The Antropy Of A Closed System

The Entropy Of A Closed System

Another profound law of science is the entropy of physics which states that the availability of the energy of the system or process for the performance of work is reduced; not stabilized, nor increased.

Energy runs down or wears out and is depleted from the system. This law about thermodynamics, the entropy of a closed system, can never be halted nor decreased. It’s strongest change, or inclination, is to tend to deplete at an increased level of measure. Or, simply stated, the amount of energy needed for a specific work will be greater than the work so that entropy results in lost energy. The greater the work need will result in greater the energy lost.

“Thermodynamis is a physical theory of great generality impinging on practically every phase of human experience. It may be called the description of the behaviour of matter in equalibrium and of its changes from one equalibrium state to another.

Thermodynamics operates with two master concepts or constructs and two great principles. The concepts are energy and entropy, and the principles are the so-called first and second laws of thermodynamics….”04

Entropy is the irreversible tendancy of a system, including the universe, toward increasing disorder.

It is one of the many fathers/supporters of evolution such as Sir Julian Huxley that promotes a continual increase of order, of organization, of size, and of complexity. Here, expressed is the evidences of two completely opposite principles: the principles of entropy through the two laws of thermodynamics and proponents of the principles of evolution.

It seems obviously axiomatic that both cannot possibly be true. The possibilty exists that entropy could decrease in an open system where local increases in organization can be expressed for a time. The whole of existance cannot be claimed as an open system that could temporarily evolve by evolutionary standards and then regress by the dictates of thermodynamics.

The crux of the matter is the attempts of supposed evolutionists to attribute environmental change to temporary influences as though they could be assigned the result of evolution; to suppose that this became such because of it’s inherent evolutionary makeup rather than the obvious result of natural reaction to environmental influences.

the dictate of evolution is that “The whole of reality is evolution”04, “04, a universal law explaining the developement of species in biology, elements in chemistry, and suns in astronomy.

There remains the gross contradiction between the theory of evolution and the second law of thermodynamics. This law plainly insists that there is a universal tendancy towards decay and disorder, not growth and developement.

The God centered view of creation is wholly supported by the testimony of the author of creation at Psalm 102:25-26: “Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heaven are the work of thy hands.

They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed.” Isaiah 51:6 has: “Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be forever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.” Romans 8:20 to 22 has:

“For the creation was made subject to vanity….For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.” “For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man is as the flower of grass. The grass withereth and the flower thereof falleth away (I Peter 1:24). “All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again (Eccles. 3:20). “Heaven and earth shall pass away” (Matt. 24:35).

The empirical law of decay is attested to by Scripture and ignored by evolution.

Yet the obvious cannot be ignored forever. Science can prove all testings to be subject to the second law of thermodynamics but is unable to provide the reason for it’s control.

The Biblical explanation is expressive
and compounding: Genesis 1:31 explains: “God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.” It was as perfect as perfect could be.

It is not now, but “was” very good. What happened to change that evaluation was the action of a “curse” as the reward for sin. God, after the rejection of man to his supervision of existance, implemented these laws of thermodynamics. Revelation 21:4 promises a later change of these influences and verse 22:3 clinches: “there shall be no more curse (the curse is fully described at Genesis 3:17).

“All experience points to the fact that every living organism eventually dies. This is a process in which the highly developed order of the organism is reduced to a random and disorderly collection of molecules. We are reminded that we are `dust’ and to `dust’ we ultimately return 04. Even today gerontologists cannot agree upon a definition for the aging process(somatic mutations).

By the word of God the scientifically projected heat death anticipated as the destiny of this universe, when all free energy has been utilized, and converted into non-available heat enegy, will never be reached (Romans 8:19; 8:21; II Peter 3:13).

My conclussion to the above inference that “theory” and “fact” are accepted in the realm of `evolution’ is that it can not `logically’ be, even, an inclination except in cases of `bias’ in favor of some motivation other than the seeking of truth. Further, that any suggestion to a validity in “evolutionary christianity” must be, supposed, without any clear definative analysis of either belief.

p.s. God willing, my next response will address the issue of Satan being offered as the father of the evolutionary concept. … et al

01 “At Random: A Television Preview,” in Issues in Evolution (Vol. III of Evolution after Darwin, Sol Tax, Ed., Univ. of Chicago Press, 1960),p. 45
02 “Evolution and Genetics,” Chap. 8 in `What is Science? (Ed., J.R. Newman, New York; Simon and Schuster, 1955)p. 272, Sir Julian Huxley. 03 “Man and Energy”; A. R. Ubbelohde (New York; George Braziller, Inc., 1955), p. 149
04 “Entropy Consumption and Values in Physical Science,” American Scientist, V. 47, Sept., 1959, p. 376 – 384 eof …..the debate continues from where is all the dust to the ploy of Satan in the evolutioary principles. ………… et al