Does Nature Break the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics?

[Michael]

Does Nature Break the Second Law of Thermodynamics?

In seeming defiance of the second law of thermodynamics, nature is filled with examples of order emerging from chaos. A new theoretical framework resolves the apparent paradox

* Waste is unavoidable—a sad fact of life quantified by the famous second law of thermodynamics. But if the world is steadily becoming more disordered, how do you explain the self-organization that often occurs in nature? At root, the trouble is that classical thermodynamics assumes systems are in equilibrium, a placid condition seldom truly achieved in the real world.
* A new approach closes this loophole and finds that the second law holds far from equilibrium. But the evolution from order to disorder can be unsteady, allowing for pockets of self-organization.

Source (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=how-nature-breaks-the-second-law)

Okay, can any of our science buffs explain this article to me in layman's terms? I read it through, but it just doesn't seem to make sense. Seems as if there may be some temporal exceptions to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, but apparently, this doesn't matter? :ummm:

[Dominick]

Source (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=how-nature-breaks-the-second-law)

Okay, can any of our science buffs explain this article to me in layman's terms? I read it through, but it just doesn't seem to make sense. Seems as if there may be some temporal exceptions to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, but apparently, this doesn't matter? :ummm:
No need to read the article. Nature is not a closed system and the 2nd law only applies to those. The total entropy still increases despite some local decreases.

[Helene]

Source (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=how-nature-breaks-the-second-law)

Okay, can any of our science buffs explain this article to me in layman's terms? I read it through, but it just doesn't seem to make sense. Seems as if there may be some temporal exceptions to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, but apparently, this doesn't matter? :ummm:

I'm not a science buff by any stretch of the definition. But I never understood why people would think the 2nd law is being breached. All the order that exists requires energy to become so. So there's an active act against entropy. It's similar why birds don't fall from the sky eventhough they're subjected to gravity. It's because they are actively working to not fall. If the birds would fold their wings to their sides, they'd instantly start falling. And when life stops, immediately entropy sets in big time (entropy also sets in during life, that's what aging is).

[Michael]

No need to read the article. Nature is not a closed system and the 2nd law only applies to those. The total entropy still increases despite some local decreases.
You can be sure I always read any linked article that I post at this forum. ;)

Other than that, your reply to my question is delightfully logical and concise. :)

Quick question: Is a human life an open or closed system?

I'm not a science buff by any stretch of the definition. But I never understood why people would think the 2nd law is being breached. All the order that exists requires energy to become so. So there's an active act against entropy. It's similar why birds don't fall from the sky eventhough they're subjected to gravity. It's because they are actively working to not fall. If the birds would fold their wings to their sides, they'd instantly start falling. And when life stops, immediately entropy sets in big time (entropy also sets in during life, that's what aging is).

Yes, it seems as if "life" is only a temporary exception to the rule of entropy - and even still just a brief one. I've always considered it a nasty human paradox that we start to die barely more than a dozen or so years after we are born. We spend most of our lives in a 'slowly dying' state. :erm:

[Helene]

Yes, it seems as if "life" is only a temporary exception to the rule of entropy - and even still just a brief one. I've always considered it a nasty human paradox that we start to die barely more than a dozen or so years after we are born. We spend most of our lives in a 'slowly dying' state. :erm:

That's a very glass half empty approach. I prefer to see it as that we spend most of our lives not dying. Actual death takes mere minutes. When a bird flies it's not continuously falling, it's flying. Sure gravity is waiting for the bird, just like entropy is waiting for us, but we are still alive. ( I do realize that a bird is in fact in a way falling, just the forces to go up are stronger, but that's exactly my point.)

I don't understand what you mean by paradox, though. What is the paradox? That when we're young our entire lives are still ahead of us, while it exists mostly of the deterioration of our bodies?

[Michael]

That's a very glass half empty approach. I prefer to see it as that we spend most of our lives not dying. Actual death takes mere minutes. When a bird flies it's not continuously falling, it's flying. Sure gravity is waiting for the bird, just like entropy is waiting for us, but we are still alive. ( I do realize that a bird is in fact in a way falling, just the forces to go up are stronger, but that's exactly my point.)
That's entirely subjective. In medical reality, the human body starts the long slow process of deterioration immediately after initial growth is complete. This means that the human body spends a majority of life in a slow decay process leading to death.

I don't understand what you mean by paradox, though. What is the paradox? That when we're young our entire lives are still ahead of us, while it exists mostly of the deterioration of our bodies?
To be alive is to be on your way towards death. That's a paradox.

[Helene]

That's entirely subjective. In medical reality, the human body starts the long slow process of deterioration immediately after initial growth is complete. This means that the human body spends a majority of life in a slow decay process leading to death.

Muscle growth is still possible throughout life.

To be alive is to be on your way towards death. That's a paradox.

How is that a paradox?

[Michael]

Muscle growth is still possible throughout life.
Yes, and so is hair growth (though not always in the precise places one might prefer!)

Heck, toenails still grow after death do they not? (eew)

This would suggest that the human body isn't a closed system does it not?

Ergo, the 2nd Law doesn't apply absolutely to human beings. Like the bird flapping its wings in order to stay aloft, despite the natural or general tendency for decay (or falling down to earth). These look like temporary abberations rather than an actual violation of the 'rule' (of entropy or gravity).

How is that a paradox?
One must be alive in order to die. The end goal of life is death. These strike me as paradoxical. :shrug:

[SMadsen]

One must be alive in order to die. The end goal of life is death. These strike me as paradoxical. :shrug:
The end result of life is death. Careful with the g-word :D

[Michael]

The end result of life is death. Careful with the g-word :D
Shakespeare wrote about a melancholy Dane.

We at DWF have only a pedantic Dane. ;)

That being said, you are entirely correct here.

[SMadsen]

Which reminds me, did the grand BOPP rise from the ashes yet?

[Michael]

Which reminds me, did the grand BOPP rise from the ashes yet?
Not yet... but it shall be reborn like the proverbial pheonix! :D

[Greendruid]

... he means phoenix :rofl:

[Michael]

... he means phoenix :rofl:
Looks like we have a new member! :D

[SMadsen]

:hatoff: :D

[Multiplum]

No need to read the article. Nature is not a closed system and the 2nd law only applies to those. The total entropy still increases despite some local decreases.
This.

But no, I don't really get it.