Originally posted by frogstomp So where is the closed system that you refer to, certainly it cant be the space that the big bang's universe is still increasing it's expansion rate into.
In case you did not notice, Scotty claims that the universe is a closed system.
Originally posted by dj2becker In case you did not notice, Scotty claims that the universe is a closed system.
wow Scotty said this???:
"Your Evolutionary theory faces a problem in the second law, since the law is plainly understood to indicate (as does empirical observation) that things tend towards disorder, simplicity, randomness, and disorganization, while the theory insists that precisely the opposite has been taking place since the universe began (assuming it had a beginning). "
I though that was your B.S. sorry my bad.
BTW nobody ever tested the 2nd Law in an environment devoid of motion.
Originally posted by scottishinnz I've explained this to you hundreds of times, but you are too stupid to remember, apparently.
The theory of evolution works on the earth, and possibly some other places too. It is contingent upon an energy input. For us, that energy input comes from the sun. The 2nd law allows a [b]localised decrease in entropy (life) provided that the overall entropy of the universe increases (the nuclear reactions in the sun release heat and energy).[/b]
But the Second law of Thermodynamics did allow the sun to form from a dot of matter?
Originally posted by dj2becker Where did he say that?
He doesn't have to - its a logical conclusion of the rubbish that he's spewing forth. If the universe works the way he tries to make you believe it does, life wouldn't work, neither would basic physics. The manufacturing industry would be screwed, in short.
Originally posted by frogstomp wow Scotty said this???:
"Your Evolutionary theory faces a problem in the second law, since the law is plainly understood to indicate (as does empirical observation) that things tend towards disorder, simplicity, randomness, and disorganization, while the theory insists that precisely the opposite has been taking place since the universe began (assum ...[text shortened]... sorry my bad.
BTW nobody ever tested the 2nd Law in an environment devoid of motion.
I never said that.
The 2nd law only talks about the whole system, not the components. One part of a system can become more complex (like, for example, a plant photosynthesizing) provided another part is increasing in entropy, providing energy for that to happen (like the nuclear reactions in the sun).
The universe is a closed system, in that there are no inputs from "outside", since there is no "outside"!
Originally posted by scottishinnz He doesn't have to - its a logical conclusion of the rubbish that he's spewing forth. If the universe works the way he tries to make you believe it does, life wouldn't work, neither would basic physics. The manufacturing industry would be screwed, in short.
Try to use quotations next time if you want anyone to beleive you.
Originally posted by scottishinnz I never said that.
The 2nd law only talks about the whole system, not the components. One part of a system can become more complex (like, for example, a plant photosynthesizing) provided another part is increasing in entropy, providing energy for that to happen (like the nuclear reactions in the sun).
The universe is a closed system, in that there are no inputs from "outside", since there is no "outside"!
“Sure there is an outside. There must be an outside—otherwise there’d be no inside for us to be in...”
Just kiddin’, Scott. It just seemed as if your exclamation point was getting bigger... It seeems like such a simple concept to grasp, and you’ve put it so many ways.
Originally posted by scottishinnz I never said that.
The 2nd law only talks about the whole system, not the components. One part of a system can become more complex (like, for example, a plant photosynthesizing) provided another part is increasing in entropy, providing energy for that to happen (like the nuclear reactions in the sun).
The universe is a closed system, in that there are no inputs from "outside", since there is no "outside"!
The universe is a closed system, in that there are no inputs from "outside", since there is no "outside"!SCOTTY
And you know this how? How do you know there isn't an "outside" the universe that doesn't conform to the normal concepts of "outside"?
You preassume that the known universe is all there is and then work back from this assumption. You could be right or wrong.
Originally posted by vistesd “Sure there is an outside. There must be an outside—otherwise there’d be no inside for us to be in...”
Just kiddin’, Scott. It just seemed as if your exclamation point was getting bigger... It seeems like such a simple concept to grasp, and you’ve put it so many ways.
Step 1; Locate Brick Wall
Step 2; Pull head back in a sharp manner
Step 3; Forcefully propel own head towards said brick wall, halting progress approximately 1 inch behind the wall.
Step 4; Repeat whenever Dj2becker or knightmeister posts.
23 Feb '07 22:141 edit
The Void of nothing
Back to Top