Re: Lizard engines and rat engines


"Guy Hoelzer" <hoelzer@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:davmfp$1ee5$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> in article dan9t3$1k9n$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Perplexed in Peoria at
> jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 7/8/05 6:39 PM:
>
> > To my mind, this toleration of final cause explanations in biology is
> > exactly the thing that separates biology from the physical sciences.
> > Teleology simply cannot be expunged from biology. If we attempt to do
> > so, we impoverish the science.
>
> In a way, I think that Biology has taken the lead on this perspective and
> that the (other) physical sciences are in the process of embracing the
> utility and validity of the teleological stance. In my view, this is being
> developed out of thermodynamics, which is certainly about the attribution of
> final cause.

I disagree, of course. And I suspect so would most physicists, chemists,
biologists, and philosophers. The second law is not teleological in any
modern sense. No more so than the old "law" that water seeks its own level,
or that heat flows from high temperature to low.

> The revolution in the paradigm here requires a restatement of
> the second law, although there are also many proponents of articulating a
> fourth law. The difference is subtle in my estimation, but also profound.
> Rather than having a second law that merely limits the scope of potential
> outcome of a dynamic process to those that do not decrease the entropy of a
> closed system (IMHO this is code for the universe as a whole), many
> physicists are coming to appreciate a law that favors the emergence of
> systems that increase the RATE of entropy gain in closed systems through
> self-organization.

First, according to the thermodynamics textbooks, a "closed system" smaller
than the universe as a whole is not only possible, it is an essential concept
in the idea structure. Thermodynamics textbooks are not written in code.

Second, you seem to misunderstand what the standard second law DOES say. It
doesn't say that the entropy of a closed system must not decrease. Put some
water in a bottle, stopper the bottle, and put the bottle in your freezer.
The contents of the bottle constitute a closed system, and the entropy of
this closed system decreases and the water cools and then freezes. (But
perhaps you don't think that the bottle of water constitutes a closed
system. Guy, I have to say that this kind of denial of the standard
definitions reminds me of Edser's methodology.)

Third, I am not aware of any reason in theory or experiment to believe that
there can be a law of maximal rate of entropy gain. Prigogine proved that
systems near equilibrium organize themselves so as to MINIMIZE the rate of
(local) entropy PRODUCTION. I am unaware of any theoretical or consistent
empirical evidence for the kind of law you suggest. And I am totally
unclear regarding your entropy "accounting" rules. If a self-organized
system simply grows in extent, thus coming to consist of more matter,
does that constitute and entropy gain?

> This conjecture (to avoid over-assertion) about
> thermodynamics mimics the notion that natural selection favors changes in
> biological populations that increase fitness, and has enormous implications
> for all the sciences. It also implies a sort of natural teleology, because
> it suggests that dynamic systems ultimately exist for the purpose of
> increasing the rate of universal entropy gain.

I don't see any analogy, even if your conjecture regarding thermodynamics
were correct. Does a self-organized system (a vortex, say) correspond to
an organism or to a population of organisms? Presumably to the population,
since this is the entity that evolves so a to maximize (average) fitness.
But no one suggests that populations exist for the purpose of increasing
the fitness of the universe, much less the rate of fitness increase.
Teleology in biology is applied to the typical components and features of
organisms, not to the organisms or populations themselves. We say that the
heart has a function, not that the organism or population has a function.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 2nd law of thermodynamics
    ... violation of the 2nd law in that order has increased and entropy has ... a whole is a closed system. ... JK Rowling, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, Chapter VIII, page 133 ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: 2nd law of thermodynamics
    ... violation of the 2nd law in that order has increased and entropy has ... I suspect the amoebas would have the same temperature as the pool, ... a whole is a closed system. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Okay then: Set your own criteria for what represents a scientific argument
    ... The biosphere is indeed not a closed system, ... Here's the second law: ... The total entropy of any closed system tends to increase over time. ... That conclusion is erroneous for open systems. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: American Spectator: Evolutions Thermodynamic Failure
    ... >In the current debate over "Intelligent Design," the strongest ... >second law of thermodynamics. ... >and it was shown that in an isolated system this entropy always ... >order can be defined which also never increase in a closed system. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: An Inflationary Account - #6 - Entropy as missing information
    ... Entropy may decrease in the closed system with a compensating ... a voltage gradient does real Newtonian work within the system, ... 'pseudo-work' - building up a countervailing concentration gradient ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading