Understanding - Page 3

VK4 wrote: GO SUBMIT YR REAL SCIENCE TO A REAL SCIENCE JOURNAL AND GET IT PUBLISHED.

Let me remind you on something on implications of the laws of thermodynamics, first of all we have to realize, just using proving physical laws, chemistry and physics, using what science has proven to such an extend that is actually merited the position of a law, something that whenever tested, no matter how often, no matter by whom? We always get the same result. When we are using pristine pure science like the laws of thermodynamics which Einstein said never being overthrown by the advanced of science, so which means it can be published as you stated.

VK4 wrote: cherry picking and pleading special cases

Not necessarily, the second law of thermodynamics sounds formidable but it something we all too familiar with; basically the law of degeneration overtime…with time things tend fall apart and wear out, again vk4, we all too familiar with bondage of corruption and decay formulize in the second law of thermodynamics, with time things tend to go from a state of high free energy to loss available free energy and entropy and from complexity to disorder and simplicity.

vk4 wrote: special pleading

The answer is no, to refresh your memory the second law is law of increasing disorder, increasing laws of free energy and increasing entropy over time…entropy being define as randomness disorderliness in system or dilute energy, the loss of free energy into the dilute energy that’s there but cannot be harness anymore!. And the first law is law mass energy conservation, things die or dies we know, matter is kind of form of energy kind coates energy, so it’s all energy up there, but the first law says no matter what happens, whether things blow up or burned down, things get transporter, whatever reactions happened in the universe the books always balance, you never have more energy at the end or less in the end at any transformation that any had before! There is always this conservation, the books balance, always the same amount of energy that you started with. That means the first law states matter cannot be created or destroyed, energy cannot be created or destroyed ultimately in that sense…matter and energy remains constant! It can be transformed but the “amount remains constant” and so that means that the quantity remains constant according to the first law, however the second law says that the quality does not remain constant, the quality degrades overtime…the universe is running down irreversibly according to the second law, that means it eventually reach the ultimate heat death or total entropy whether be no more free energy available anywhere in the universe, it all be dilute entropy, everything will be dark and cold, no life, no useful work can be done anywhere in the universe.

vk4 wrote: real science is creation science

You are correct, and to refresh your memory, since it is irreversibly running down what is that mean? The universe cannot be infinitely old as you would love to be, but the second law proving science that it can’t be, because it’s running down and it will reach an end, it hasn’t reach end yet, it therefore it cannot be infinitely older, it long sense it would be maximum entropy and no life and no evolution, no nothing could exist…So the second law clearly shows universe must have a beginning, one something or someone put that free energy there! That is now running down irreversibly, so the second law says universe must had a beginning, but the first law says it could not had began itself by natural law; why? Because matter, energy cannot create or destroy themselves, NOT by natural law, so we must have a beginning but the universe cannot begin itself – by natural law, what do we need? Something supernatural; something transcended the limitations of space and time natural laws, something like omnitions / omnipotent creator, who transcends all this limitations and was eternal, therefore had no beginning, therefore needs no-cause to explain his origin.

 

Shtal.

Er when did i say that the universe is infinitely and you quoted half my sentence. see how you are a lier you make up anything to protect yr childish myths about imaginary god.

i gave you a REAL scientific explanation with references to real scientific papers by real scientists you ignored it out of fear and chose to misquote me and cherry pick my words dishonestly. because you are a lier with no shame and you have no qualifications to dispute science. Stop telling lies coward.

You contradict yrself claiming the universe increases energy therefore young then you isolate a living thing as not part of rest of same universe fraud liar.


Tell me about the desert people who god did not apply entropy to so they wouldn't get sore feet in the desert you retard.

LOL @VK4

Look VK4, Evolutionist Charles J Smith he points out this explanation, [an open system] however, is not completely satisfying, because it still leaves the problem of how or why the ordering process has arisen (an apparent lowering of the entropy), and a number of scientists have wrestled with this issue. Bertalanffy (1968) called the relation between irreversible thermodynamics and information theory, one of the most fundamental unsolved problems in biology.

But I got news for you it is still unsolved; they have never giving adequate answer to this lethal contradiction.

Now some claim Ilya Prigogine in 1977 got a noble prize for solving this problem that is demonstrably false, for one thing, he never claim he did, he was surprised that he got the prize, he said he never worked in the laboratory for years prior to receiving it, and what it can proven in the laboratory is real science. But notice, Prigogine received the Nobel Prize in chemistry for using thermodynamics, in the words of the Nobel committee, “to bridge the gap that exists between the biological and the social scientific fields of inquiry.” Whatever that means vk4, perhaps you can tell me. But I know this much it doesn’t say he solved the problem for the second law of thermodynamics poses for naturalistic origin for first living cell. They never said he did, he never said he did. In fact the boldest statement I can find on the internet, Prigogine making is this.

“What was the role of dissipative structures in evolution? It is very tempting to speculate that prebiotic evolution corresponds essentially to a succession of Instabilities leading to an increasing level of complexity.”

Since when has been tempted to speculate merited the Noble Prize? I am tempting to speculate all the time, I wish they give me one; I would like to have it. In fact I am more than tempted I do speculate, and I speculate that this speculation is now what we are speculating about.

But the point is vk4, been tempted to speculate doesn’t cut it, he never proved it in laboratory, and he used incredible assumptions in his model. And he said the math works but you have to understand is the assumptions not the math to determines whether it is true. If I assume that man could carry millions pounds on his back and I assume the with that burden he could run at the speed of one mile per second, my math would correctly compute such a man could transport a burden of the million pounds over distance of ten miles and ten seconds; anything wrong with my math vk4? No, what’s wrong is the assumptions are blatantly unscientific and absurd. Never have we seeing a man do that? And to assume it without scientific proof is just speculation; it doesn’t matter what the math says.    

 

Shtal.

1968 Science and a letter to the editor that was not even rigorous enough to be called a paper and yet another trip to the icr creation website.


instead of another strawman argument stop misquoting and and get to the point you assume a fairy like god spoke the universe into existence 4400 years ago as written by bronze age goat herders where is your proof.

and when are you going to submit yr research to a REAL. science journal instead of quote mining via the pseudo science crestionist web site.


no straw man arguments proof.


hey i need a laugh pleasr do tell again yr science of how god switched off entropy for 40 years with the guys in the desert. that cracks me up make sure you put that in with yr research article. you are a shameless liar, did you graduate high school professor of biology, cosmology, geology, logiv, physics and chemistry that you claim to know more about than people with actual qualifications ...go post a letter written by einstien.....that he didn't write liar.


yr make believe god sends liars to hell.

So in conclusion vk4, if you can figure this out then you are brilliant! You are more astound and intelligent than many of physicist today who are blinded by their philosophy, cannot see the simple argument.

If I have a bunch of random automobiles parts and we want to get a Cadillac, you put them in front of the factory, you supply with energy, it goes through the factory, workman read the blueprint, the robots follow specifications and you get beautiful Cadillac at the end, increase from random parts to Cadillac’s.

And if we have random chemicals, life has, energy conversion systems and blueprint to take those random chemicals and make replica of it-self, exceedingly complex systems but it meets the criteria.

On the primitive birth you might have some random chemicals, very few, never have we produce all once the necessary, but raw solar energy would produce greater enemas because it destroys them like the bull in the china shop, you can’t converter to usable form, you can’t specifically directed without that, without those criteria a naturalistic origin life is alertly excluded by the proven the second law of thermodynamics.

And the conclusion for you my dear vk4, I quote the famous scientist Sir Arthur Eddington, he said… “if your theory is found to be against the Second Law of Thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation.”

That would be my concurrent(s) in that regard for you vk4.

Romans 1:20 says: For ever since the creation of the world His Invisible nature and attributes, that is, His eternal power and divinity have been made intelligible and clearly discernible in and through the things that have been made – His handiworks. So (men) are without excuse – altogether without any defense or justification.

I think that is self-explanatory. Thank you. Shtal.

A bunch of automobile parts don't occur in nature dip shit. and what's that got to fo with enemas dickhead???

You are an enima and a laxative. you quote mine edington so tell me where doed hell get energy from to burn for infinity???


Was yr proof of god that scripture bwahaha using the bible to prove god exists, so much for science lol.


anyhoo tell me the thermodynamics. of how hell works, you have with no scientific qualifications proved to yrself that non-science creationists know more about science than actual science so thermodynamics of hell and maths please not quote mining famous people out of context.

how god made light before stars would be another thermodynamics question for you to explain with yr genius as well.


no going to sleep cos you run out of quotes to mine.

oh and please mr scientist with no scientific qualifications please do give a full mathematical treatment on the thermodynamics. of a completely disordered state that was gods flat plate earth covered in water with a dome over it presumably to stop the water falling off went to the highly ordered state of a spherical earth floating in space with highly ordered life forms orbitting the sun yes the earth orbits the sun i know you guys want gods earth to be at the centre of the universe, that dam copernicus. thermodynamics of hell and light before stars.

Shtal you need any help with the math??