The Second Law of Thermodynamics Applied to Processes A formal definition of the second law of thermodynamics is "In any closed system

, a process proceeds in a direction such that the unavailable energy (the entropy) increases." In other words, in any closed system, the amount of disorder always increases with time. Things progress naturally from order to disorder, or from an available energy state to one where energy is more unavailable. A good example: a hot cup of coffee cools off in an insulated room. The total amount energy in the room remains the same (which satisfies the first law of thermodynamics). Energy is not lost, it is simply transferred (in the form of heat) from the hot coffee to the cool air, warming up the air slightly. When the coffee is hot, there is available energy because of the temperature difference between the coffee and the air. As the coffee cools down, the available energy is slowly turned to unavailable energy. At last, when the coffee is room temperature, there is no temperature difference between the coffee and the air, i.e. the energy is all in an unavailable state. The closed system (consisting of the room and the coffee) has suffered what is technically called a "heat death." The system is "dead" because no further work can be done since there is no more available energy. The second law says that the reverse cannot happen! Room temperature coffee will not get hot all by itself, because this would require turning unavailable energy into available energy. Now consider the entire universe as one giant closed system. Stars are hot, just like the cup of coffee, and are cooling down, losing energy into space. The hot stars in cooler space represent a state of available energy, just like the hot coffee in the room. However, the second law of thermodynamics requires that this available energy is constantly changing to unavailable energy. In another analogy, the entire universe is winding down like a giant wind-up clock, ticking down and losing available energy. Since energy is continually changing from available to unavailable energy, someone had to give it available energy in the beginning! (I.e. someone had to wind up the clock of the universe at the beginning.) Who or what could have produced energy in an available state in the first place? Only someone or something not bound by the second law of thermodynamics. Only the creator of the second law of thermodynamics could violate the second law of thermodynamics, and create energy in a state of availability in the first place. As time goes forward (assuming things continue as they are), the available energy in the universe will eventually turn into unavailable energy. At this point, the universe will be said to have suffered a heat death, just like the coffee in the room. The present universe, as we know it, cannot last forever. Furthermore, imagine going backwards in time. Since the energy of the universe is constantly changing from a state of availability to one of less availability, the further back in time one goes, the more available the energy of the universe. Using the clock analogy again, the further back in time, the more wound up the clock. Far enough back in time, the clock was completely wound up. The universe therefore cannot be infinitely old. One can only conclude that the universe had a beginning, and that beginning had to have been caused by someone or something operating outside of the known laws of thermodynamics. Is this scientific proof for the existence of a Creator God? I think so. Evolutionary theories of the universe cannot counteract the above arguments for the existence of God. Evidence such as this helped to convince me to believe in God, and to accept His plan of

failed to overcome our vulnerabilities to cancer and other diseases. Outside forces can increase order for a time (through the expenditure of relatively large amounts of energy. when steam engines were transforming the world and physicists such as Rudolf Clausius. it suggests that the cosmos will eventually exhaust its available energy and nod off into an eternal stasis known as heat death. It has set limits to our technology. they can never completely avoid wasting some energy and running down. vast sums are spent to counteract the relentless effects of this law (maintenance. No matter how advanced our machines become. computer memory. The effects of the 2nd Law are all around. etc. Ironically. of which the second law is only one part. Everything appears to change eventually and chaos increases. The natural tendency of complex. and ultimately returns to dust. the second law of thermodynamics might well be the biggest. medical bills. In deep ways. such reversal cannot last forever.salvation through His son Jesus Christ. as with global climate change. The mere act of living contributes to the inexorable degeneration of the world. I have written a short testimony. But of all the comedowns.greater disorder. Material things are not eternal. threadbare. everything in nature is obedient to its unchanging laws. Even death is a manifestation of this law. thermodynamics has become one of the most important branches of physics and engineering. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics describes basic principles familiar in everyday life. From these nitty-gritty beginnings. James Joule and Lord Kelvin developed a theory of energy and heat to understand how they work and what limited their efficiency. all these systems behave the same. It is partially a universal law of decay. Science has given humanity more than its share of letdowns. left to themselves. Each year. Ultimately. in accordance with the second law. It is well known that. Not only does the second law squash the dream of a perpetual-motion machine. However. For further detailes about my conversion to Christianity. such as the impossibility of reaching the speed of light. ordered arrangements and systems is to become simpler and more disorderly with time. painting. It says we live in a universe that is becoming ever more disordered and that there is nothing we can do about it. It is a general theory of the collective properties of complex systems. Their energy is transformed into lower levels of availability for further work. the mid-19th century. clothing becomes faded. the ultimate cause of why everything ultimately falls apart and disintegrates over time. chemical compounds ultimately break apart into simpler materials. Nothing stays as fresh as the day one buys it. processes return to their natural direction . and confronted us with inconvenient truths. and through the input of design). Everything ages and wears out. touching everything in the universe. not just steam engines but also bacterial colonies. dates to an era of technological optimism. . Nicolas Sadi Carnot. All are running down. Once the force is released. the science of thermodynamics.). even black holes in the cosmos. they do not ultimately become more complex.

Ponder on this a while. Whose lives do they save. It is but a short lived illusory success. the main content of politics is economics. neither can economics and technology“. Ah yes. and the main content of economics is technology. But. we can blame the politics and economics of a rich country that has kept that surplus from reaching the starving people of a poor country. speed. The tractor has helped handle large swathes of land.only those who can afford. if you please. yet the underlying factors of alleviation of poverty and unemployment have not been solved by technology at all. And technology that lightens our “production by the masses.Technology with a Human Face “Today. he urges us to utilize the scientific techniques. that helps us get to the truth of the matter and increase our knowledge. “The primary task of technology. is to lighten the burden of work man has to carry in order to stay alive and develop his potential” (the bold highlight is my action). technology has not been able to either predict or even help save lives. or those who really need it (a very small percentage)? Schumacher never says that technology in itself is bad. In natural disasters or man made disasters. it would seem. If politics cannot be left to experts. or violence and destruction of human-work enjoyment. Instead of which people have often fallen back on traditional methods and knowledge. a small and beautiful thought that Schumacher gives us to think about is what he terms intermediate technologythan mass productions” Schumacher again. but has it helped feed the millions? Yes. But technology has been a factor here that has created that surplus that really cannot be of help. What he instead asks us is to recapture simplicity in all that we do so as to produce a selfbalancing system of nature. It is the human hand that helps dig through and pull out people very often. is for you dear reader. Lets take medical machines that are supposedly created to help save lives. rather . to wonder and think that although technology has helped in many ways. to focus on technology that does not lead to giantism. All he asks.

develop our creativity. this fact still holds true: that however powerful it could become. Yet. But despite all this. but the wrong use of it. Countless wars have sprung. they say technology is the culprit. And now. or an element of destruction. we have created and developed new beginnings. we see its manifestations—from the largest aircraft to the smallest microcomputer chip. he ceased to be a helpless prey to a number of predators to become a god among beasts. It‘s still up to is possessor on how he will apply the power he possesses—whether as a tool of progress. also lead us to our own ruin? From the evolution of military weapons. And now. would help give us better time to relax and do what we would like. ready to help him whenever need arises. and pay for our own happiness! This brings to mind the Vaccum Cleaner that adds more work than lessens it! Yes the Washing machine certainly lessens the work. Some even cannot do without their gadgets beside them. that motion generates power. Man created technology to serve this purpose. From the age when he still used wooden and stone tools to a powerful era of silicon and steel. and people blame technology for it. man is gradually realizing the fact that his little creation would someday take him to the very edges of his capacities. the environment is being trampled. But what if this technology. to the advent of the nuclear age. by all means. as well as dismal catastrophes. which can then be used to move gears in a tub to wash clothes ( in another room). It has brought us times of peace. It may have brought people closer together. but then again we go off to the gym to exercise our muscles paying a huge amount when it can be so easily dealt with by washing and scrubbing and rinsing! An image that has often come to my mind – when people employ the cycle in a gym. as well as wars and struggles. technology should never be blamed for all of this. so that he can then face the more challenging problems ahead.burden. technology and human way of life have somewhat become inseparable. and they say technology is the one accountable of all. . and will remain as such. Technology has become a beast of burden of our time—doing things we usually do in the past. but not necessarily on friendly terms. becomes uncontrollable by human hands? What if this beast of burden eventually becomes a monster? Could this same technology. Everywhere we look. But now we have to pay someone else to help us communicate better. at the cost of many end. Through technology. like an able servant at his master‘s side. animals are being led to extinction. which has brought us to a state of luxury and civilization. What a novel idea and thus save electrical energy and lessen carbon footprints! Technology and the Human Race The human race has indeed gone far with technology. increase our creativity. technology is still just one of man‘s tools. work things with our hands that give us joy. it has brought us great prosperities.

Abolition of Man A Brief Summary of The Abolition of Man I – By regarding all value judgments as subjective. modern humans are faced with a choice between two evils. we should develop the proper culture so as to effectively administer this technology that we have. we may expect this surrender to be for perpetuity.The effect of technology on our surroundings is the complete reflection of our values. The resulting apathy is felt to be highly inconvenient. The only force left to motivate us will be the force of natural impulses. The first alternative must involve cynical propaganda. Thus on a closer view he will have confirmed the ―given‖ nature of all moral principles and the need to reject either all or nothing of traditional morality. We should prove to be worthy of its possession. to explain why that selection is retained while the rest is rejected. Therefore. Our wish to ―see through‖ the mainspring of specifically human . for technology and corruption is a bad combination. and nature is a thing to rule. or you hope they will not. Modern people who admit this are then likely not to accept all but to reject all. not to be ruled by. humanity is nature. On the assumption of a perfect genetic science perfectly applied. but which in fact is a small selection from traditional morality. although on the subjectivist assumption this comes from a confusion of thought. and found to be incurable. in the end. Values will then be a thing for humans to produce and to modify at will. Either you hope that other people will still believe at least some value judgments to be objective. not a thing to be guided by. This may in practice be often rejected for moral reasons. III – ―Man‘s conquest of Nature‖ will be completed when human nature is conquered. The second alternative means a debunking of all our sense of value. II – The attempt to debunk traditional values is often based on a set of values which is considered to be new. since they believe that morality is human. The conquest of nature will thus have ended in total surrender to nature. The innovator will be unable.

by every culture ". supported by quotations from different cultures.‖ Logical positivism vs. the trunk that unites intellectual man with visceral (animal) man. An appendix to "The Abolition of Man" lists a number of basic values that Lewis saw as parts of the Tao. to love the good and hate the bad. He claims that they teach that all statements of value (such as "this waterfall is sublime") are merely statements about the speaker's feelings and say nothing about the object.". Without the Tao. this is a philosophical position rather than a grammatical one. . and who in turn. by “Gaius and Titius”. The final chapter describes the ultimate consequences of this debunking: a distant future in which the values and morals of the majority are controlled by a small group who rule by a "perfect" understanding of psychology.action is a magician‘s bargain: ―to ‗see through‘ all things is the same as not to see. the controllers will no longer be recognizably human. [edit]Men without chests: a dystopian future Lewis criticizes modern attempts to debunk "natural" values (such as those that would deny objective value to the waterfall) on rational grounds. the Christian. to train them to like and dislike what they ought. natural law Lewis begins with a critical response to “The Green Book”.. but must be inculcated through education. and the Jew. A fictional treatment of the dystopian project to carry out the Abolition of Man is a theme of Lewis's novel That Hideous Strength. who believed that the purpose of education was to train children in "ordinate affections. on the contrary. being able to "see through" any system of morality that might induce them to act in a certain way. Lewis notes. Lewis says that such a subjective view of values is faulty. In surrendering rational reflection on their own motivations. pseudonyms for The Control of Language: A Critical Approach to Reading and Writing (1939) and its authors Alex King and [1] [2] Martin Ketley. certain objects and actions merit positive or negative reactions: that a waterfall can actually be objectively praiseworthy. the controlled will be robotlike. the Pagan. He says that although these values are universal. and that one's actions can be objectively good or evil. with minor differences. Aristotle and Augustine. and the Abolition of Man will have been completed.. Lewis calls this the Tao (which closely [3] resembles Confucian and Taoist usage). and so parents and teachers who give such books to their children and students are having them read the "work of amateur philosophers where they expected the work of professional grammarians. and may be called "men without chests". are ruled only by their own unreflected whims. Lewis takes the authors to task for subverting student values. Those who lack them lack the specifically human element. and. no value judgments can be made at all. and modern attempts to do away with some parts of traditional morality for some "rational" reason always proceed by arbitrarily selecting one part of the Tao and using it as grounds to debunk the others. they do not develop automatically or inevitably in children (and so are not "natural" in that sense of the word). The Green book was used as a text for upper form students in British schools.." that is." Lewis cites ancient thinkers such as Plato. the traditional moralities of East and West. He says that there is a set of objective values that have been shared. In any case..

evidence or reason. I think I have finally figured out his problem. found in no animals. 2010 I’m a big fan of Lewis. presupposing that Truth is good — a traditional moral found only in the Tao). He calls it one of those things that “just is”. my argument is against the Tao and my argument is true. but after reading The Abolition of Man. The Abolition of Man comes in when one tries to excise the Tao from humanity. that he tries to counter every argument. He enters the parking lot and circles every light post before exiting.Passages from The Abolition of Man are included in William Bennet's The Book of Virtues which could be said to be a compilation of examples of Lewis's "Tao" system of values or natural law. He is so knowledgeable. but for those of us who are deprived of his notes. we get a bit lost. one must actually invoke it (for example. I really respect Lewis’ argument and I think he is. . never had the conversations he had nor heard the counter arguments he had. predict every objection. of course. read to an audience that was trained to read ancient Greek and Latin. I’m just sad that he packaged such a great message in a book that was originally written as a series of three lectures. This produces a book that is hard for the layman to apprehend. it probably made perfect sense. and nowhere else in the universe that we know. Lewis Published August 13. which is very handy). His general gist was that Traditional Morality (which he calls the Tao) is a universal Law of reality that demands no proof. and it is such a firm-rooted law that every society on earth. and therefore he makes many presupposition about his audience’s reading. like common sense. Lewis always casts too wide a net.S. To become a race that rejects the Tao is to become something other than human. because one finds that man can not be man without it — it is a defining characteristic of man. correct. Babylonian to African. regardless of its religion or culture. has recognized it (he then gives examples of cultures recognizing the Tao from ancient Egyptian to Christian. education and the things they take for granted. The Abolition of Man by C. and wrap it all up by the end of each chapter. and has debated the issues with so many people of vastly differing opinions. When compared with the notes he must have had while writing. He gœs on to argue that no one can debunk the Tao because in order to have a defensible position against it.

it was good but reading a synopsis of the book would work for most people.Anyways. .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful