Removing the entropy from the definition of entropy: clarifying the relationship between evolution, entropy, and the second law of thermodynamics

Joshua S Martin,Clinton D Francis,N Adam Smith

doi:10.1186/1936-6434-6-30

Abstract

Misinterpretations of entropy and conflation with additional misunderstandings of the second law of thermodynamics are ubiquitous among scientists and non-scientists alike and have been used by creationists as the basis of unfounded arguments against evolutionary theory. Entropy is not disorder or chaos or complexity or progress towards those states. Entropy is a metric, a measure of the number of different ways that a set of objects can be arranged. Herein, we review the history of the concept of entropy from its conception by Clausius in 1867 to its more recent application to macroevolutionary theory. We provide teachable examples of (correctly defined) entropy that are appropriate for high school or introductory college level courses in biology and evolution. Finally, we discuss the association of these traditionally physics-related concepts to evolution. Clarification of the interactions between entropy, the second law of thermodynamics, and evolution has the potential for immediate benefit to both students and teachers.

Highlights

It is perhaps apropos that the concept of entropy has continuously picked up misunderstandings and misinterpretations that have left the concept bloodied, beaten, and unrecognizable
With this goal in mind, we present a historical review of the concept of entropy in the context of thermodynamics, provide an understood definition of entropy including examples that can be used in a classroom setting, and discuss how entropy relates to and supports the theory of evolution
We have addressed each of these misconceptions in turn and hopefully shed a light on how they arose and how to address them in a classroom setting

Summary

Introduction

It is perhaps apropos that the concept of entropy has continuously picked up misunderstandings and misinterpretations that have left the concept bloodied, beaten, and unrecognizable. If each book can be broadly categorized as either a biology book or a physics book, our set includes an equal number of biology books (Darwin, Gould, Linneaus, Schödinger, and Simpson) and physics books (Copernicus, Einstein, Hawking, Hubble, and Newton). The number of energetic microstates (entropy through Boltzmann’s equation) is directly related to the number of ways of spreading energy (books) across molecules (spaces on the shelf) for different thermodynamic constraints.

Results

Conclusion