Reddit reviews Design in Nature: How the Constructal Law Governs Evolution in Biology, Physics, Technology, and Social Organization

I can't recall who, but someone did write a book on this type of idea. Reviews were meh, but several harsh reviews pointed out anecdotal / causation pseudo science.

Source: not a physicist.

Edit: www.amazon.com/Design-Nature-Constructal-Technology-Organization/dp/0385534612

I know this is a long shot for anybody looking at this picture but I just started reading this books regarding patterns and design in nature. figured someone else might be as interested as I was on the subject.

enjoy!

http://www.amazon.com/Design-Nature-Constructal-Technology-Organization/dp/0385534612/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330725112&sr=1-3

You may be interested in the constructal law, as explained in this book (a science book, not a religious book). There is some relationship there. When Jesus says "Apart from me you can do nothing", and John says that all things were made through him (John 1:3), I think it's being quite clear that God is present in all of creation. The problem is how we disconnect from this process through sin.

As said by another user in this thread, the "why' is a philosophical question. I will do my best to answer the implied "how."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructal_theory

I am just a layman and all I know is from an extensive reading habit and curiosity about science. I just finished this book: http://www.amazon.com/Design-Nature-Constructal-Technology-Organization/dp/0385534612 , and I think that the Constructal Theory has an interesting take on how animate cells came to exist on earth. I'm going to do my best to summarise the ideas covered by Bejan. Take everything that follows with a grain of salt because -- as I said before -- I have no formal schooling on the matter


In "Design in Nature," Bejan posits that the rise of animate matter on earth is neither a question of biology or chemistry, but a question of physics that is answered by the Constructal Theory (For a finite-size system to persist in time (to live), it must evolve in such a way that it provides easier access to the imposed currents that flow through it.)

Take the example of a flow of water moving across the earth, from a mountain spring to the seashore. For a distance, the water would move in a laminar flow from the spring, however, this is not the most efficient way to move the mass of the water to the seashore. Over time, the flow of water would evolve to move more efficiently, by moving from laminar to a more turbulent flow, excavating deeper riverbeds and moving more water farther with less energy expended. As more time passes, the flow system will inevitably vascularize itself into a river delta, creating the most efficient flow system to move the current from the spring to the ocean permitted by the brakes present in the environment (brakes in river systems commonly include temperature, geology of the mountain and river valley, and of course friction.)

Now this next part may take a bit of a conceptual stretch. Imagine the entire earth as a flow system, driven by the heat energy given to it by radiation from the sun. Due to this energy, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics), the elements on the earths surface boil and move in a constant quest for equilibrium in the system. If the earth were a closed system, its oceans and rivers would freeze and its landmasses would dry up due the achievement of said equilibrium. (This will happen inevitably as the sun dies out billions of years from now.)

However, our planet is not a closed system, so the movement of water and other elements across its surface (according to the Constructal Theory) must find better and more efficient ways of moving through its environment as long as the system keeps being affected by outside forces. Bejan theorizes that the rise of a diverse and thriving biosphere on the earth's surface is natures way of facilitating flows of matter (mostly water) across through the environment. After all, what is a fish but a pouch of water able to move under its on impetus?

Thank you for reading my wall of text, and please feel free to criticize and correct, as I have no idea how well accepted the constructal law is in the community.