[HughieDiamond]

In an open system entropy always increases, right? Early life forms, such as self-replicating RNA, must have been generated by chemical reactions for which overall entropy increased. By extension as we move up the evolutionary change each new life form must have been formed by processes which increased entropy. To date humans are the greatest entropy catalyzers per unit mass because not only do they metabolize complex molecules and operate at less than 100% efficiency they also use their brains to increase entropy, most notably through global warming. So, my question is could entropy be viewed as a driving force ( not sure if the "dimensions" are correct here) for the creation of life? Or, less biocentrically, is life simply a catalyst for increasing entropy and if so have I found the "meaning" of life!

[ebaines]

Your concept isn't quite right. Entropy always increases in a closed system. The formation of molecules with less entropy than their constituents (such as RNA from amino acids) results in a decrease in entropy for those constituents, and thus requires input of energy (such as from the sun or geothermal activity). It is not clear that humans are "the greatest entropy increasers per unit mass," although the all human activity such as constructing buildings or blowing them up in war-time increases entropy significantly. But life forms are not the only source of increasing entropy in the universe - the sun for example is a huge entropy increaser, many order oif magnitude more so than earth and all its life forms. So no - it does not follow that the "meaning of life" is to increase entropy; but maybe that's the "meaning of the universe"!

[gaiusbaltar]

You are both right. If you take the long term perspective, if population size and technology continue to increase exponentially, life could become a sort of catalyst for the heat death of the universe. That is, assuming we don't wipe ourselves out.