|
Author
|
Topic: The Theory of evolution in the Perspective of Thermodynamics and Experience-de Jong
|
sciwall
Member
Member # 2454
|
posted 13. December 2006 09:54
quote:
You still miss the point that we are not discussing the temparature of sun-boilers or rocks in space, but the the temperature of the very thin atmosphere of scarce, free moving, molecules on an imaginary 100,000 km radius sphere with 2ndEarth in its center.
Hi William,
Okay, so I guess I was concerned with your statements about how there 'are no temperature differences' on the surface S. Since it is clearly obvious now that two objects on surface S can be at different temperatures, I guess this claim has been falsified and we can conclude -
Point 1: Objects sitting on surface S 100,000 miles out from the center of the hypothetical 2ndearth can differ in temperature significantly as long as the sun is still radiating energy.
Thus, temperature differences on surface S can exist and be maintained.
However, we can go further if you want to. I guess you are giving up on macroscopic objects like rocks or temperature probes, and instead focusing on the few molecules that are present in nearly empty space. We can look at these a little more closely if you would like:
Lets start with two objects on surface S. One is in the full sun, which we will call O1, and the other is in the full shade on the So subregion of S that is eclipsed from the sun by the earth. This second object we will refer to as O2. Now, lets say both O1 and O2 are rocks 1 meter in diameter. It is clear that O1 will be at a higher temperature than O2, that is T(O1) > T(O2). Why is this? Well, 'empty' space is actually full of energetic photos, objects absorb these photons, converting the energy into molecular kinetic energy. Thus, an object in the full sun (O1) will be absorbing more energy and converting it into molecular kinetic energy (higher T) than an object that is only exposed to the background radiation of the solar system (O2).
So when O1 and O2 are 1 meter in diamter rocks, T(O1) > T(O2).
What about if O1 and O2 are .1 m rocks. Yep, the same physical chemistry applies and T(O1) > T(O2).
What about if O1 and O2 are 100 um crystals. Yep, the same physical chemistry applies and T(O1) > T(O2).
Now what about single molecules? Here again, the same physical chemistry applies. Any molecule that is in the full sun has an absorption spectra that overlaps with the solar emission spectra will absorb energy from the sun and convert it into thermal molecular kinetic energy (higher T).
Therefore, it is pretty simple to claim that the temperature on surface S is not uniform. That is, any object, macroscopic, microscopic, or molecular, will be at a higher temperature when on the region of surface S that is in full sunlight than when it is in the full shade So region.
Thoughts?
[ 13. December 2006, 09:55: Message edited by: sciwall ]
IP: Logged
|
|
William DeJong
Member
Member # 1162
|
posted 19. December 2006 04:37
quote:
Sciwall , posted 13. December 2006 : Therefore, it is pretty simple to claim that the temperature on surface S is not uniform. That is, any object, macroscopic, microscopic, or molecular, will be at a higher temperature when on the region of surface S that is in full sunlight than when it is in the full shade So region.
You are right. At a certain moment of time, some free moving molecules on surface S will have a higher energy than others. But the next moment a molecule that is in the shade will move into the sunlight, and another will move from the sunlight into the shade. Some other molecules will collide, and exchange energy, and some others will fall apart. The scarce, free moving molecules on S can form "energetic ripples", like the free moving sand grains on a beach. But random processes cannot maintain these differences, and expand them ever furhter. On average, over a longer period of time, energy differences on S will not be maintained but will equalize, according to the 2ndLaw.
Also in space, no hidden "quinta essentia" is present to preserve differences and make them grow ever further. Such a thing only exists in the fantasy world of the theory of macro-evolution. Saying good-bye to this fantasy world, which is taught intensively in our schools and universities, appears almost impossible for many a one.
Although the Neo-Darwinistic fantasy world is in conflict with clear empirical facts and the laws of physical science, many people choose to ignore this conflict. Everybody is allowed to cherish his/her individual faith or fantasies. When it comes to science, however, ignoring this conflict leads to the corruption of science and a return to the Dark Ages. This is a sad thing.
IP: Logged
|
|
sciwall
Member
Member # 2454
|
posted 19. December 2006 05:05
Hi William,
Well, you are getting closer.
quote:
At a certain moment of time, some free moving molecules on surface S will have a higher energy than others.
But lets be clear about what we have actually shown. From basic physical chemistry principles (molecular thermodynamics), it is easy to show that at any point in time, free moving molecules on surface S that are in full sunlight (S1) have higher energy (higher T) than those in the shade of the earth (So). That is, when you look at any one moment, T(S1)>T(So).
I think we can agree on this.
But then you make the strange claim that -
quote:
On average, over a longer period of time, energy differences on S will not be maintained but will equalize
Remember William, that at any point at time, T(S1)>T(So). This means that on average, as long as the sun is shining, the temperature difference on S, T(S1)>T(So) will be maintained. This temperature difference is what is thermodynamically referred to as 'steady-state'. Look up the term William, it will help you with your basic thermodynamics.
Yes, the 2nd law implies that this difference will eventually equalize, and you should know exactly when this will occur. It will happen when the sun stops shining.
I think this all can be summarized up very cleanly as -
Point 2: On a surface S 100,000 km out from an imaginary planet 2ndEarth, that is in orbit around a radiative heat source like our sun, there is a maintained temperature difference between molecules and objects that are on the full sun region of surface S (S1), and the much smaller full shade region of surface S, (So). As long as the radiative heat source continues to output energy, this temperature difference, T(S1)>T(So) will always on average be maintained.
IP: Logged
|
|
William DeJong
Member
Member # 1162
|
posted 27. December 2006 11:59
Sciwall , you are right: there is a "thermic ripple" present at So, where the sunrays are blocked by 2ndEarth. But since 2ndEarth is moving through space, the position of this thermic ripple moves through space as well. If the ripple passes by point A in space at t=t1 and by point B in space at t=t2, indeed there is a temperature difference between A and B at t=t1 as well as at t=t2. But soon after t1, the thermic ripple at A will equalize with its surrounding, and soon after t2, the same happens to the thermic ripple at B. On average over a longer period of time, the temperature in A and B is equal.
Moving through space, 2ndEarth produces a thermic ripple. But this ripple is not maintained -as you claim - and will not start growing ever further. (Compare the ripples of sand on a beach: their positions change continuously, they are not maintained and do not keep growing ever further).
The claim that space is full of free moving energy of the sun that will preserve differences of complexity, energy, temperature, concentration, information, et cetera, and make them grow ever-further, is in flat contradiction with empirical evidence and empirical science. The claim is only a belief derived from the fantasy-world presented by the theory of macro-evolution.
[ 27. December 2006, 12:00: Message edited by: William DeJong ]
IP: Logged
|
|
sciwall
Member
Member # 2454
|
posted 02. January 2007 14:11
Well William,
Looks like you have abandoned your claim that there is no temperature differences on surface S, so I will just leave that alone unless you want to reformulate your assertion about the thermodynamics of 2ndEarth in terms of two arbitrary points A and B over which the sun eclipses.
Anyway, you said something else that struck me as a bit odd -
quote:
Compare the ripples of sand on a beach: their positions change continuously, they are not maintained and do not keep growing ever further
Tell me William, have you ever seen a sand dune?
IP: Logged
|
|
William DeJong
Member
Member # 1162
|
posted 09. January 2007 04:26
Sciwall,
My thesis that on surface S no temperature differences are present refers to a static 2ndEarth. During our discussion, we have made a refinement by introducing a dynamic view where 2ndEarth is moving around the sun. In that situation, my thesis needs a refinement too: on average, over a longer period of time, no temperature differences are present on S. The temperatures on S are in "dynamic equilibrium".
quote:
Tell me William, have you ever seen a sand dune?
I'm living close to the Dutch coast and the dunes (large ripples of sand). All the time, workers of a governmental organization take effort to prevent these dunes being washed away by wind and water. They put reed in the sand to keep it in place, plant special grass, replenish sand on the beach, et cetera, since the random forces of wind and water do not preserve dunes and do not expand them ever further.
Dunes clearly demonstrate the fundamental property of our universe that random processes cannot preserve differences (e.g. of sand, temperature, energy, information, or complexity) and make them grow ever further.
IP: Logged
|
|
sciwall
Member
Member # 2454
|
posted 12. January 2007 17:01
Hi William,
quote:
My thesis that on surface S no temperature differences are present refers to a static 2ndEarth.
Well, on a static 2ndEarth there is a static temperature difference present on surface S, think this should be reasonably clear, no?
quote:
During our discussion, we have made a refinement by introducing a dynamic view where 2ndEarth is moving around the sun. In that situation, my thesis needs a refinement too: on average, over a longer period of time, no temperature differences are present on S.
Well, even if we choose to deal with 'average temperatures over long times', which introduces its own issues we can pursue if you want, your statement above is still demonstrably incorrect.
Think about it, I think we have finally come to a point where we can agree that temperatures on the So region on surface S that is eclipsed by the sun is significantly colder than the solar illuminated region of S. Now, as the earth revolves around the sun, this So not region will also move around surface S as a 'belt' with a diameter of ~10,000 km. Lets call this belt-like area over which So passes over the course of a year A1 and the region of S which is never eclipsed A2.
Now, it should be obvious where I am going with this. Over the course of the year, the temperature of A2 will be constant. However, on surface A1, over the course of a year, at every given point, the temperature will drop significantly when the eclipsed region So passes over it. On surface S which has a diameter of 100, 000 km and circumference of ~300,000 km, the region So will eclipse any given point of A1 approximately ~3.5% of the year.
This means that the temperature on A1 on surface S will be on average over the year, approximately 3% colder than the temperature on A2. This average temperature difference will exist and be maintained as long as the sun is shining.
Looks like you might need to adjust your thesis some more.
So in regards to sand dunes, how are they formed William?
[ 14. January 2007, 14:54: Message edited by: sciwall ]
IP: Logged
|
|
William DeJong
Member
Member # 1162
|
posted 16. January 2007 04:55
Hi Sciwall,
You keep missing the point that in our universe differences of temperature are not preserved but ultimately equalize. If 2ndEarth stands still inside sphere S, then in equilibrium the temperature at So will be equal to the temperature anywhere on S. For a proof, see my post of 14 November 2006. If 2ndEarth is moving inside S, indeed a "thermic ripple" will be produced on S, but this ripple will soon equalize with its surrounding and on average anywhere on S temperatures will be equal.
Let 2ndEarth move around the sun in a state of dynamic equilibrium with surrounding space. As a consequence the influx of energy IE into the region R surrounding its path around the sun equals the outflux OE. You contend that the shadow of 2ndEarth will produce a region A1 inside R with a temperature that is on average permanently lower than the temperature in the region A2 aside of it. If this would be true, a heat engine could be attached between A1 and A2 and produce an additional amount of energy AE. This is impossible, since the IE = OE. As a consequence the thesis is false.
quote:
So in regards to sand dunes, how are they formed William?
Sand dunes are large ripples of sand formed by the random forces of wind and water on a beach. Dunes illustrate perfectly the dynamics of random processes. Such processes can temporarily produce differences, but they cannot preserve these differences and expand them ever further. Sand dunes can only be kept in place and be expanded by the directed effort of putting reed in the sand, planting special grass, guiding the watering of the dunes and gardening their ecosystem of plants and animals.
Dunes, as well as the initial Miller-experiment combined with the adjusted Miller-experiment (see my post of 12 September, conclusion 2), demonstrate the fundamental property of our universe that random processes cannot preserve differences (e.g. of sand, temperature, chemical complexity, energy, or information) and make them grow ever further.
IP: Logged
|
|
2ndclass
Member
Member # 1979
|
posted 16. January 2007 13:18
William: quote:
If this would be true, a heat engine could be attached between A1 and A2 and produce an additional amount of energy AE.
Heat engines don't produce energy; they convert thermal energy to work. And there is such a heat engine on this planet. It's called the weather system, and it wouldn't exist if the space surrounding the earth's atmosphere were at a uniform temperature. quote:
This is impossible, since the IE = OE.
This is the opposite of the truth. Heat engines require a source and a sink, so virtually all heat engines are implemented in systems where IE = OE. The only requirement is a sustainable temperature difference.
[ 16. January 2007, 13:34: Message edited by: 2ndclass ]
IP: Logged
|
|
sciwall
Member
Member # 2454
|
posted 22. January 2007 14:56
quote:
You keep missing the point that in our universe differences of temperature are not preserved but ultimately equalize
Yes, the temperature differences between S and So, or A1 and A2 will ultimately equalize. When will this happen? When the sun goes out. This will ultimately occur, and then the temperature differences will largely disappear. Until then though, there exist demonstrable temperature differences on the surface S. Sorry, but this is just the way it is. I know you spent a lot of time on your thermodynamic argument, but it is technically flawed.
2ndclass explains why your thinking on the matter is flawed, I suggest you read carefully what he wrote and consider it as well as look at your basic thermodynamics again. Dynamic equilibrium does not preclude heat engines at all. Think about it William - can you not envision how a heat engine could be created to work off the difference in temperature between the sun and shade in space. In case you do not want to think about it - such devices are actually quite easy to envisage and have been considered for decades for space based energy generation.
Now just quickly onto sand ripples -
So you first say:
quote:
Compare the ripples of sand on a beach: their positions change continuously, they are not maintained and do not keep growing ever further
But sand dunes are -
quote:
Sand dunes are large ripples of sand formed by the random forces of wind and water on a beach
So random forces of wind and water can grow ripples to become dunes. Is there a limit to how big they can get? Is there a limit to how long they can last? I think we can agree they can not grow infinitely and last forever, but of course, neither can life, right?
IP: Logged
|
|
William DeJong
Member
Member # 1162
|
posted 23. January 2007 06:12
quote:
2ndClass , posted 16. January 2007. This is the opposite of the truth. Heat engines require a source and a sink, so virtually all heat engines are implemented in systems where IE = OE. The only requirement is a sustainable temperature difference
Let 2ndEarth be standing still, inside sphere S. Let S be in equilibrium with surrounding space, which means that the influx of heat coming from the sun equals the outflux of heat. (Notice that the surface of S is far away from 2ndEarth and its turbulent atmosphere). If a temperature difference would be present between two points on S (for instance between point A inside the shadowed area So and point B outside of it), then a heat engine could be attached to this temperature difference and produce an amount of work. According to the first law of thermodynamics, heat and work are equivalent. Since we know that the influx of heat into S equals the outflux of heat, there is no room for an additional outflux of heat/work produced by a heat engine which is attached between a sustainable temperature difference on S. Therefore, no sustainable temperature difference can exist on the surface of S.
quote:
Sciwall , posted 22. January 2007 Yes, the temperature differences between S and So, or A1 and A2 will ultimately equalize. When will this happen? When the sun goes out. This will ultimately occur, and then the temperature differences will largely disappear. Until then though, there exist demonstrable temperature differences on the surface S.
You overlook that 2ndEarth inside S is in equilibrium with its surrounding and is radiating heat, which will reach So. You can verify this empirically by the following experiment. Hang a stone in the center of a Perspex sphere and place it in the sunshine. If this would result in a sustainable temperature difference between the shadow of the stone on the sphere and its surrounding, then we could attach a heat engine to this temperature difference to convert it into another difference, for instance of electrical potential. Consequently, this simple and cheap construction could replace sophisticated and expensive solar panels. But you will notice that in equilibrium the temperature inside the shadowed area will be equal to the temperature outside of it.
quote:
Sciwall , posted 22. January 2007. So random forces of wind and water can grow ripples to become dunes. Is there a limit to how big they can get? Is there a limit to how long they can last? I think we can agree they can not grow infinitely and last forever, but of course, neither can life, right?
Sand ripples on a beach clearly demonstrate the fundamental property of our universe that random forces cannot preserve differences (for instance of height, temperature, heat, complexity or information) and expand them ever further. Anyone is free to view the 3 Gigabyte DNA program inside each human cell and the mutation repair systems that maintain its integrity as a ripple of complexity produced by the random forces of our weather system. But physical science tells us that random forces cannot maintain differences and expand them ever further.
IP: Logged
|
|
2ndclass
Member
Member # 1979
|
posted 23. January 2007 11:30
William: quote:
Since we know that the influx of heat into S equals the outflux of heat, there is no room for an additional outflux of heat/work produced by a heat engine which is attached between a sustainable temperature difference on S.
Again, heat engines don't produce energy. They convert thermal energy to work, which is dissipated as thermal energy. Adding the heat engine doesn't change the influx or outflux of energy; it simply does something "useful" with the energy as it flows through the system.
IP: Logged
|
|
Zachriel
Member
Member # 1793
|
posted 23. January 2007 12:58
2nd class: "Again, heat engines don't produce energy. They convert thermal energy to work, which is dissipated as thermal energy. Adding the heat engine doesn't change the influx or outflux of energy; it simply does something 'useful' with the energy as it flows through the system."
Something, er, useful.
Well, anyway, it continues to move for as long as the Sun shines.
Edit: Try the link now.
[ 23. January 2007, 18:22: Message edited by: Zachriel ]
IP: Logged
|
|
sciwall
Member
Member # 2454
|
posted 30. January 2007 03:01
quote:
You overlook that 2ndEarth inside S is in equilibrium with its surrounding and is radiating heat, which will reach So. You can verify this empirically by the following experiment. Hang a stone in the center of a Perspex sphere and place it in the sunshine. If this would result in a sustainable temperature difference between the shadow of the stone on the sphere and its surrounding, then we could attach a heat engine to this temperature difference to convert it into another difference, for instance of electrical potential. Consequently, this simple and cheap construction could replace sophisticated and expensive solar panels. But you will notice that in equilibrium the temperature inside the shadowed area will be equal to the temperature outside of it.
And back to square one...
Seriously William, we took pages and pages belaboring the point that the temperature of surface S was substantially decreased in the eclipsed region So. You even finally admitted as such.
Now you are back to claiming the temperature is the same everywhere again?
[ 30. January 2007, 03:02: Message edited by: sciwall ]
IP: Logged
|
|
William DeJong
Member
Member # 1162
|
posted 30. January 2007 06:06
quote:
2ndClass , posted 23. January 2007. Again, heat engines don't produce energy. They convert thermal energy to work, which is dissipated as thermal energy. Adding the heat engine doesn't change the influx or outflux of energy; it simply does something "useful" with the energy as it flows through the system.
If on sphere S a temperature difference exists, a heat engine can be attached to it and do work. This work can consist of, for instance, making a generator run, resulting in the production of electricity, which can be stored in a battery as electrical energy. The heat engine thus converts a temperature difference into electrical energy. It extracts a flow of energy out of S, until the temperature difference has equalized. Then, the engine stops.
quote:
Zachriel , posted 23. January 2007. Well, anyway, it continues to move for as long as the Sun shines.
Apparently, you did not conduct the experiment I described in my post of January 23. If you take a Perspex sphere (S), hang a stone in its center from an opening in the top, and put S in the sunshine, the stone produces a shadow So on S. The stone starts absorbing heat and for some time the influx of energy (IE) into the sphere exceeds the outflux (OE). Inside So, the temperature is lower than outside of it. When heating up, the stone starts radiating energy. After some time, the stone has absorbed a maximal amount of heat, and radiates all the heat that reaches it. In equilibrium, (a) the "energetic hole" in the center of S has equalized, (b) the difference between IE and IO has equalized, and (c) the temperature difference between So and its surrounding has equalized. Still the sun is shining.
quote:
Sciwall , posted 30. January 2007 . Now you are back to claiming the temperature is the same everywhere again?
In a dynamic situation, "energetic ripples" may emerge. But on average, no temperature differences are present. In a static situation, things are quite simple and can be verified easily. Please conduct the experiment described above, and you will find the temperatures are the same inside So and outside of it. When measuring temperatures, please read first point 1 of my post of November 14, 2006. This may prevent us from moving in circles.
In the fantasy world of the theory of macro-evolution, the free moving energy of the sun has the intrinsic desire to produce differences, preserve them, and make them grow ever further. In this fantasy world, the molecules of our atmosphere have the desire of combining themselves into ever more complex configurations, which are preserved by a magic property the Alchemists referred to as the "quinta essentia" of matter. In the real world, the free moving energy of the sun and the molecules of the earth's atmosphere obey the laws of thermodynamics, which tell us that any difference (for instance of temperature, heat, energy, complexity or information) will ultimately equalize. The experiment with the Perspex sphere and the stone demonstrates this fundamental property of our universe.
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
