Go back
The Second Law of Thermodynamics

The Second Law of Thermodynamics

Spirituality

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
Unless life was created and is running down as reality indicates.

Why do you say the definition is incorrect? Because your house was never painted so its paint can never wear off?
The definition only takes into account the whole system, and completely ignores the component parts.

As for your example, it's clearly stupid. If the definition used by the author is correct, plants wouldn't be able to grow. Neither would you.

Your house would never become painted, because that'd be decreasing entropy - something your author claims can't happen.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by scottishinnz
The definition only takes into account the whole system, and completely ignores the component parts.

As for your example, it's clearly stupid. If the definition used by the author is correct, plants wouldn't be able to grow. Neither would you.

Your house would never become painted, because that'd be decreasing entropy - something your author claims can't happen.
Your house would never become painted, because that'd be decreasing entropy - something your author claims can't happen.

I've personally never seen a house painting itself.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]Your house would never become painted, because that'd be decreasing entropy - something your author claims can't happen.

I've personally never seen a house painting itself.[/b]
But did you defy physics and do the impossible when you painted your house. I usually don't struggle that much trying to get the paint onto the wood, if you need divine intervention to do it, I'd say the problem is with you or your paint, not physics.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]Your house would never become painted, because that'd be decreasing entropy - something your author claims can't happen.

I've personally never seen a house painting itself.[/b]
What a dumbazz.

YOU wouldn't be able to paint your house, if the author's postulates are correct.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnow
But did you defy physics and do the impossible when you painted your house. I usually don't struggle that much trying to get the paint onto the wood, if you need divine intervention to do it, I'd say the problem is with you or your paint, not physics.
Where did I say that the Second Law of Thermodynamics makes it impossible for you to paint your own house?

You actually paint your house because of the second law. If the law didn't work, you would never need to paint it in the first place.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by scottishinnz
What a dumbazz.

YOU wouldn't be able to paint your house, if the author's postulates are correct.
Which postulates?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
Where did I say that the Second Law of Thermodynamics makes it impossible for you to paint your own house?

You actually paint your house because of the second law. If the law didn't work, you would never need to paint it in the first place.
But by painting it, you are making the system more ordered, something your author seems to think is impossible.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by scottishinnz
But by painting it, you are making the system more ordered, something your author seems to think is impossible.
Where does he think that? You are only putting words in his mouth like only you can do.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
Where did I say that the Second Law of Thermodynamics makes it impossible for you to paint your own house?

You actually paint your house because of the second law. If the law didn't work, you would never need to paint it in the first place.
If entropy can't decrease locally, then you could never undo the damage done by entropy.

We (Louis, numerous other posters, and every pysicist with a real degree, and I) say entropy can decrease on a small scale, just, by the 2nd law, it must not decrease on the system.

You say entropy cannot decrease, period.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnow
If entropy can't decrease locally, then you could never undo the damage done by entropy.

We (Louis, numerous other posters, and every pysicist with a real degree, and I) say entropy can decrease on a small scale, just, by the 2nd law, it must not decrease on the system.

You say entropy cannot decrease, period.
Second law of Thermodynamics:

"Every system, left to its own devices, always tends to move from order to disorder, its energy tending to be transformed into lower levels of availability (for work), ultimately becoming totally random and unavailable for work. "

You must enjoy putting words in my mouth.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
Second law of Thermodynamics:

"Every system, left to its own devices, always tends to move from order to disorder, its energy tending to be transformed into lower levels of availability (for work), ultimately becoming totally random and unavailable for work. "

You must enjoy putting words in my mouth.
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but you've essentially said it multiple times. If that isn't your opinion, and you admit that local decreases in entropy are allowed, than what is the problem with abiogenesis, evolution, big bang, etc.?????

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnow
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but you've essentially said it multiple times. If that isn't your opinion, and you admit that local decreases in entropy are allowed, than what is the problem with abiogenesis, evolution, big bang, etc.?????
If the universe is a closed system, then "local" would apply to the whole universe.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Your definition, by the way, is getting misinterpreted. It does say that the SYSTEM tends to increase in entropy, but says nothing about local changes, we are interpretting it more correctly, probably partly due to a better education in physics.

Here are some better formal ways to state the 2nd law:

"A transformation whose only final result is to convert heat, extracted from a source at constant temperature, into work, is impossible." -- Lord Kelvin

"The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium." -- Rudolf Clausius

"Heat cannot of itself pass from a colder to a hotter body." -- Rudolf Clausius

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnow
Your definition, by the way, is getting misinterpreted. It does say that the SYSTEM tends to increase in entropy, but says nothing about local changes, we are interpretting it more correctly, probably partly due to a better education in physics.

Here are some better formal ways to state the 2nd law:

"A transformation whose only final result is t ...[text shortened]... lausius

"Heat cannot of itself pass from a colder to a hotter body." -- Rudolf Clausius
Your definition, by the way, is getting misinterpreted.

And you are the one doing the misinterpretation.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dj2becker
If the universe is a closed system, then "local" would apply to the whole universe.
That is exactly the opposite of what we mean by local. We are talking about changes on a smaller scale which do not effect the entire universe. e.g. Earth may decrease in entropy, while some spot halfway across the Milky Way increases. These changes are local, and can happen with no net change to the overall entropy of the universe.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.