Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: nyu notesfiles V1.1 4/1/84; site cmcl2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!cmcl2!ultra
From: ultra@cmcl2.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Second Law
Message-ID: <34600001@cmcl2.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 19-Nov-84 20:29:00 EST
Article-I.D.: cmcl2.34600001
Posted: Mon Nov 19 20:29:00 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 21-Nov-84 05:13:17 EST
Organization: New York University
Lines: 25
Nf-ID: #N:cmcl2:34600001:000:1360
Nf-From: cmcl2!ultra    Nov 19 20:29:00 1984


From SOR Pamphlet #2:

>      Some may wonder about the implications of the second law of ther-
> modynamics.   Are  there  not  instances of disorder being transformed
> into order?  For example, a seed growing into a  tree  or  a  pile  of
> bricks  being  built into a house represent examples of an increase in
> order and complexity.  What is happening here?
>      In every instance when  order  increases,  several  prerequisites
> must  be  met.   First,  the  system must be open to available energy.
> Evolution meets this requirement, since it is open to energy from  the
> sun.  That, however, is a necessary but not sufficient condition.  The
> transformation to a higher energy state must be accompanied by an  en-
> ergy  converting  mechanism using a preset plan.  Bricks only become a
> house as an intelligent human discriminantly orders them according  to
> the  blueprints.   The  seed  grows into a tree as it follows the plan
> stored in its genetic code, the DNA.  Evolution, however, depends upon
> chance  chemical reactions and random mutations, and has no plan forc-
> ing its direction upwards towards greater complexity.

Leaving aside the problem of defining `preset plan' in a rigorous way,
please explain why, by your reasoning, the formation of snowflakes doesn't
violate the second law of thermodynamics.

	Isaac Dimitrovsky