[_ Old Earth _] Life without God

[Blazin Bones]

How did the material of the universe form? Who ignited the "Big Bang" if that's how things started? The Big Bang does not follow the second law of thermo dynamics, so something had to at least cause a reaction. God was at least that Catalyst, at most He designed all you see, and He designed you. I obviously lean toward the second extreme.

 

[Asimov]

Perhaps you overlooked the :-? emoticon to show that I was using your logic and that it was rather poor.

Perhaps you overlooked my statement that I was being rhetorical.

Isn't that basically what I stated? :-?

No, spontaneous generation is different from abiogenesis. Abiogenesis is chemistry, where elements form protocells, and so on.

I don't know, I don't anything about viruses. Do they happen to spontaneously arise from non-life?

Viruses are not considered alive. They rely on hijacking cells in order to replicate their DNA.

They do grow, they do metabolise, and they do respond to stimuli.

It's tough defining exactly what life is, because of things such as viruses.

Everything is made of non-life. Is it so hard to think that the first cells arose from non-life, due to chemical reactions?

 

[Asimov]

How did the material of the universe form? Who ignited the "Big Bang" if that's how things started? The Big Bang does not follow the second law of thermo dynamics, so something had to at least cause a reaction. God was at least that Catalyst, at most He designed all you see, and He designed you. I obviously lean toward the second extreme.

Brutus,

What do you mean the material of the universe?

Nothing has to ignite the Big Bang, we don't know if someone, something, or if the Big Bang just expanded on its own. The Big Bang wasn't an explosion, so it wasn't ignited.

Can you tell me what the 2nd Law states?

 

[Asimov]

Huh?

Chernobyl is evidence that apart from God all you have is desolation and destruction. No city can survive inless there is at least one righteous man or women to give a witness and a testimony for God. Apart from God you would have nothing.

Chernobyl is evidence that if you don't look after a nuclear power plant, it's probably going to blow up.

 

[Blazin Bones]

Here's a basic explanation of the second law of thermodynamics, as according to pyshlink.com.

You cannot break even (you cannot return to the same energy state, because there is always an increase in disorder; entropy always increases).

Here's why the "Big bang" doesn't work. Before the "big bang" there was just a bunch of particles lying around, How then could planets much less galaxies just happen to form. That is an increase in order which is impossible according to that second law.

In order for the universe to have formed, something (God) had to have been the catalyst. No Scientists will refute the necessity of a catalyst. What they will argue is what that catalyst was. Christians know that this spark came from God.

 

[Asimov]

Here's a basic explanation of the second law of thermodynamics, as according to pyshlink.com.

You cannot break even (you cannot return to the same energy state, because there is always an increase in disorder; entropy always increases).

wow, that really makes no sense at all.

Actually, the 2LOT states:

* 2nd Law: A far reaching and powerful law, it is typically stated in one of two ways:

It is impossible to obtain a process that, operating in cycle, produces no other effect than the subtraction of a positive amount of heat from a reservoir and the production of an equal amount of work. (Kelvin-Planck Statement)

or

It is impossible to obtain a process that, operating in cycle, produces no other effect than a positive heat flow from a colder body to a hotter one. (Clausius Statement)

The entropy of a thermally isolated macroscopic system never decreases (see Maxwell's demon), however a microscopic system may exhibit fluctuations of entropy opposite to that dictated by the second law (see Fluctuation Theorem).

It says nothing of complexity, or order and disorder. It says that in a closed system, the entropy of usable energy in said system always increases.

Here's why the "Big bang" doesn't work. Before the "big bang" there was just a bunch of particles lying around, How then could planets much less galaxies just happen to form. That is an increase in order which is impossible according to that second law.

There was no "before" the big bang. The universe at the moment of the big bang was a singularity of infinite density, so there were not "particles lying around". The Universe is energy. The Big Bang was an expansion of space.

So we start with a universe comprised of energy, energy infinitely dense. It doesn't get much ordered than that, Brutus.

Stars form because of gravity. Planets form from after the stars, from the leftovers.

Would you like me to go more in depth on Star formation, Brutus? Do you even care?

In order for the universe to have formed, something (God) had to have been the catalyst. No Scientists will refute the necessity of a catalyst. What they will argue is what that catalyst was. Christians know that this spark came from God.

Right, considering you were wrong on the rest of your points about catalysts (a term for chemical reactions), it thus follows that you are wrong on this point as well.

Anything before the Universe is meaningless, and undefined, because we cannot observe it, and it has no effect on the universe. Because of this, you, me, nor anybody can say anything about what started the universe, or if it started itself, or if it "just happened".

 

[cubedbee]

Before the "big bang" there was just a bunch of particles lying around, How then could planets much less galaxies just happen to form. That is an increase in order which is impossible according to that second law.

Here's your problem. You would be right about your conclusion if there was really just a bunch of particles lying around before the big bang. However, in actuality all mass/energy was confined to a singular point--the most ordered configuration possible, containing zero entropy.

 

[Blazin Bones]

Source it and then I'll work with your definition? Entropy is still showing that your scenario is moving from more to less, or order to disorder.

Cubedbee, supposing this mass was the ultimate form it would disperse in a form of energy correct? How then did it reform into planets, that would be returning to a collected (ordered) state. This is still denying the Law and needs a Catalyst (God) to create the planets.

 

[cubedbee]

Cubedbee, supposing this mass was the ultimate form it would disperse in a form of energy correct? How then did it reform into planets, that would be returning to a collected (ordered) state. This is still denying the Law and needs a Catalyst (God) to create the planets.[/color]

The entropy of a closed system cannot decrease. The universe as a whole is a closed system, and the total entropy cannot decrease. However, the entropy of an open system can and does decrease. The universe as a whole is composed of many interrelated closed systems---and entropy in some of these systems (those that formed stars and then planets) can decrease while entropy in other systems (dark and cold areas of space formerly teaming with energy) increase. This doesn't violate the 2nd law as long as the total entropy of the entire system is always increasing.

 

[Asimov]

Source it and then I'll work with your definition? Entropy is still showing that your scenario is moving from more to less, or order to disorder.

wikipedia.org, type in "thermodynamics"

The usable energy in a closed system is being lost to heat, therefore entropy is increasing, so yes.

 

[ThinkerMan]

Cubedbee, supposing this mass was the ultimate form it would disperse in a form of energy correct? How then did it reform into planets, that would be returning to a collected (ordered) state. This is still denying the Law and needs a Catalyst (God) to create the planets.[/color]

The entropy of a closed system cannot decrease. The universe as a whole is a closed system, and the total entropy cannot decrease. However, the entropy of an open system can and does decrease. The universe as a whole is composed of many interrelated closed systems---and entropy in some of these systems (those that formed stars and then planets) can decrease while entropy in other systems (dark and cold areas of space formerly teaming with energy) increase. This doesn't violate the 2nd law as long as the total entropy of the entire system is always increasing.

1. Cubed is absolutely right about how he describes this.

In the terms of the universe, life on earth is zilch, nada nothing. Just because entropy here on earth is not necessarily increasing (thanks to the sun) doesn't mean entropy as a whole within the universe does not.

Think of your kitchen. You are able to take water, noodles, and a silver packet and make an elegant meal of Ramen noodles. The specific entropy of the meal decreased, but the entropy of the kitchen as a whole increased due to your effort, heat lost to the microwave, ect.

2. Read "Fabric of the Cosmos". He has a fascinating chapter on entropy in the universe and how is has increased since the big bang and why.

 

[Blazin Bones]

Thinkerman, I think I'm following your reasonings, but your example still had me causing the decrease in entropy. Therefore, a cause is still necessary. Would you mind providing an example of decreasing entropy without a catalyst?

 

[Asimov]

Thinkerman, I think I'm following your reasonings, but your example still had me causing the decrease in entropy. Therefore, a cause is still necessary. Would you mind providing an example of decreasing entropy without a catalyst?

Uh, Brutus, you can't have decreasing entropy without the input of energy. For instance, the input of energy to make the Ramen noodles is you. But due to conservation of energy, your body uses up fuel in order to make those noodles.

Just like with the entire earth. Without the input of energy from the sun, life would be impossible. Entropy decreases on earth, but increases on the sun.

 

[Blazin Bones]

Uh, Brutus, you can't have decreasing entropy without the input of energy. For instance, the input of energy to make the Ramen noodles is you. But due to conservation of energy, your body uses up fuel in order to make those noodles.

Just like with the entire earth. Without the input of energy from the sun, life would be impossible. Entropy decreases on earth, but increases on the sun.

Exactly my point, Asimov. Something has to be responsible for the decrease of entropy. inorder for these isolated decreases of entropy, you have to have a catalyst. God is at least that catalyst, but I still believe He created it as it is.

 

[Asimov]

Exactly my point, Asimov. Something has to be responsible for the decrease of entropy. inorder for these isolated decreases of entropy, you have to have a catalyst. God is at least that catalyst, but I still believe He created it as it is.

What? We have reasons for why these decreases in entropy occur, and it doesn't require God at every step.

 

[Blazin Bones]

What? We have reasons for why these decreases in entropy occur, and it doesn't require God at every step.

First, your still agreeing with me. Your still suggesting that God must be involved in some of these "steps". As to the Decreases in entorpy being explainable, then explain them to me.

 

[Asimov]

What? We have reasons for why these decreases in entropy occur, and it doesn't require God at every step.

First, your still agreeing with me. Your still suggesting that God must be involved in some of these "steps". As to the Decreases in entorpy being explainable, then explain them to me.

How am I agreeing with you, Brutus? I'm not suggesting anything.

Ok, our solar system is a closed system. The sun doesn't get it's energy from another source. The solar systems entropy is always increasing. Parts of the solar systems entropy may decrease, but that is because those parts receive energy from the sun (such as Earth). The TOTAL entropy of the solar system still increases though, because even though the Earth's entropy is decreasing, the sun is losing energy as the earth's energy increases.

I don't see how God must be a part of this.

 

[Blazin Bones]

How did the sun get there?

We all know how science claims to understand how stars form, but something causes the reaction. Again God is present as at least a catalyst.

 

[Asimov]

How did the sun get there?

Gravity attracts. Clumps of hydrogen atoms formed the sun.

I don't know much about star formation, I'm sure you could look it up if you really wanted to.

We all know how science claims to understand how stars form, but something causes the reaction. Again God is present as at least a catalyst.

Yes, fusion causes the reaction. Look up fusion, and how it occurs. Again, God is only present where you wish to insert him.

 

[Blazin Bones]

Fusion still takes at least something to start the reaction. I'm not inserting God anywhere. I'm still a firm believer in the Bible, and that god is merely allowing man to understand a small bit of His power. You are still denying that God is apparently required at some part of the process of creation. Reactions don't just happen on their own, they need a catalyst.