Gallo's thermo testCreationists frequently claim that the 2

^{nd}law of thermodynamics makes evolution impossible. They assert that the 2LoT requires there must always be an increase in disorder while evolution (they think) requires a decrease. They make such statements as "Entropy would also dictate that these forms would degredate rather than improve a species." Most usually, creationists have learned a few buzz words and post these like parrots without any comprehension of what they are saying. They are acting as dupes 99 out of 100 times.Most probably, if you are reading this page, it is because a creationist has posted a one or two line 2LoT argument against evolution and I have asked that he/she demonstrate competence to discuss thermodynamics and you are that creationist or an interested reader. 99 out of 100 times I never hear from the creationist again.

At any rate, I feel that the following exercise will suffice to demonstrate at least a minimum competence in thermodynamics. If the above mentioned creationist is merely a dupe who parrots babble from his/her creationist masters, I'll say my good-byes now.

Please consider the following two statements and then answer a few simple questions:

It is impossible for any system to operate in such a way that the sole result would be an energy transfer by heat from a cooler to a hotter body. It is impossible for any system to operate in a thermodynamic cycle and deliver a net amount of work to its surroundings while receiving energy by heat transfer from a single thermal reservoir.

- Please explain the relationship of the above two statements to each other.
- Please indicate which (if either) is correct.
- Please explain the implication of a violation of either (your choice) to the other.
- Please define entropy.
- Please define the concept of irreversibility. (For the sake of clarity, please illustrate with an example of the spontaneous reversal of an irreversible change. Please support your illustration with the appropriate mathematical equations).
- Now, since thermodynamics is an exact science based on a limited number of specific mathematical concepts, please present your proofs (we are, after all, dealing with math here) that evolution would be impossible.
To simply assert that this is so in words is nothing more that a substitution of metaphor for math. It is impossible to express completely and adequately the principles of thermodynamics in words. It is also impossible to draw any conclusions or to apply thermodynamics with words. Thermodynamics IS math. The words are only to explain (incompletely) to those of us who may be lacking in sufficient math skills.

- Something is said to be a property of a system if, and only if, its change in value between two states is independent of the process of that change. The Clausius inequality states that the integral of the heat transfer at a part of a system boundary during a given cycle divided by the absolute temperature at that part of the boundary, when the integral is performed over all parts of the boundary and over the entire cycle, is less than or equal to 0. Now, it can be demonstrated (this is a fact, by the way) that for any internally reversible process between two states of a system that the value of the integral depends on the end states only. It can be concluded, therefore, that the integral defines the change in some property of a system (an extensive property, by the way). Please name that property.
I thank you in advance for explaining these few elementry concepts about the 2LoT for me. I know that I will better understand your discussion after you have instructed me in these matters.

Awaiting your answer

gallo