The second law of thermodynamics and evolution

  • Thread starter Monsterboy
  • Start date
217
72
Mod note:
The link in the original post contained a link to a crackpot, anti-evolution website (against our rules) that discusses a rejected paper (also against our rules). This link has been removed. Here's a link to Retraction Watch that covers the same (retracted) paper: http://retractionwatch.com/2011/03/16/more-on-applied-mathematical-letters-journal-retracted-paper-questioning-second-law-of-thermodynamics/.


<Crackpot link deleted>

Sorry to bring up this topic , I am currently involved in a debate , this seems to be the point where I got stuck , if anyone has read this paper that is mentioned in the article above and know why it got removed and why it is wrong please share the details and explain it. Is the author a well known creationist crank ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Borg

Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,818
2,028
If the quotes from the article are an indication of what he wrote, I would consider him a crackpot.

After viewing the site and it's links, I would not treat it as a respectable site either. There are links to Intelligent Design being an actual scientific theory and articles about how students should "question everything" - meaning evolution. The final conclusion for the article you listed also talks about the "right way to challenge" evolution.
 
217
72

Borg

Science Advisor
Gold Member
1,818
2,028
You also asked why it is wrong. The author makes ridiculous arguments to 'prove' his points. I.E. there is no evidence that DNA, auto parts, etc. entered the atmosphere in the past, therefore the increase in order on earth cannot be explained properly. I have no idea what the peer review process of the publication is or was but I know that many sites like that allow just about anything to be 'published' as long as they get paid.
 
Last edited:
217
72
You also asked why it is wrong. The author makes ridiculous strawman arguments to 'prove' his points. I.E. there is no evidence that DNA, auto parts, etc. entered the atmosphere in the past, therefore the increase in order on earth cannot be explained properly. I have no idea what the peer review process of the publication is or was but I know that many sites like that allow just about anything to be 'published' as long as they get paid.
Yes , I understood that the "scrap metal and computer" argument is totally wrong.
 

Bandersnatch

Science Advisor
2,761
1,587
Yes, Granville Sewell is a mathematician and a well-known 'Intelligent Design' advocate. His paper did indeed sneak past peer review (I can't fathom how, but it did all the same), but was withdrawn before publication. See here for the withdrawal notice:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0893965911000243
The paper itself can be found hosted on the University of Texas' website, where Sewell is a professor:
http://www.math.utep.edu/Faculty/sewell/AML_3497.pdf

The 'paper', and I use scare quotes because it's not much more than an opinion piece that starts with an a priori conclusion, and no actual maths to speak of, basically argues the same faulty reasoning that has been argued many times by the anti-evolution crowd: that it is impossible for complexity to appear 'just like that', therefore it could not emerge at all.

The references section of the Wikipedia article on Sewell contains links to a number of thorough refutations of his arguments, including this one:
http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/does_evolution_have_a_thermodynamics_problem
 
217
72
there is no increase in order in the thermodynamic sense when organisms become more complex, entropy is disorder at the molecular level, so even if our bodies are more complicated than a microbe, the entropy at the molecular level does not decrease ,our bodies generates more entropy than bacteria (per unit mass) as we continuously emit IR radiation from our body after consuming higher grade energy. Our bodies continuously generate entropy ,is that correct ?
 
Last edited:

Bystander

Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
5,019
1,022

D H

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Insights Author
15,329
680
Thread closed for moderation.
 

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving

Hot Threads

Top