Mark,
>>>We can do that for the solar system not because its
>interactions with its surroundings are negligeable but because they are probably
>decreasing entropy in its surroundings rather than the reverse.<<
>
>Why is that?
Because most of the sun's radiation goes into outerspace (the sizes of the planets,
asteroids, etc. are minuscule compared to their distances to the sun), thereby
decreasing entropy there and increasing it in the solar system since this radiation is
low-entropy. In such a case, entropy should increase even more than in a closed
system.
>Incidentally my premise for saying intelligent life couldn't evolve again is (a)
>because the length of time required is probably too great and (b) because
>startying ab initio would require replicating conditions early on in rthe life of the
>planet (impossible). Of course, I suppose that some other species than our own
>which is already well developed, might fill the niche left by our extinction, but it
>is
>hard to see what.
a) If life had to start again from zero, true. But if only a few bacteria are left,
there
should be enough time judging from the record. And if some plants or even animals
survive, the time necessary would be relatively small. Of course it's difficult to
imagine what would be next. That doesn't mean nothing will be next.
b)True, but if there are other forms of life possible than the exact same one that we
already had, they could spring from other conditions. Again, it's difficult to imagine
what and it's always easy to say that it would be impossible because of this and
that. But look at the bizarre oceanic ground ecosystems near those sulfurous heat
sources. Who'd have thought it could exist before actually seeing it?
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
