Biological organisms are [i]primarily[/i] Software Defined Lifeforms. - Yes or No?

Not this again.

My high school students understood the second law of thermodynamics well enough to see Layman's mistake.

Didn't see that discussion with Layman. A lot of people get confused with entropy and negentropy, don't understand the concept but are keen to play with it philosophically, 'cause it looks cool and all. It conjures up romantic visions of life going against the flow, fighting inevitable decay and all that.

Which it does, until death comes and entropy has the last laugh.

That was a completely dishonest reply to what I said. I stipulated that I was not talking in unlimited timeframes. Even there we could end up talking about Dyson spheres showing intelligence could overcome entropy etc but that’s way off subject.

Can you show me examples in nature, other than biological life, that reverses entropy in human timeframes? Or stated in mechanical terms, any increase in complexity comparable to life ? The best I’ve ever been offered there is an eddy of air or water. Hardly enough organizational power there to create anything comparable to even the simplest bacteria.

Every single second that passes, every single living organism abides by the second law of thermodynamics. It's not like life contradicts general physics. Birds don't negate gravity either when flying. They manage or control its effects. Likewise, living organisms control their internal entropy level by importing negentropy in the form of food and exporting entropy in the form of feces and heat.

You are just posting knee jerk negative replies without making any attempt at engaging the point.

I clearly said I was talking about systems that do not violate the laws of physics but still reverse entropy on human time scales. There is nothing else in nature that does that as far as I know.

One simple example that easily exceedes your 'single second law'. A tree takes in light energy and converts it to concentrated (more organized in a higher energy state) chemical energy. It can store it for thousands of years (millions if it gets buried).

There goes Olivier's one second rule.

So you think that life breaks the laws of thermodynamics?

The biosphere does not "reverse" entropy. In terms of the planet alone, this is not a closed system. Energy comes in from our star, which replenishes that which would otherwise be a part of an entropic cycle. When, in a billion or a billion and a half years from now, our star expands into a red giant in its slow, slow death throes, it is very likely that the biosphere will literally be toast. Entropy continues unaffected in the larger context of this star system. None of the so-called laws of thermodynamics is violated.

The god squad prefer the simple-minded explanations, because thinking is hard!

Still troll'n?

If it makes you happy and feel like you won a point, yes, the universe ends in heat death and nothing interesting happens along the way.

Cripes, even farmerman was perceptive enough to recognize that biological life was unique in its ability to reverse entropy if only temporarily.

You guys go literally to the end of the universe to dodge the subject.

The problem is that Leadfoot doesn't understand entropy or the second law of thermodynamics.

Evolution doesnt break the second law of thermodynamics any more than salt crystals or snowflakes do.

This is what happens when you learn physics from the internet rather than taking the time to study it in college (or high school in this case).

Apparently Max is not aware that the subject is not evolution. But I’m guessing he’s one of those reductionists who believe that evolution explains everything.

And I already addressed crystals as not being an example of complexity. Maybe you don’t know what is meant by the word complexity? A Mandelbrot plot looks very complex, but it’s not either.

Here we go again... you are doing Physics by Google.

1) Entropy is a mathematical concept. It does not mean "complexity". Entropy can be calculated with the function



Yes, this is another case where the fact that you don't understand mathematics means that it is difficult to understand the Physics.

2) Since you don't understand the Physics... you have no choice but to listen to the people who actually do. Sorry, but unless you take the time to study the subject, you making up the convenient answer.

Outside of the Creationist community (people whose belief in the Bible compel them to disprove evolution) there are virtually no Physicists who believe that evolution breaks the second law of Thermodynamics.

Your basic argument is this.

1) There is a God.
2) Therefore Evolution is wrong.
3) Therefore Science is wrong.
4) Thermodynamics is science.
5) Therefore Thermodynamics is wrong.
6) Therefore Evolution is wrong.
7) Therefore there is a God.

This is flawed logic. I wish you would at least leave pseudo-science out of it.

Impressive, you can cut & paste from the internet.

It is your side of the argument that claims complexity of the type seen in life is a natural consequence of the laws of nature including entropy.

I’m saying you can’t show a single example of that anywhere in the universe other than life. So claiming that life proves that argument is circular and therefore invalid.

Is that any clearer, or are you just trolling again.

My dear Leadfoot,

This argument you are making is mathematically and scientifically incorrect according to real Physicists (almost all of them , except maybe for a few on the internet with a religious dogma to prove).

You do this all of the time. If you are going to argue against Physicists, then why do you even bother to argue about Physics. If you went to a Thermodynamics class in college, you would learn about Carnot cycles... that is the introduction to Thermodynamics that most of us get when we actually study Physics. To get to this point you have to understand loop integrals and be able to define a reversible process.

I could try to explain this to you... I have experience as a Physics teacher. But you start with the conclusion you want to believe and then reject any facts that don't fit it.

You are being ridiculous, and you are making up science that you don't understand. There are zero reputable Physicists who agree with you on this. You are basically rejecting a basic understanding of Physics.(taught to undergraduate physics students around the world)

It is silly. If you are going to reject Physics... then why would the second law of thermodynamics even matter?

(If we were to have a serious discussion about this topic, it would be based on the mathematical definition of entropy. The word "complexity" that you keep throwing around is undefined. You are using it because it fits your preconceived notions. A scientific discussion will start by talking about endothermic proceses and heat reservoirs.)

My dear Max,
Go **** yourself.

Dude, don’t lose your cool like that when you get cornered, it’s a dead giveaway.

Plenty interesting things happen along the way, but magic ain't one of them. Sorry.

My only point is that if you are going to be using science in your argument, get the science right. This pseudo-science, where you are using the terms but getting the concepts wrong, is a pet peeve of mine.

If you mean I have lost patience with Max's attempt to misrepresent what I said and derail the discussion into an unrelated topic, yes. You think his lying about what I said is 'getting me cornered'?

I never said life violated the laws of physics. I specifically said the opposite. I said that biological life (while it is living) reverses entropy. Yes, I know how counter to 'normal' that sounds. And I stand by that position. Farmerman (no fan of my opinion) also sees that life does that. Do you really think Max' argument that eventually the sun will die addresses the topic? If he comes up with relevant facts I’ll listen, but otherwise, **** that trolling **** of his.

So I'll put the challenge to you. Can you give a single example of anything other than life that is self organizing to this extent? Does order really come from disorder? The very complex software controlled thermodynamic system that is life, clearly does this.

Dude, don’t you get it? That’s my point.

Incredibly interesting things happened, Software Defined Lifeforms are the prime example. I don’t believe in magic therefore there has to be another explanation. Natural processes, the laws of physics, etc have never been shown to produce life.

If this is true, it means that the absurd idea that given enough time life will arise anywhere you find water and sunlight is simply wrong. It means we in all likelihood will not find life on Mars or anywhere else in the solar system. If we do find life there, I’ll be proven wrong and I’ll concede. Until then, it is you who believe in the magic of software defined life from dust. You sure don’t have science to back up that blind faith.