Version 1.1
Copyright © 1999 by Ken Harding
[last update: January 18, 2000]
__________________________________________________________________
he old, debunked creationist
objection regarding the Second Law of Thermodynamics is, well, just that--
an old, debunked objection. This is one of those areas where creationists
have an easy time fooling people, because the topic is so scientifically
complex and misunderstood, and outside most people's experience.
For those reasons, creationists still make wide use of it. It sounds
awfully scientific, with complicated terminology and deep notions.
But it is being misused, and most creation supporters can't even explain
what it means.
The creationist objection of evolution based on the Second Law of Thermodynamics is built upon an incorrect understanding of the Law. The earth is not a closed system. Neither is the solar system. The universe apparently is, but the 2nd Law allows for the transference of energy from one part of a closed system to another. But even more importantly, none of the processes which bring about evolution (birth, death, genetic mutation) violate the second law- in fact they are observed all the time, aren't they? Evolution does not violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics-- nothing does.
It is true that you can't build a machine that produces more energy than you put into it, and that energy tends to dissipate. But the addition of external energy or the transfer of energy from one part of a system to another can suspend this process of energy dissipation.
Bological systems use external energy to grow. DNA, by way of chemical processes, can grow more complex over time. The earth, as a system, receives energy from space in the form of sunlight and cosmic gamma radiation, and therefore can increase in complexity as long as this energy continues to enter the earth's system.
None of the processes which are responsible for evolution (birth, death and genetic variation) violate any scientific laws. Also, scientific laws are not like "laws" we are familiar with in everyday life that must not be broken. A scientific law is simply a human description of a physical phenomenon.
On the large scale, it's correct that the universe will tend toward chaos and disorder. It is also true that "pockets" within a closed system can exchange energy, thereby causing temporary increases in order. In other words, heat can travel from one part of a closed system to another part. One such area is our solar system.
According to their own understandings of the second law of thermodynamics, they can't provide scientific evidence or inference why their own hypotheses do not violate the second law.
The 2LoT is one of the biggest anti-evolutionist smokescreens, in my opinion. It is nothing. Birth does not violate the second law. Death does not, and neither does genetic variation. These three events are what cause evolution to happen. It is a baseless objection-- one they use to cause doubt and confusion in the non-scientific public. They're trying to sway the fence-sitters, as well as reassure their followers.
Claims regarding Thermodynamics must be made as mathematical expressions, not metaphors. To my knowledge, anti-evolutionists have not provided any mathematical calculations as to exactly why birth, death and genetic variation violate the second law of thermodynamics.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is applicable to the Earth and the biosphere, but what the public needs to understand is that creationists apply it wrongly. The second law restricts possible changes in entropy when a system makes the transition from one state to another. It requires that the initial state, as well as the end state, both be in thermodynamic equilibrium, and that throughout the transition the system must be thermodynamically isolated. The Earth and biosphere do not satisfy any of these conditions, hence the conclusion is that the Second Law does not apply.
The pursuit of non-equilibrium thermodynamics is the proper tool for analyzing the thermodynamic behavior of the Earth and biosphere, but is never used by creationists. It includes an analogous application of the Second Law which which describes the overall non-equilibrium system as a collection of sub-systems, each of which is in thermodynamic equilibrium, but not isolated. The analysis then centers on identifying the sub systems that are sources or sinks of entropy, and the entropy and energy flow between sub-systems. Obviously, this is an enormous task if applied to the Earth and biosphere, and no wonder if creationists are daunted by the magnitude of effort required. Nevertheless, it is the only proper way to describe the thermodynamic behavior of the biosphere during evolution.
Of course, the other major cerationist mistakes are the assumption that entropy
and order/disorder are strictly analogous (they are not), and that evolution
moves from disorder to order, which has yet to be demonstrated.
To me, it is the weakest of their arguments.
Click here to learn much more about this topic.
Other topics for beginners:
Carbon 14 and other Radiometric Dating Methods- good or bad?
What's Wrong with Creationism Anyway? (coming soon)