then obviously pre-biotic structures
can do so too.
I hope David will correct me if I've got anything wrong here. Sorry, David,
but I hope you won't consider it a waste of time to educate me. ;-)
Richard Wein (Tich)
--------------------------------
"Do the calculation. Take the numbers seriously. See if the underlying
probabilities really are small enough to yield design."
-- W. A. Dembski, who has never presented any calculation to back up his
claim to have detected Intelligent Design in life.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 09 2000 - 07:11:05 EST