Debate and discussion of any biological questions not pertaining to a particular topic.
Honestly I am not a good reference for proving or disproving entropy, but I am pretty sure that you should find some good explanation if you pick a physics textbook. You will probably find there much better explanations and demonstrations and applications of entropy that I would ever be able to provide you with.
As for your last comment about the wrongness of the use of a mechanistic world view to understand biology, I would say that you are very wrong. Biological processes are based on the same laws of physics that everything else. They are just very complex systems, that are quite hard for the poor physicists to model and then understand.
Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)
I used to be an enthusiastic supporter of entropy theory. But, in those times I am always confused about the negative entropy. It was said that living organism increase its order by decreasing the order of food they have eaten; the more order the living organism create, the even more disorder be created in environment. But after read the book "Order and Entropy_Scientific Puzzlement of 100 Years", my worldview dramatically changed. In fact, entropy is a perfectly incorrect theory. Living organism can increase its order without enhancing the disorderness of environment. Because creatures possess a valueble order factor__DNA.
Well, it's time to stop wasting our time about entropy__an extremely wrong concept.
Since biological systems are so complex, it's inappropriate to use any physical function to uncover the nature of life.
Negative entropy is not exist. Orderness of any system cannot be measured by an unified quantitative term, such as entropy.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests