deleted this post
No they do not contradict eachother. What is this "passage"? Where is this crap coming from!?!?
Since my answer won't be nearly as convincing as some other people here, i'll look up some previous threads for you unless someone else comes in and fully explains why they are not contrary to one another.
The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of the universe will always increase or stay the same. This does not mean that the entropy of any individual objects cannot decrease, as long as the total entropy does not.
It really says nothing about evolution, since creating the "more ordered" (lower entropy) state of evolved life involved greater increases of entropy elsewhere.
My guess would be you read this misunderstanding from a religious site trying to convince people that evolution is wrong. Have a reality check:
Do you think scientists are stupid?
The 2nd law of thermodynamics is one of the most basic principles of science, so if you don't think scientists are stupid, then you should assume that this question has come up before. If you do think scientists are stupid, well, you should stop using your computer - it might blow up because of the idiots who designed it....
Sorry to everyone :)
haha russ, i think you need to use that as the default responses for a lot of the things we get around here. Even high schoolers know what the 2nd law is. Things so incredibly basic are bound to be realized by someone if they are indeed wrong! One must realize what the whole definitions of these laws actually are before start thinking they contradict something.
The big bang theory violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
The universe can't be infinitely old, entropy would have stabilized, and it's pretty difficult for anything to exist at a specific time if the time of the universe goes infinitely backwards.
Life forms in general reverse local entropy to some effect. For example, when an object, such a large steel building is contstructed, you end up with raw materials removed from a somewhat scattered state, reorganized into more complex materials and then relocated to create a building. Perhaps the original source of energy for this work was due to the Sun, but the current and local source of energy was oil, coal, or water flowing through a dam.
The big bang? Where did that come from and who said the universe is infinitely old?
Just pointing out an example of violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
How does the big bang violate the 2nd LT?
whoa, i just had a deja vu moment... i remember writing this exact same sentence before...
Don't ask me, do a web search, plenty of answers out there explaining this. At the moment the universe appeared, there was an initial entropy (call it zero), before it happened there was no universe, and therefore no initial state of entropy.
Yah from geocities...
This isn't the place to toss out non-sense theories and refuse to back them up with scientific data
1. Do NOT hijack a thread and change to subject matter from "evolution" to "big bang".
2. "local entropy"? Since when is there a question about such a thing? The 2nd Law was NEVER meant to apply to part of a system. This isn't about the entropy of a local system. It should never have been brought up to cloud the issue.
3. When you cite sources to support dubious claim, do NOT simply say "do a web search". You should know by now that crackpot sites isn't a valid reference source on here.
4. Please show a peer-reviewed source that shows that the Big Bang violates the 2nd Law (whatever that means). Create a separate thread in the Cosmology forum and list your sources. If you are unable to cite reputable sources, submit that to the IR forum.
5. This thread is done!
Separate names with a comma.