Entropy Disproves Abiogenesis

originally posted by: TerraLiga

Please enlighten me, because I can't think of a single factor of our sun that is 'ordered'.

It is a thermodynamic definition. Entropy is disorder, so decreased entropy is order. Objects, such as our sun, are moving towards higher entropy, meaning it is increasing disorder.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

I didn't say 'decrease', I said 'low'. The eventual final state of the universe is a low entropy homogenous one where each square meter is identical to the next, i.e. energy will be spread equally throughout the universe.

Yeah so where did the order come from to begin with? If we're moving towards entropy (disorder) that means there is currently order in the universe. If chemical interactions over time increase overall disorder, there must have been order in the beginning for this inherent energy to come from.

a reply to: cooperton

It seems you're misusing entropy to suit your narrative. What will become disordered when the sun runs out of fuel? It will still exist as a body.

You speak as if the universe originated as it exists today, but the evidence suggests otherwise.

a reply to: cooperton

I'm struggling to understand what you read in the books of the bible to disregard evidence and accept parable as truth.

originally posted by: TerraLiga
a reply to: cooperton

It seems you're misusing entropy to suit your narrative

Dude instead of wasting our time just blindly refuting everything I say try to have a conversation.

The opposite of entropy is order, and it is called 'negentropy'. This isn't "my narrative", they are objective thermodynamic terms.

Our universe is moving towards a maximized state of disorder. For this to be possible, we must currently be in a state of some degree of order, "negentropy". Biological and cosmological systems are highly negentropic, meaning "ordered"

originally posted by: cooperton
Yeah so where did the order come from to begin with?

Does it matter? The universe began with very low entropy and is moving towards a homogenized level of entropy.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: cooperton

There are indications that there is a level of laws that underpins the laws we operate under. Meaning the laws of physics might have modifications that can be made.

Thank you for acknowledging my point in the OP. I mean that sincerely. But Yes, I wonder if there was some sort of exception that defied physical laws... to me I would suppose this is the action of a higher dimensional intelligent being that is the Architect of the ordered world.

a reply to: cooperton

I'm having a conversation with you. I object to your selective terminology.

But, to further the conversation, I believe the universe itself operates opposite to the normal understanding of entropy. It started in utter confusion and chaos but will ultimately be in a state of universal constant, with the remaining elements and atoms spread relatively evenly throughout.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: rnaa

Entropy applies if no new energy is introduced into the system.

No, entropy is always a factor in all chemical equations. Entropy applies on the biochemical scale, not just the macro scale. Look up Gibbs free energy equation... "S" stands for entropy in the equation and it helps determine whether a reaction is favorable or not

Amino acid polymerization is energetically unfavorable in water, it is non-spontaneous. It's similar to lighting a match underwater. This is because amino acid decay is spontaneous in water, whereas amino acid synthesis is not. Reactions that increase entropy are more spontaneous than those that decrease entropy.

Do you expect a decayed leaf to turn back from dirt into a living leaf again? Because that's what you're arguing here.

You're ignoring common sense and basic biochemical laws to maintain your belief system.

No hes actually right adding energy into a battery, for example, increases entropy as it loses energy it decreases, Ypu can use thermodynamic parameter entropy to check the health of a battery, In fact, macroscopic matter stores internal energy, and that matter’s entropy is determined by how the energy is stored. Energy and entropy are intimately linked.

a reply to: cooperton

The "sun" will either swallow up the closest planet to it when the magnetic moment is right to suck it in for more fuel as it has done in the past or a wandering black hole will swallow all the fiery energy off of it making it later eventually appear as jupiter does when it's local gravity pulls some of those gases back to it.

A black hole is best thought of as a gravity well without something like a proton or neutron star to hold it in place as a paired bond and the other end is swinging out there like a vacuum cleaner hose however looking more like a fire hose.

That's the only thing in space that appears as chaos in otherwise what appears as ordered... hoever when it gains enough mass etc as a fuel source? BANG!

As described? That bang appears as a galaxy... how else would one describe such a thing other than such an event being "big" as galaxies as we have come to know them are MASSIVE some people think us with our lil probe out beyond pluto is the edge of the galaxy :p not to really make fun but that's the truth they don't think of it as no no no there are countless stars like that one we see in just one galaxy. Those we see in the "sky" just local specs of salt on a black surface on the larger scale of how many there are.

so why worry about it? Why see it as ordered or disordered... it just is until it isn't and when it isn't peace is found the wondering where it went is the interval... how should I know not being attached to the same things other than the basic elements and those things cling back even if you don't.

Does the earth or sun want water on it does it want all of us on it? Ideally no they both want to be back in union at their cores... but all this life etc growing on it sure makes for more fuel over time.

Until then eat up play drink and be merry those objects in space without a so called "intelligence" does... just because our bad breath have given them names and personalities doesn't mean they'd ever know it, and if they did accept them? Holy hell... that wouldn't be good at all.

What happened uh that one thing we have been calling jupiter is now awake and aware and making contact calling itself our god has changed course out of it's gravity well and coming this way to "hug earth".

a reply to: cooperton

Do you expect a decayed leaf to turn back from dirt into a living leaf again? Because that's what you're arguing here.

Yes. Of course. In a way.

The tree will reuse some of the decayed leaf to create more leaves next year. Sort of. Along with more energy input from the sun, and other 'food' from the atmosphere and soil. The sun shines on the tree making more energy available to do work thus DECREASING entropy. The tree uses that energy to live and grow.

Furthermore, other creatures will use some of that decayed leaf to further their existence as well - which also decreases entropy.

From Britannica:

entropy, the measure of a system’s thermal energy per unit temperature that is unavailable for doing useful work. Because work is obtained from ordered molecular motion, the amount of entropy is also a measure of the molecular disorder, or randomness, of a system.

Just because a specific leaf has decayed and no longer has energy that can be put to use being a leaf again doesn't mean that the products of that decay cannot be reused and put to work in some other system - and that process reduces entropy.

The Earth is NOT a closed system (it is constantly being showered with solar energy and space debris) and analyzing it as if it is a closed system is fraught with gotchas, false assumptions, and foolish conclusions.

Of course you can, for the sake of analysis, set boundaries on your systems for the purpose of that analysis. But when you do so you must recognize the limits of relevance introduced by that boundary.

You can argue that a particular decayed leaf has increased entropy, but at the same time you must realize and acknowledge that that leaf has contributed to the decreased entropy of countless other organisms before extrapolating that leaf death to the heat death of the universe.

originally posted by: rnaa
a reply to: cooperton

Yes. Of course. In a way.

The tree will reuse some of the decayed leaf to create more leaves next year. Sort of. Along with more energy input from the sun, and other 'food' from the atmosphere and soil. The sun shines on the tree making more energy available to do work thus DECREASING entropy. The tree uses that energy to live and grow.

The point was that dead things decompose inevitably. Living things don't randomly emerge from inert matter without a seed containing DNA that tells it to do so

Do you suppose we should all go dig up the graves of our ancestors because there's a chance their bodies may have regenerated and rendered them alive again by random chance?

Biological polymers like proteins and DNA decay spontaneously. This means they cannot spontaneously synthesize in water, as is needed for abiogenesis to be true. Dehydration synthesis of DNA and protein polymers is equivalent thermodynamically to lighting a match underwater. This is why catalysis is necessary for the existence of organisms.. and this is why abiogenesis is impossible because there's no enzymes to catalyze reactions if there is no life yet.

Even with high heat from the sun (which is also an ordered system, and couldn't come to be through a universe increasing in entropy), the reactions will all actually move faster towards an entropic state!


^notice that as T increases, this amplifies the entropic factor. This is why there is no lab test that is capable of replicating abiogenesis, because it is not possible for random molecular interactions to generate ordered biological systems against the inevitability of increasing entropy.

originally posted by: TerraLiga
It started in utter confusion and chaos but will ultimately be in a state of universal constant, with the remaining elements and atoms spread relatively evenly throughout.

The second part of that sentence is what is generally accepted, but if that is true, then the first part of the statement cannot be true. If the universe started with total entropy, then it would not have conducted any reactions after that. The world therefore must have began with order (negentropy) then, because otherwise there would be no reactions leading towards the inevitable disorder (entropy)

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Does it matter? The universe began with very low entropy and is moving towards a homogenized level of entropy.

This is the paradox. If we are moving perpetually moving towards entropy, and a maximized state of entropy (homogeneity) is apparently inevitable, then this means there must have been order to begin with. These pre-existent structures must have been negentropic, which defines biological and cosmological structures. Because due to thermodynamic law, entropy increases over time, not negentropy. This is why I believe there was order to begin with, because it's really the only answer since the universe doesnt tend towards order. This is why I believe in an intelligent Architect of the universe that must have set things in order.

originally posted by: cooperton
If we are moving towards entropy...

Huh? You don't move 'towards entropy'. It's very difficult to converse with you on this because you don't even have the terminology or an understanding of entropy.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus


Huh? You don't move 'towards entropy'. It's very difficult to converse with you on this because you don't even have the terminology or an understanding of entropy.

I meant 'we' as in the universe. The universe is perpetuating reactions that tend towards a universe of maximized entropy. Negentropy doesn't form from reactions over time. This is why there must have been order to begin with, since order (negentropy) is not increasing in the universe.

originally posted by: cooperton
The universe is heading towards maximized entropy homogeneity, apparently.

The amount of entropy doesn't change.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

The amount of entropy doesn't change.

The amount of energy is constant, but entropy (the disorder of the system) increases according to the second thermodynamic law

1) order exists
2) the universe is heading towards a state of disorder

therefore:

3) order must have existed in the beginning since our universe is heading away from order.

originally posted by: cooperton
3) order must have existed in the beginning since our universe is heading away from order.

No one is disputing that the universe is moving from a high ordered state to a lower one, the issue is you're using entropy, which you obviously don't understand, to prove your religious views. Going back to my first post, the earth is not a closed system so the entropic principle you're trying to apply is invalid.

a reply to: Crowfoot

You can actually trace how things like the spear point moved across the world in the archaological record. The bow/arrow. You can see the logical progression, how new cultures adopted then adapted the expressed model ending up with different point types. LIkely, the progenitor of this was the first person to say, "Hmmm, i should figure out how to attach this pointy rock to this stick so i can cut things from further away". This wasn't agriculture...it didn't crop up in many places at once. Or animal husbandry. This was a single event, leading to a traceable chain of following events across 3 continents, starting with a spear point and ending in bows and arrows.

This was before religion would tell them to be wary of the devil. I suspect that we used to transmit informationa mong groups of humans much, much easier than after the settling of borders and determining of dieties.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

No one is disputing that the universe is moving from a high ordered state to a lower one

ok so where did high ordered state originate from?

the earth is not a closed system so the entropic principle you're trying to apply is invalid.

I am referring to the universe as a whole

originally posted by: cooperton
ok so where did high ordered state originate from?

There are many theories but I'm not afraid to say I don't know.

I am referring to the universe as a whole

You localized it to an extreme level by bringing in abiogenesis on earth.