On 01.02.2012 22:51 John Mikes said the following:
Evgenii, I am not sure if it is your text, or Russell's":
*"**In general, I do not understand what does it mean that
information at zero Kelvin is zero. Let us take a coin and cool it
down. Do you mean that the text on the coin will disappear? Or you
mean that no one device can read this text at zero Kelvin?"*
This was my question to Russell.
** I
doubt that the "text" embossed on a coin is "its" *information*. It
is part of the "physical" structure as e.g. the roundness. size, or
material(?) characteristics - all, what nobody can imagine how to
change for the condition of 0-Kelvin. The abs. zero temp. conditions
Yes, but when we speak about information carrier (book, a hard drive,
DVD, flash memory) it is exactly the same. And it has nothing to do with
the total number of physical states in the device, as this example with
zero temperature nicely shows.
Evgenii
are extrapolated the best way we could muster. A matter of (sci.)
faith. Maybe the so called 'interstitial' spaces also collapse? I am
not for a 'physicalistic' worldview - rather an agnostic about
'explanations' of diverse epochs based on then recent 'findings'
(mostly mathematically justified??? - realizing that we may be up to
lots of novelties we have no idea about today, not even of the
directions they may shove our views into. I say that in comparison to
our 'conventional scientific' - even everyday's - views of the world
in the past, before and after fundamental knowledge-domains were
added to our inventory. I do not condone evidences "that must be,
because THERE IS NO OTHER WAY" - in our existing ignorance of course.
Atoms? well, if there *is* 'matter'? (MASS??) even my
(macro)molecules I invented are suspect. So 'entropy' is a nice term
in (classical?) thermodynamics what I coined in 1942 as *"the science
that tells us how things would proceed wouldn't they proceed as they
do indeed"* thinking of Carnot and the isotherm/reversible
equilibria, etc. - way before the irreversible kind was taught in
college courses. Information is another rather difficult term, I like
to use 'relation' and leave it open what so far unknown relations may
affect our processes we assign to 'causes' known within the model of
the world we think we are in. The rest (including our misunderstood
model - domain) is what I may call an 'infinite complexity' of which
we are part - mostly ignorant about the 'beyond model' everything.
We 'fabricate' our context, try to explain by the portion we know of
- as if it was the totality - and live in our happy conventional
scientific terms. Human ingenuity constructed a miraculous science
and technology that is ALMOST good (some mistakes notwithstanding
occurring), then comes M. Curie, Watson-Crick, Fleming, Copernicus,
Volta, etc. and we re-write the schoolbooks.
John M
**
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi<use...@rudnyi.ru>
wrote:
On 29.01.2012 22:49 Russell Standish said the following:
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 04:23:12PM +0100, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 28.01.2012 23:26 meekerdb said the following:
On 1/27/2012 11:47 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
A good suggestion. It well might be that I express my thoughts
unclear, sorry for that. Yet, I think that my examples show
that
1) There is information
and entropy
that engineers employ.
Some engineers employ information, some the thermodynamic entropy.
I have not seen though an engineering paper where both information
and the thermodynamic entropy have been used as synonyms.
2) There is the thermodynamic entropy.
+ thermodynamic information
3) Numerical values in 1) and 2) are not related to each
other.
Fixed that for you. Why should you expect the different types of
information that come from different contexts to have the same
numerical value? The whole point of "On complexity and emergence"
is that notions of information and entropy are complete context
sensitive (that is not to say their subjective as such - people
agreeing on the context will agree on the numerical values).
First the thermodynamic entropy is not context depended. This must
mean that if it is the same as information, then the latter must
not be context dependent as well. Could you please give me an
example of a physical property that is context dependent?
Second, when I have different numerical values, this could mean
that the units are different. Yet, if this is not the case, then in
my view we are talking about two different entities.
Could you please explain then what is common between 1) and 2)?
Evgenii
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send
email to
everything-list@googlegroups.**com<everything-list@googlegroups.com>
.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscribe@
**googlegroups.com<everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/**
group/everything-list?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en>
.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
