Talk:Negentropy

Request Anthere look at this one, as she is more up on theoretical biology...

Less order to more order

The text states that "life converts food with less order into a system with more order". No, never. Life destroys order, wastes heat, and concentrates the energy to maintain some order, much less total order than original. There is "no free lunch". A 400 kg lion destroys 800 kg of animals in a few months and will still die and decay in the end. The lion NEVER converts less order to more order, NEVER converts 10 kg of healthy gazelle into 11 kg of aging lion. 147.161.147.79 (talk) 07:02, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

There is no such thing as an isolated system

'The second law of thermodynamics states that the total entropy of an isolated system always increases over time' but in reality there are no isolated systems, and we are yet to prove that the universe/multiverse is an isolated system, it could be fractally recursal. --Dr zoidberg590 (talk) 01:08, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Remember, this is "Simple English". But in ANY arbitrary system, say an imaginary box within an open space, the total entropy increases, as repeatedly observed. When that momentarily appears not to be so, just wait longer.

It's a fascinating thought experiment (cite: Roger Penrose) to consider the system at or before the big bang, after the heat death, and the context outside of the observable universe. These are things we have not yet observed, by definition. Lack of evidence is not evidence but unknown. Yet, I am personally tickled by the idea that our observed expanding universe is within a collapsed black hole of (or jet from) of a greater universe with different laws or opposite arrow of time (negentropy).

An interpretation of Zarasthustra (Asha=negentropy=truth=order=life=light vs Druj=entropy=corruption=death=darkness) is that Asha, the creative order, is perfecting itself internally (despite or enabled by surrounding entropy). It's a beautiful thought. Alexgenaud (talk) 07:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Proposed changes from an ignoramus

I’m wondering about a change from:

“It is a temporary condition in which certain things are hotter and more highly organised than the surrounding space.”

to:

“It is a temporary condition in which certain things are becoming hotter and more highly organised than the surrounding space.”

Also, what about changing: “This is the second law of thermodynamics:“ to: “This does not change or contradict the second law of thermodynamics:“

I’m not sure such changes would be valid or acceptable. But on the outside chance that they were, it might be nice to address HOW such a temporary/localized reversal would come about even if it were to acknowledge that there is no definitive answer to such a question.

JaperZ (talk) 18:55, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Interesting. Perhaps one of your changes are correct, but not both. Either negentropy is a current state that appears to contradict entropy. OR negentropy IS a contradiction of entropy (falsification of the 2nd law).

Negentropy is not only a localised observation, it requires the observer to ignore the surrounding space. Negentropy is no law at all: it's the process of pretending you don't know what you know. :) Alexgenaud (talk) 08:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Another way to look at it (or another way increase/decrease) confusion.

If an increase in the amount of energy of a system tends to increase that system’s entropy, would negentropy be a temporary (or localized) exception to that generalization?

JaperZ (talk) 19:59, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Sorta. I agree with your analogy but disagree with that negentropy exists in our observed universe. Disorganised energy is destructive, rapidly increasing entropy (literally an explosion). Order requires greater energy to localise energy (or maintain material structure). Negentropy doesn't really happen. Life (metabolism) for example, extracts disproportional energy from the environment and focuses it. But "there is no free lunch". It's a little silly (in my opinion) to acknowledge the wider system but only measure the concentrated resultant system. That's called "cherry picking". Yet that is what we must mean by "temporary and localised".

Suppose you are 70 kg and healthy; You will consume thousands of kilos of food, burn thousands of kilos of fuel, waste thousands of kilos of hot pudding and pee, and still age, die, and decay in the end. When or where was entropy decreased? I posit: never and nowhere. You only destroyed massive quantities of external order to maintain some decaying order for a little bit longer than if you did nothing at all.

A diamond will decay very slowly but required enormous energy (heat, pressure, time, and highly unusual circumstances) to produce. A diamond is a temporary localised slower entropy state that will eventually turn to ash and dust. The diamond never gets more organised without MUCH MORE heat, pressure, time, and waste.

Alexgenaud (talk) 07:34, 30 August 2023 (UTC)