Thermodynamics Vs Evolutionism?

Question

If the laws and thermodynamics and Evolution are so contradictory( evolutionism moves towards diversity and adaptaion while thermodynamics towards simplicity) then how do the not conflict with each other. I need to write about it( not alot less than a page) so if you have a source too its so much better

Answer 1

As others have described beautifully, evolution and thermodynamics are NOT contradictory at all.

A common misapplication of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is to say that the evolution of life on earth represents an increase in complexity, and therefore a decrease in entropy, and therefore a violation the 2nd Law. As others have pointed out, it is a mistake to equate "order" or "complexity" as the opposite of entropy, or to equate entropy with either "disorder" or "simplicity." In other words, it is an extreme stretch to extend the concepts, mathematics, and statistical results used to describe trillions of molecules bouncing around in a thermodynamic system, to such things as the complexity represented by a single DNA molecule.

But just as important, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics applies to *closed* systems ... and the earth is quite obviously NOT a closed system ... it has an external energy source: the sun. And this external energy source drives all of life (and the struggles and processes that drive evolution) from the photosynthesis of plants and algae, on up through the food chain.

I have heard the counterargument that the earth+sun IS a closed system. This is true, but the creation of energy in the sun represents an *enormous* increase in entropy, which far exceeds any *decrease* in entropy represented by life on earth.

In short, the "thermodynamics" argument against evolution is trivially refuted, as it is always based on a truly BAD mis-statement of what the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics actually says.

Great question though!

Answer 2

The laws of thermodynamics are not contradictory to the laws of evolution because they apply in different circumstances.

You seem to be talking about the second law of thermodynamics, that "Entropy is always increasing"--which means things are tending towards a more "chaotic" (also interpreted as a more uniform) state. Think of two liquids mixing.

The second law only applies to a system that is "thermodynamically closed". This means that nothing is entering or leaving the system.

Every living system is an open system. Every living system takes in energy and then dissipates heat; the earth as a whole is also an open system because it takes in low-entropy energy from the sun, and radiates out high-entropy energy in the form of heat.

Thermodynamics becomes much more complicated when you consider open systems; even the basics are disputed and poorly understood--people can't even agree on a set of simple laws about how open systems behave. You are right that evolution leads towards greater complexity...this is not in contradiction to the laws of thermodynamics because only open systems evolve in this fashion.

One of the best authors on this topic is Robert E. Ulanowicz. I would seriously advise reading his book, if you want to understand the relationship between thermodynamics and ecology. He talks about all the stuff I am talking about, much more extensively. Other major authors on this topic include Stuart Kauffman.

You can read stuff about this online but you will really do best to find some book sources! There aren't any great sites that I've been able to find, but there are a ton of great books. Probably the most relevant two are the ones I've attached as sources.

Answer 3

That's an absolutely great question. I've often wondered this myself.

Then I realised something, basically the 2nd law only applies (really) to simple systems and to net energy. Some systems may be considered increasing in complexity but they are doing so at the expense of other organisms or by using fuel (chemical or otherwise) and are using up net energy in the system.

In a way it's like asking does a motor violate the 2nd law, the answer is no, it performs a task of (possibly) providing increased power at a specific point, but it does so at the expense of some more diffuse source of energy. Gasoline or coal or some such is transformed such that the "energy" is removed and focused, but nothing is created.

It's the same for evolution or living systems.

A plant receives energy from the sun - but only some is converted into sugar and energy. An animal eats the plant and only receives most of the energy of the plant (maybe only the fruit), the animal has to eat another plant etc, to keep it's energy stores up or it will die and so on.

Carl Sagan once mentioned "Consider for a moment that in one day, the Sun delivers more energy to a single square yard of the Earth than was released during the Hiroshima blast, it's just not used very efficiently by plants and animals and doesn't all arrive at once."

Answer 4

First of all, the mathematics of thermodynamics makes certain important presumptions about those things the laws apply to, one of which is uniformity! The equations of thermodynamics break down if you have a complex system involving complex interactions across a system which is neither closed nor in an quasi-equilibrium state. For example, we can use the equations of thermodynamics to describe the behavior of a lake, but they don't work for a metropolis. Secondly, the ONLY "law" in thermodynamics that seems to put any restriction on spontaneous emergence of complexity is the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, which states that in any closed, quasi-equillibrium system, entropy always rises. This law was established empirically; in other words, it had to be posited, but never proven mathematically, except for special or restricted systems. Furthermore, while the term "entropy" has an exact mathematical definition, the term "disorder" does not, even though many equate the two. Particularly with the advent of computers and simulation, there has been rise in studies of "self-organized complexity", where in certain systems, even as entropy rises, spontaneous complexity can actually occur. It is not a violation of the 2nd Law for increased complexity to occur even in a closed system, because it's the NET entropy that rises, not that entropy must rise for any part of the system. For example, a plant draws its energy from solar radiation, as well as chemicals from the environment, and increases in size and complexity, without causing the total entropy to go down. The great fallacy in associating entropy with "disorder" is that it seems to suggest that the 2nd Law says that everything must necessarily degrade into chaos, and that's neither true nor supported mathematically.

Answer 5

Basically that's why life needs a continous supply of energy. But you dont have to mix in evolution.