![]() Without entropy and a natural tendance for things to decay there would be no selection. The essence of what bugs me I think is that it is odd that a law which essentially state that disorder increases seems to be dirrectly linked to (i.e be a driving force behind) evolution - which has given rise to some highly complex systems (albeit within a closed system that overall obeys the 2nd law). I understand that taken as a closed system the 2nd law holds - hence my careful use of "locally" - I never meant to suggest that evolution => 2nd law doesn't hold. ![]() What is the relationship between the 2nd law and evolution?Īpplogies the question is vague. But Evolution actually gives us a system that locally moves away from thermodynamic equilibrium giving us system of very high complexity (us!). "and the second law follows because random chance alone practically guarantees that the system will evolve towards such thermodynamic equilibrium". On the other hand the second law seems to drives evolution - in the sense that it provides a constant fitness measure - essentially evolutionary fitness of life is a measure of its ability to maintain an ordered state in a system that naturally drives towards disorder. ![]() On one hand evolution seems to drive against the second law in that it creates a state of (locally) higher order.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |