And order spontaneously arises from disorder.
1 Like
Thatâs true. Nothing, as Astrid noted, is something of a red herring here. The attempt to include it where it doesnât belong leads to nonsense, nonsense such as de novo creation.
Perhaps it would be better to say order and chaos are entangled the way life and non life are. As one predominates, the other recedes. But there is always potential to move from one state to the other in time.
1 Like
Under the right conditions, to some degree yes.
Mostly not, but neither is it uncommon.
In the far-from equilibrium conditions, at the right distance from some stars with a flow of energy but not too much energy you can see order spontaneously arising from disorder to various degrees depending on the conditions.
Or sugar crystals forming in your syrup bottle.
Seems to me a flow of energy orders a systrm.
Scattered raindrops to form a river in all its complexity.
Howabout cloud formations.
1 Like
These are not order flowing from chaos, but order flowing from order.
Evidently you use a unique definition of chaos.
Possibly also not wanting to see my point?
Lets try, order spontaneously increasing.
You agree that happens?
1 Like
Which is the order, and which is the âchaos?â The syrup or the crystals? For those who prefer the syrup then it is going from order to disorder instead of the other way around, however itis best today that the sugar goes from one kind of order to another. This is not by magic, but by the natural law of Kinetic Theory.
Rain drops, rivers, and clouds are all parts of the water cycle which are also governed by Kinetic Theory. None of which are chaotic, but all different forms of the same orderly process.
Death is disorder, and it is not spontaneously reversed. âEntropyâ is form of disorder, which is found only in an isolated static state.
In the physics sense, they are extremely chaotic. In the âunguidedâ sense, that is a philosophical question, not a scientific one.
Never - mind.
I thought this was supposed to be a forum
with science in jt.
1 Like
@Paraleptopecten Timothy, please clarify. What is extremely chaotic? Quantum physics, thermal energy, or something else? .
Would you also consider water turning to ice to be an example of disorder â order even though that requires a reduction of (heat) energy?
Not super-strong on science, but intrigued by, and keen to understand, what you are saying here.
Thanks .
Kind of obvious that crystals are more orderly than
a liquid, and that there is a flow of energy involved.
Too much heat (rapid movement of molecules) prevents
the crystals forming. Give the molecules half a chance, and
they will order themselves into neat ranks.
1 Like
The water cycle involves a lot of chaotic motion, but is governed by specific laws. It is chaotic in the same way that any other aspect of weather, or rolling a die, or a double pendulum is.
The water cycle certainly does involve kinetic or thermal energy, which is non-directional or oscillating, and has been labelled as random. I find it hard to accept that a system is chaotic, that is without order, when it is very orderly except for the temporary power of lightning and wind unleashed to restore the balance of nature.
What I think is the problem here is that scientists use words taken from philosophy and then use them in a different manner. which creates much confusion. Random is a prime example, but it is clear that chance is random in a way that chaos is not.
Weather is random in that it cannot be predicted in advance, although it can be predicted, so certainly it is not totally random, which is why we need a better label for it. On the other hand, when I did read up on chaos theory the conclusion was that weather was best predicted by using computer models, which is what they are doing today. This is because it is the environment which guides the weather, in much the same way that the environment guides evolution.
Yes, thatâs exactly what I would mean by âchaoticâ.
The problem with this, which I encounter fairly often on this website, is that, according to Darwin and not disproven elsewhere, natural selection guides evolution. This means that it is scientifically correct to say that evolution is guided unless you maintain that Darwinâs theory is not science.
Is natural selection guided by anything, or is it independent?
âUnguidedâ in that quote is as in no supernatural guidance, not as in no physical guiding mechanism, which is what ânatural selection guides evolutionâ refers to.
Perhaps the answer to this is both yes and noâŚ
From the perspective of methodological naturalism the answer is no. Things might influence natural selection (eg. Ecology) but natural selection is not guided in a teleological sense by anything scientifically detectable. Or at least that is the understanding I have developed hanging out here and reading posts from folk far knowledgeable about this than I.
Yet from the perspective of my theological tradition I would say the answer is yes - natural selection (like all things) is guided by the good, right, and perfect providence of God. Here the end to which God directs natural selection is the final cause to which he directs all things - the manifestation of his beauty.
In my view, this yes and no are not mutually exclusive but rather, like heads and tails on a coin, are different perspectives on the same object.
2 Likes