|
Author
|
Topic: Reducing Entropy Production Distinguishes Intelligent Design
|
David L. Hagen
Member
Member # 323
|
posted 22. April 2007 23:26
Reducing Entropy Production Distinguishes Intelligent Design
Properly understood, the second law will be seen as one of the primary methods of distinguishing between designed systems and consequences of natural forces. Then comparing biotic systems to designed for natural systems will show biotic systems as designed. e.g., See paper and discussions at:
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-10-t-000038#000000
Granville Sewell: Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000216.html Granville Sewell and the Second Law of Thermodynamics
I believe eventually a more powerful analysis will be on the Rates of Entropy Production. In particular comparing entropy production rates vs Maximum Entropy Production. Natural systems proceed typically along paths Maximum Entropy Production. e.g. lightning or water falls. i.e., entropy change is not just positive, but tends towards the maximum. (i.e., the second law is a subset of the study of Entropy Production rates.)
By contrast, engineers design power systems to convert energy to useful applications such as mechanical or electrical energy. In doing so, they use design methods to minimize entropy production. e.g., Much of Niagra Falls is diverted through hydropower systems to form mechanical and then electrical energy. Thermodynamic engineering design is beginning to use detailed analysis of entropy production. Engineers then seek to minimize that entropy production.
I expect the Maximum Entropy Production principle will eventually be recognized to be one of the greatest barriers to abiogenesis, the formation of the genome, and self replicating cells. It may provide quantitative methods for distinguishing natural systems from Intelligent Design parallel to Dembski’s Filter.
Accordingly, I state/posit the following:
Maximum Entropy Production Principle:
Systems comprising natural forces tend towards Maximum Entropy Production.
Proposition: Intelligently Design Systems Reduce Entropy Production:
Intelligently designed systems tend away from Maximum Entropy Production towards Minimum Entropy Production relative to natural systems.
Proposition: Entropy Production Distinguishes Intelligent Design:
Some intelligently designed systems may be distinguishable from systems of natural forces, by the probability of their entropy production relative to maximum entropy production.
Challenge: Can this relative entropy production probability be quantified sufficient to thermodynamically distinguish Intelligent Design from natural forces similar to Dembski's Universal Probability Bound of about 10^-120?
PS Within intelligently designed systems, entropy production will tend towards the maximum. Can the difference between consequences of intelligent design and the internal operation of intelligently designed systems be better stated?
Following are some references for background light reading.
L. M. Marryushev & V.D. Selznev, "Maximum Entropy Production Principle in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology." Physics Reports 426(2006)1-45.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TVP-4J3NY3M-1&_user=10&_coverDate=04%2F30%2F2006&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_or ig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=370e7f0fae2745735d6f02dd14cb8030
L M Martyushev, A S Nazarova and V D Seleznev "On the problem of the minimum entropy production in the nonequilibrium stationary state" 2007 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40 371-380 doi:10.1088/1751-8113/40/3/002
Stijn Bruers, "Classification and discussion of macroscopic entropy production principles." Condensed Matter, 04/2006, 27 pp.
Hisashi Ozawa, Atsumu Ohmura, Ralph D. Lorenz, and Toni Pujol, "The Second Law of Thermodynamics and the Global Climate System: A Review of the Maximum Entropy Principle." Reviews of Geophysics, 41, #4 1018, 2003
For further articles, see: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22maximum+entropy+production%22&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search
"Maximum Entropy Production" at Google Scholar etc.
[ 22. April 2007, 23:43: Message edited by: David L. Hagen ]
IP: Logged
|
|
2ndclass
Member
Member # 1979
|
posted 23. April 2007 16:05
David: quote:
By contrast, engineers design power systems to convert energy to useful applications such as mechanical or electrical energy. In doing so, they use design methods to minimize entropy production. e.g., Much of Niagra Falls is diverted through hydropower systems to form mechanical and then electrical energy.
Hydroelectric plants don't slow the rate of entropy increase; they simply divert the energy involved to another location. Instead of all of the energy being dissipated from the bottom of the falls, some of it is dissipated from air conditioners and dishwashers.
Likewise, living systems do not increase entropy more slowly than random piles of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen. Quite the contrary. So I don't see how associating low rates of entropy increase with designed systems can possibly help the ID cause. But maybe I'm misunderstanding your proposal.
IP: Logged
|
|
David L. Hagen
Member
Member # 323
|
posted 23. April 2007 21:12
2ndClass
Your examples suggest we need to examine:
1) Change in the spatial or geographical distribution of magnitude of entropy increase.
2) Changes in time and rate of entropy increase.
The timing depends on the resultant path.
If hydropotential is converted to electricity and thence to aluminum or a battery, isn't there is a major change in the time and/or magnitude of entropy change due to intelligent design?
Even with hydropower transmitted over power lines and expended through motors, there are still energy storage issues in charging the lines and in spinning up / down motors etc.
IP: Logged
|
|
2ndclass
Member
Member # 1979
|
posted 24. April 2007 12:11
It's true that batteries, as well as capacitance and inductance in the power supply chain will store a small amount of energy produced by the hydroelectric plant. This introduces a latency in the power transmission, but it doesn't affect the overall rate of entropy increase. And let's not forget that before the energy reached the waterfall, it was typically stored for several months in a snowpack, so energy storage certainly isn't unique to human-designed and biological systems.
IP: Logged
|
|
miosim
Member
Member # 4541
|
posted 25. April 2007 21:44
Dave,
I think that any DEVELOPING non-equilibrium system (biological or social) is indeed slow down entropy production by partially converting it into order.
In this regards any CONSTRUCTIVE human activity like generating hydroelectric power even if it is dissipated later, but contributes to increase an order, should SLOW DOWN entropy production.
If the non-equilibrium systems is in the state of STAGNATION (no order increase) and only maintain itself, it would NOT AFFECT total entropy production.
If the non-equilibrium systems in the state of degradation (due to death, war or other sorts of “intelligence” driven destructive processes), it would INCREASE total entropy production.
IP: Logged
|
|
David L. Hagen
Member
Member # 323
|
posted 27. April 2007 18:46
2ndclass
Introducing storage or "latency", by definition reduces the average rate of entropy production. Please work at greater accuracy in you statements.
Hydroelectric systems electrolyzing aluminum could use 20% to 90% of the power. e.g., Cahora Bassa hydroelectic plant in Mozambique.
Snowfall has an obvious natural cause. Intelligent design in making ice storage sheds with sawdust insulation is an historic example of delaying the natural melting rate.
Modern snow making equipment is an active intervention storing energy from cold air and delaying the rate of the energy being released back to the air.
Another example is the internal combustion engine. The combustion explosion is constrained by the piston to expand at a much slower rate than it would without the intelligently designed constraint.
Miosim
Thought provoking comments. From your third example, we could extend my previous proposal to include increases in entropy production rates. However, this may be more difficult to distinguish from the Maximum Entropy Production principle. I was proposing that identifying a lower rate than that caused by natural forces would infer intelligent design, and be distinguishable from the Maximum Entropy Production principle.
IP: Logged
|
|
kyle7
Member
Member # 191
|
posted 28. April 2007 12:05
Another aspect of this are the systems of entropy production. Those designed tend to have a large number of entropy decreasing subsystems dispersed within the larger system.
quote:
I think that any DEVELOPING non-equilibrium system (biological or social) is indeed slow down entropy production by partially converting it into order.
I think the greatest hoax itroduced to science is the notion that "developing" non-equilibrium systems naturally increase in order without bounds. For example, clouds tend to form paterns that are ordered to some degree, but we would never expect them to form the words, "Sally will you marry me? Bill." After a while, while still maintaining the previous words, we would not expect to see the words, "I love you." to form. This evolution in order does not occur naturally.
But I don't mean to get away from the original content of the topic. My point is that the word "non-equillibrium" is magically waved in discussions about thermodynamics as though it can explain any decreasing entropy process moving away from the local quasi-equilibrium state.
IP: Logged
|
|
Douglas
Member
Member # 641
|
posted 28. April 2007 13:48
kyle,
quote:
I think the greatest hoax introduced to science is the notion that "developing" non-equilibrium systems naturally increase in order without bounds. For example, clouds tend to form paterns that are ordered to some degree, but we would never expect them to form the words, "Sally will you marry me? Bill." After a while, while still maintaining the previous words, we would not expect to see the words, "I love you." to form. This evolution in order does not occur naturally.
Others have pointed out that there is a difference between mere "order" and "organization". The messages in the sky you posit are, of course, "ordered", but they are also organized. "Order from chaos" scenarios do not, cannot, explain organization. Neither do I, but I'm sort of working on it.
[ 28. April 2007, 13:49: Message edited by: Douglas ]
IP: Logged
|
|
David L. Hagen
Member
Member # 323
|
posted 28. April 2007 20:14
2ndclass
quote:
“Likewise, living systems do not increase entropy more slowly than random piles of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.”
May I suggest you think deeper on the proposed principle.
Compare photosynthesis and ATP formation with sunlight incident on “random piles of” C, H, & O. Sunlight striking random CHO will heat that CHO pile. Some sunlight on metal will heat it, while energetic photons will release electrons by the photoelectric effect.
However, photosynthesis converts photons to ATP with almost 100% efficiency. Numerous researchers have commented on the amazingly high efficiency of this conversion.
Reduced Conversion Rate:
Recent researchers have remarked on the long duration of photon capture to resonance energy.
Graham Fleming et al. “Evidence for wavelike energy transfer through quantum coherence in photosynthetic systems,” Nature, April 12, 2007
“Surprisingly, this quantum beating lasted the entire 660 femtoseconds."
http://www.physorg.com/news95605211.html
Photosynthesis thus provides a major reduction in the entropy production rate compared to solar heating or electron ejection.
Biotic storage:
The ATP then provides stable biotic energy storage. This biotic energy storage provides a further major reduction in the entropy production rate relative to solar heating or electron ejection.
Photosynthesis to ATP thus exhibits reduced entropy production rate via a complex system in contrast natural forces.
Thus, by the proposed principle, photosynthesis has the characteristics of an intelligently designed system.
IP: Logged
|
|
2ndclass
Member
Member # 1979
|
posted 30. April 2007 12:12
David: quote:
2ndclass
Introducing storage or "latency", by definition reduces the average rate of entropy production. Please work at greater accuracy in you statements.
Hydroelectric systems electrolyzing aluminum could use 20% to 90% of the power. e.g., Cahora Bassa hydroelectic plant in Mozambique.
More accurately, a reduction in the rate of entropy production would be entailed by a continual net increase in the amount of stored energy. On the other hand, if energy storage components saturate and subsequently maintain a static amount of energy (eg capacitance, inductance, or batteries), then the rate of entropy production is unaffected by them after saturation.
But your example of aluminum electrolysis gives the lie to my objection. Assuming significant efficiency (and according to this it can approach 50%), and assuming a continual supply of aluminum oxide, the electrolysis does indeed provide a reduction in the increase of entropy.
quote:
May I suggest you think deeper on the proposed principle.
Compare photosynthesis and ATP formation with sunlight incident on “random piles of” C, H, & O. Sunlight striking random CHO will heat that CHO pile. Some sunlight on metal will heat it, while energetic photons will release electrons by the photoelectric effect.
However, photosynthesis converts photons to ATP with almost 100% efficiency. Numerous researchers have commented on the amazingly high efficiency of this conversion.
Again, you have shown my objection to be wrong. I was thinking of animals, which actively seek stored energy to metabolize, thus making them chronic entropy producers. But apparently plants are a different story, storing energy that otherwise would have dissipated. And this energy can be stored for millions of years as fossil fuels. So you're correct -- my objections were misguided. My apologies.
IP: Logged
|
|
David L. Hagen
Member
Member # 323
|
posted 11. May 2007 13:02
2ndClass - Thank you for your gracious response.
quote:
More accurately, a reduction in the rate of entropy production would be entailed by a continual net increase in the amount of stored energy.
Your observation would apply to a continual prcess showing a continual rate of change. If there are discrete quantities or limited duration processes, then it would depend on the relative quantities of energy involved. e.g. photon capture is a discrete process which results in electro mechanical vibration/stress and then biochemical conversion.
Either way, I posit that:
A system showing a reduction in entropy generation rate from that caused by the four natural forces appears to evidence Intelligent Design.
IP: Logged
|
|
kyle7
Member
Member # 191
|
posted 16. May 2007 03:20
David,
I think your basic idea has merit but you need to be careful how you present your argument. All someone has to do to counter your argument is to present a natural system that has a low entropy production rate. Would a system with a trickle of energy qualify as a violation? Should your system include some aspect of entropy reduction? And even if it did include some aspect of entropy reduction, could not a simple system, as found in nature, be presented as evidence against your argument? And who is to decide what boundary to use in identifying this low entropy production rate for your system. It has been my observation that the critics of ID don't necesarily play fairly especially when it comes to thermodynamics! And to be fair to the critics of ID, could not a dishonest advocate of your theory artificially create a boundary which would suggest design purely from their choice of the boundary?
I have wondered if there is a way to quantify a new law of physics that measures the efficiency of the use of energy and the complexity of the system. When you look at a car engine, you will notice the high energy differences in the components. If you include a vector element related to the motion of the component while the magnitude is the energy content, you will notice large variations throughout in time and location. Natural systems fail to have this characteristic -- especially the uniformity in the vector motion. This same characteristic is evident in living systems. Anyway, there are probably a hundred different ways to capture these characteristic of complexity and energy efficiency, which a smart ID proponent could advance.
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic