Could the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics be wrong? I think the existence of the Sun implies it is. Even if the Sun burns out in like 8 billion years, that has zero impact on current calculations. In essence, there is a free lunch in nature, because plants will always convert sunlight into sugar. Life becomes more ordered as it ages, not less, as you and Dr. Peat so eloquently explained - the opposite of inanimate objects
Are you aware of the Expanding Earth Theory, and Soviet science regarding the idea of natural gas as being continuously produced by the Earth? I think these ideas would completely align with the this framework. Also, in the words "Art is tree of life. Science is the tree of death." Understanding that all that is good is flowing, and all that is bad is static, I think allows a person to start seeing the picture.
Could the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics be wrong? I think the existence of the Sun implies it is. Even if the Sun burns out in like 8 billion years, that has zero impact on current calculations. In essence, there is a free lunch in nature, because plants will always convert sunlight into sugar. Life becomes more ordered as it ages, not less, as you and Dr. Peat so eloquently explained - the opposite of inanimate objects
Are you aware of the Expanding Earth Theory, and Soviet science regarding the idea of natural gas as being continuously produced by the Earth? I think these ideas would completely align with the this framework. Also, in the words "Art is tree of life. Science is the tree of death." Understanding that all that is good is flowing, and all that is bad is static, I think allows a person to start seeing the picture.