The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-07-2016, 06:40 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 05:58 PM)u196533 Wrote:  According to the story of abiogenesis chemical systems evolved from replicator molecule to life. That is a huge climb up a thermodynamic mountain and took millions of years. Each major step up moved the atoms farther from equilibrium and made them more and more unstable. It is inconceivable

your incredulity is not an argument.

Quote: that the energy was "force fed" into chemical systems to force them to react in ways that would lower their entropy and increase energy for millions of years. At some point in that story prior to photosynthesis, those primitive life forms had to seek energy.

Nothing was force fed into the systems. They are awash in sunlight, geothermal activity, electrical discharges, etc. Experimentation has shown that simple chemicals exposed to a source of energy combine into more complex molecules fairly quickly. The earth had millions of years and a wide variety of conditions. the fact that you can't believe it happened says much ore about you than the science.

Quote:See Gibbs Free Energy equation to understand the basic drives. It is not an advanced topic.

You keep bringing that up like it is applicable to the topic. It isn't. We aren't looking at isolated systems in thermal equilibrium, we are looking at complex interactions continually bathed in sources of energy.

Quote:Living things seek energy to lower entropy. Inanimate objects do not. If you were to analyze any living thing as a simple collection of atoms, you would conclude that they would decompose. Seeking energy to lower entropy does not happen spontaneously in inanimate objects. That is how the atoms associated with life behaves differently from non-life.

You keep making that same category mistake. The atoms in living things behave exactly they way they do when they are in non-lviing things. There are such things as emergent behaviors and synergies. You continually try to understand living things in a purely reductionist way and fail to take into account higher levels of organization.

Quote:Something that violates the laws of physics is kinda the definition of supernatural.

That assumes perfect knowledge of the laws of physics and betrays your god-of-the-gaps argument again. It is largely irrelevant since you haven't demonstrated anything that violates the laws of physics yet.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like unfogged's post
26-07-2016, 06:41 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 06:25 PM)u196533 Wrote:  It is better to be silent and thought an idiot that to speak and remove all doubt.

I just love the smell of irony in the morning.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
26-07-2016, 06:44 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 06:25 PM)u196533 Wrote:  
(26-07-2016 06:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Not this shit again.
Because it is driven by DNA.
Fucktard has no basic knowledge of biology.

DNA did not exist at that point in the process of abiogenesis.
You have no basic knowledge of abiogenesis. Please refrain from posting until you do. (It is better to be silent and thought an idiot that to speak and remove all doubt.)


If this bullshit was worth 2 cents, it would be published and recognized.
In fact it's utter crap. You know nothing about biology, AND you have never posted the proof of how atoms and molecules act differently in living systems. There has been no doubt in anyone's mind here that you are a fool.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
26-07-2016, 07:46 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 05:58 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Living things seek energy to lower entropy. Inanimate objects do not. If you were to analyze any living thing as a simple collection of atoms, you would conclude that they would decompose. Seeking energy to lower entropy does not happen spontaneously in inanimate objects. That is how the atoms associated with life behaves differently from non-life.

Living things do not seek to lower entropy. They have no such purpose.
Due to the consequences of the evolutionary process, those living organisims (within an adaptive space) that are more likely to survive and procreate in comparison to their competition (also competing for the limited resources) will naturally become more abundant so long as they are able to avoid becoming prey to other living things that may see them as a food source. Those living organisms that are less likely to survive and procreate diminish in numbers and may become extinct.
An individual organism does not become more complex over its lifetime. It grows according to its DNA, epigenetics and ability to consume resources given it's energy expendature. Living organisms gain energy directly from sunlight (plants), or from consuming other living organisms (plant or animal). Regarding the cycle of energy, the sun feeds the plants (most sunlight energy is lost), the plants turn some of that energy into sugars, the animals feed off the plants (most energy from the plants is lost) and turn some of that energy into protiens. All along the way energy is lost (entropy increases).
Why did life start out as simple systems and overtime evolve to be complex?
It's because of the consequences of evolution and competition for limited resources. The more complex organisms became more competitive when seeking out the limited resources. Those that developed locomotion, those that developed sight, those that developed efficient and effective ways to get food, and avoid becoming food proliferated while most died out. This dying out or "Filtering" results in organisation and complexity and may give some people the illusion of low entropy.
But the progressive changes are a result of random mutations coupled with this filtering. Mutations are not more complex, they are merely differences. Over generations, the filtering causes the DNA structures and Genotypes to appear more elaborate and complex because, as it turns out, more features have proven to give survival and procreation advantages over organisms with simpler features.
This process has gone on in Earth for over 4 billion years. Meanwhile our Sun expends 3.86 x 10^26 watts of Energy, which is 3.86 x 10^26 Joules per second.
Only 1.74 x 10^17 watts makes it to Earth, which is 0.000000045% of the Sun's energy.

With regards to atoms, every atom of a type is the same. All fundamental particles of a type are indistinguishable. All electrons are the same. It doesn't matter how you configure them, H2O is water, it doesn't matter which Hydrogen atoms you use, it doesn't matter which Oxygen atom you use. It doesn't matter if the atom is in a rock or in your bum.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Stevil's post
26-07-2016, 07:52 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 06:40 PM)unfogged Wrote:  
(26-07-2016 05:58 PM)u196533 Wrote:  According to the story of abiogenesis chemical systems evolved from replicator molecule to life. That is a huge climb up a thermodynamic mountain and took millions of years. Each major step up moved the atoms farther from equilibrium and made them more and more unstable. It is inconceivable

your incredulity is not an argument.

Quote: that the energy was "force fed" into chemical systems to force them to react in ways that would lower their entropy and increase energy for millions of years. At some point in that story prior to photosynthesis, those primitive life forms had to seek energy.

Nothing was force fed into the systems. They are awash in sunlight, geothermal activity, electrical discharges, etc. Experimentation has shown that simple chemicals exposed to a source of energy combine into more complex molecules fairly quickly. The earth had millions of years and a wide variety of conditions. the fact that you can't believe it happened says much ore about you than the science.

Quote:See Gibbs Free Energy equation to understand the basic drives. It is not an advanced topic.

You keep bringing that up like it is applicable to the topic. It isn't. We aren't looking at isolated systems in thermal equilibrium, we are looking at complex interactions continually bathed in sources of energy.

Quote:Living things seek energy to lower entropy. Inanimate objects do not. If you were to analyze any living thing as a simple collection of atoms, you would conclude that they would decompose. Seeking energy to lower entropy does not happen spontaneously in inanimate objects. That is how the atoms associated with life behaves differently from non-life.

You keep making that same category mistake. The atoms in living things behave exactly they way they do when they are in non-lviing things. There are such things as emergent behaviors and synergies. You continually try to understand living things in a purely reductionist way and fail to take into account higher levels of organization.

Quote:Something that violates the laws of physics is kinda the definition of supernatural.

That assumes perfect knowledge of the laws of physics and betrays your god-of-the-gaps argument again. It is largely irrelevant since you haven't demonstrated anything that violates the laws of physics yet.

I bring up the Gibbs Free Energy equation as a simple way to explain the drive toward lower energy and higher entropy for people who clearly have no background in chemistry or thermodynamics. The drive toward lower energy and higher entropy applies to ALL systems.

Just because energy is available does not mean that a reaction will occur. Those reactions will not occur spontaneously. Even if you force something into a state of disequilibrium (low entropy/high energy), it is unstable and will revert to it's constituents at the earliest opportunity.

So those prebiotic life forms were in a state of disequilibrium, and then must have sought out energy to maintain their low entropy. That must have occurred according to the abiogenesis narrative.
Yes that is a violation of physics. Reductionism will never be able to explain the emergence of self preservation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-07-2016, 08:03 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 06:44 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(26-07-2016 06:25 PM)u196533 Wrote:  DNA did not exist at that point in the process of abiogenesis.
You have no basic knowledge of abiogenesis. Please refrain from posting until you do. (It is better to be silent and thought an idiot that to speak and remove all doubt.)


If this bullshit was worth 2 cents, it would be published and recognized.
In fact it's utter crap. You know nothing about biology, AND you have never posted the proof of how atoms and molecules act differently in living systems. There has been no doubt in anyone's mind here that you are a fool.


This basic argument was also basically described in my thermodynamics textbook back in the 80s. It was the most intimidating book I ever saw. Nothing but differemtial equations and Nusselt number calculations. Then it took a time out to explain the applicability of thermodynamics to life.

It is not well publicized because most people do not have the background to understand it. You certainly don't since I have not discussed biology. My argument is based on chemistry and thermodynamics.

If it is bullshit, point out the fallacy.

Fact: All things, except living things, tend toward lower energy and higher entropy.
Fact: All livng things exist in a state for from equilibrium
Fact: Living things seek energy to lower entropy
Fact: Inanimate objects do not.
If you believe in natural abiogenesis, you must accept this as a fact: Somewhere in the process of abiogenesis, those chemical systems must have sought out energy in an act of self preservation in order to survive.

The fact that you haven't heard the argument does not invalidate it. It says more about you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-07-2016, 08:07 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 07:46 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(26-07-2016 05:58 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Living things seek energy to lower entropy. Inanimate objects do not. If you were to analyze any living thing as a simple collection of atoms, you would conclude that they would decompose. Seeking energy to lower entropy does not happen spontaneously in inanimate objects. That is how the atoms associated with life behaves differently from non-life.

Living things do not seek to lower entropy. They have no such purpose.
Due to the consequences of the evolutionary process, those living organisims (within an adaptive space) that are more likely to survive and procreate in comparison to their competition (also competing for the limited resources) will naturally become more abundant so long as they are able to avoid becoming prey to other living things that may see them as a food source. Those living organisms that are less likely to survive and procreate diminish in numbers and may become extinct.
An individual organism does not become more complex over its lifetime. It grows according to its DNA, epigenetics and ability to consume resources given it's energy expendature. Living organisms gain energy directly from sunlight (plants), or from consuming other living organisms (plant or animal). Regarding the cycle of energy, the sun feeds the plants (most sunlight energy is lost), the plants turn some of that energy into sugars, the animals feed off the plants (most energy from the plants is lost) and turn some of that energy into protiens. All along the way energy is lost (entropy increases).
Why did life start out as simple systems and overtime evolve to be complex?
It's because of the consequences of evolution and competition for limited resources. The more complex organisms became more competitive when seeking out the limited resources. Those that developed locomotion, those that developed sight, those that developed efficient and effective ways to get food, and avoid becoming food proliferated while most died out. This dying out or "Filtering" results in organisation and complexity and may give some people the illusion of low entropy.
But the progressive changes are a result of random mutations coupled with this filtering. Mutations are not more complex, they are merely differences. Over generations, the filtering causes the DNA structures and Genotypes to appear more elaborate and complex because, as it turns out, more features have proven to give survival and procreation advantages over organisms with simpler features.
This process has gone on in Earth for over 4 billion years. Meanwhile our Sun expends 3.86 x 10^26 watts of Energy, which is 3.86 x 10^26 Joules per second.
Only 1.74 x 10^17 watts makes it to Earth, which is 0.000000045% of the Sun's energy.

With regards to atoms, every atom of a type is the same. All fundamental particles of a type are indistinguishable. All electrons are the same. It doesn't matter how you configure them, H2O is water, it doesn't matter which Hydrogen atoms you use, it doesn't matter which Oxygen atom you use. It doesn't matter if the atom is in a rock or in your bum.

"Living things do not seek to lower entropy." That is flat out false. In fact lower entropy is one of the definitions used in many descriptions of life.

My argument is regarding the thermodynamics associated with abiogenesis. Your discussion of evolution is totally irrelevant and will be summarily dismissed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-07-2016, 08:38 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
At work.

Hello again U196533. Big Grin

I think it has been asked before but can you please point to the differance between an atom within something that is 'Alive' and something that is 'Dead'?

Looking forwards to our exchange. Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Peebothuhul's post
26-07-2016, 08:48 PM (This post was last modified: 27-07-2016 06:09 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 08:03 PM)u196533 Wrote:  My argument is based on chemistry and thermodynamics.
Fact: All things, except living things, tend toward lower energy and higher entropy.
Fact: All livng things exist in a state for from equilibrium
Fact: Living things seek energy to lower entropy
Fact: Inanimate objects do not.
If you believe in natural abiogenesis, you must accept this as a fact: Somewhere in the process of abiogenesis, those chemical systems must have sought out energy in an act of self preservation in order to survive.

The fact that you haven't heard the argument does not invalidate it. It says more about you.

What is says, is that you're desperate to make people believe in your imaginary friend.
You're full of shit "u". Your garbage has been debunked. You're making a fundmental error about closed systems. You never wrote a book on thermodynamics. No one who did would make such a simple error.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/probability.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK21737/
http://cupola.gettysburg.edu/cgi/viewcon...xt=philfac
http://www.quantamagazine.org/20140122-a...y-of-life/
http://www.askamathematician.com/2013/03...e-entropy/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3ShyXSHsbc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBITz7WE6WE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rAeZqEckNU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Fal_M1z_v8
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-u...termediate
http://biologos.org/common-questions/sci...second-law
http://ncse.com/cej/2/2/creationist-misu...use-second
http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/evol...namics.php
http://2ndlaw.oxy.edu/evolution.html
http://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/t...namics.htm
http://www.physicsforums.com/threads/evo...cs.261129/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...173205.htm

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
26-07-2016, 08:54 PM
RE: The creation of the universe is "beyond the remit of science".
(26-07-2016 08:03 PM)u196533 Wrote:  This basic argument was also basically described in my thermodynamics textbook back in the 80s.

Cite it.

(26-07-2016 08:03 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Fact: All things, except living things, tend toward lower energy and higher entropy.

Define a "living" thing.

(26-07-2016 08:03 PM)u196533 Wrote:  Fact: All livng things exist in a state for from equilibrium

Fact: Your condescension would be more effective without spelling errors.

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: