Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 680: Line 680:     
Ok, I thought I had proved that the second law does not apply to an open system, which forms the basis of the counterexample to evolution in the article. If you can tell me what the mistake is in my example above, we can proceed further. [[User:Richardm|Richardm]] ([[User talk:Richardm|talk]]) 09:22, 23 September 2016 (EDT)
 
Ok, I thought I had proved that the second law does not apply to an open system, which forms the basis of the counterexample to evolution in the article. If you can tell me what the mistake is in my example above, we can proceed further. [[User:Richardm|Richardm]] ([[User talk:Richardm|talk]]) 09:22, 23 September 2016 (EDT)
 +
:As you said, the 2nd Law does not apply to an open system; for such a statement to be correct, then the 2nd Law cannot function at all anywhere there is an open system.  If the earth is an open system as you said above, ''then the 2nd Law should not exist''; you would never, ever, see entropy of any kind.  Unfortunately, such a belief flies in the face of direct observation, which happens to be the first step of the Scientific Method. 
 +
:That is the point of the argument you are missing when it comes to evolution.  This open/closed system argument was made when it was discovered that entropy exists in life; we are born, we age, we wither away, we die, and our bodies turn back into dust.  That is entropy.  The heart of evolution states that as species evolve they get better and better, and that is the opposite of what is actually observed.  So, for this strikeout to happen on the article page, I require absolute proof that the 2nd Law cannot function anywhere for any reason in an open system.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 09:58, 23 September 2016 (EDT)
Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336

edits

Navigation menu