Žr. Entropy
John Baez siūlo knygas
Peter Neuman bendramintis siūlė:
Mintys
- Jeigu entropija mažėja, tai turi būti kitos galimybės, kuriose jinai didėjo. Tad tai tėra galimybė. Ir ši taisyklė - šis išsiskyrimas - yra kaip subliukšta kvantinė funkcija. Mat, kvantiniuose reiškiniuose visos galimybės yra kartu.
- Deciding is a subsystem issue - we are between what has been decided and what has not yet been decided - and we can participate in between - and there are subsystems within us and we are within other subsystems - it is a parallel process on hierarchical levels - thus ambiguous.
- Mažėjanti entropija reikalauja, kad būtų didėjanti. Panašiai, kaip kad norint leisti patikslinti, reikia leisti nuklysti.
- Lūkesčiai skiriame praeitį ir ateitį - tikimės - tuo pačiu skiriame išorę ir vidų, ką žinome ir ko nežinome, ką pažįstame ir ko nepažįstame.
- Entropijoje slypi dviprasmybė - ar Dievas būtinai geras? ar ne? Yra dviprasmybė, ribinis nepastovumas - fluctuation, nes teisingumo išlaikymui reikalinga, kad vadai būtų neteisingu elgesiu su jais gryninami, išbandomi.
- Dvejybės atvaizdai yra jų sąlygos, kur koks požiūris galioja. Pavyzdžiui, vidus ir išorė. Tapatumas ir skirtingumas. Palyginti su entropija.
- Disentropija ir meilė. Kažkas rūpinasi, kažkas saugoja. Kad būtų vienaip ne kitaip. Ar sutampa tikslai. Mylinčiojo tikslas ir mylimojo nauda?
- Entropy increases. Over what? Over time? But time as it unfolds become more deliberate, more determined, more established. Kuom keičiasi visata.
- Ribos tikslas yra kurti sąlygas neprieštaravimui. Laikui tekant didėja neprieštaravimas. Atitinkamai erdvėje auga entropija.
- Laikas yra tarsi pertvara tarp skirtingų sistemų - vienos akimirkos sistema atskirta nuo kitos akimirkos sistemos. Tai primena atskirtų (ir sujungtų) sistemų entropijos skaičiavimo uždavinį.
- Entropijos perskyros primena visko padalinimus.
- Malda išlaisvina iš įpročio - iš pasikartojančios veiklos.
- Susieti su Brauno judėjimu?
- Deliberateness is unambiguity.
- A) You can one-time convert heat into work by expanding.
- B) But if you want recurring behavior (as with a clock, or a wave) you need to contract.
- Structure sheds energy.
- Engine - pasikartojanti veikla - varoma jėga. Carnot cycle.
- Time - is an external clock - recurring between.
- Ordering of time = acceptance of control.
- Q/T = S entropy
- Entropy is related to the number of possible arrangements that yield the observed result.
- Entropy is a measure of the precision of measurement.
- Delta-S = Delta-Q/T
- Nondeliberate = uncontrolled
- How do you get the control back (Dievo valia). Why would there be a return to control?
- Economy - bubbles (increasing "useless") freedom.
A) The issue of "deciding" necessitates a framework given by "the division of everything into five perspectives": Every effect has had its cause, but not every cause has had its effects. And the boundary/present is where these two causal directions coincide. This framework, cognitively, has two representations: we imagine it either as time (cause in past, effect in future) or space (cause outside a subsystem, effect inside a subsystem). More about the "divisions of everything" here: http://www.ms.lt/derlius/20170220LevelsOfKnowledge.pdf
B) Cognitively, our emotional lives are driven by expectations, especially the temporal boundary between expecting and learning an outcome, and the spatial boundary between self and world. I write about that here: http://www.ms.lt/sodas/Book/TaxonomyOfMoods
C) Intuitively, think of entropy in terms of "deliberateness" and "nondeliberateness". Googling on "entropy deliberateness" doesn't yield much, so perhaps that's novel.
D) The role of the coordinate system - who decides the particular coordinate system used? - because whoever decides can scramble and unscramble the "phase space" at will.
E) A particular set of atoms, say, may seem meaninglessly chosen. And yet if we study what happens to those atoms - their flow through the system - then we may nevertheless witness signs of life. So the definition of life - for example - as that which can have ("(self)-interest") - is related to entropy. A frog has "self-interest" directly, and a clock (which has a potential owner) has "(self)-interest" on behalf of its owner. Which is to say, life is that which we can be helped or hurt. (In Lithuanian, we have a word "nauda" ("what is useful to us"), which suggest that something can be done on our behalf. And I'm thinking, you can't do anything on behalf of something that's not alive, but only for that which is alive - to whatever degree.)
F) Entropy, as I wrote above, is important in discussing the ambiguity of open systems (based on grace) and closed systems (based on justice). Yes, locally, at a certain level, we're fueled by the Sun, and yet again, at bigger and smaller levels things are crumbling all the same. So the ambiguity seems very important.
G) Prayer is (if it is anything) a way of engineering, of increasing the likelihoods of miracles. I think it does this by increasing the ambiguity required for (God or external forces) to intervene (without breaking any laws too badly). So explaining this dynamics would be my main idea.
Entropija:
- Irreversibility.
- Dalis terminės energijos sistemoje, kuria negalima dirbti darbą.
- Kaip lygiai energija yra išdalinta sistemoje.
- Valingumas (deliberateness).
Pokalbis su Thomas Gajdosik: Thinking entropy on the quantum level. Entanglement etnropy. What is observed thermodynamical entropy. Statistical property.
Entropija - informacija yra ko reikėtų atstatyti būklę, perkeisti koordinates. Entropija + informacija = konservacija ?
Ar tyrimas yra entropijos raiška? Pavyzdžiui, metu kamuolį ant kalno viršūnės ir žiūriu, kaip jisai nuriedės, tada vėl numetu ir taip toliau. Kokia tikimybė, kad tai vyktų atbulai, atvirkščia laiko kryptimi? Tyrime laikas teka viena kryptimi, atvirkščiai tiesiog neįmanoma.
Viskas turi tą pačią temperatūrą - tai žemiausia entropija. Bet jeigu sumažiname mąstą tada temperatūros sąvoka pasikeičia.
Vietinė savybė: energijos visuma nesikeičia, tik raiška keičiasi.
Visuminė savybė: entropija didėja, energija sistemoje išsilygina.
Visuminius ir vietinius reiškinius jungia koordinačių sistema.
Teisingumas: Esame visi paskiri, nepriklausomi, kovojame už save, nevieningi. Malonė: esame visi vieningi, vienas kitą palaikome.
Penrose book
- Walks on trees. Tree graphs - classical theory. Penrose pg.675.
- Space time quantum unfolding. Requires self reflection?
- If we run an experiment then... chosen by "experimenter" God... coarse graining as in entropy
- Entropy increase <=> balanced by expansion of universe's fine scaleness
- Low entropy = high distinction, differentiation with environment - basis for life.
Susipažinti su:
John:
- What is learnable?
- What is discernible and what is not?
- Levels like computability, complexity. A classification of dynamical systems.
- Energy and entropy should never have been in the same units.
- Coin toss experiment.
- Masses far apart - you can change very little energy.
- A little bit of energy can make a big difference. How much can you change the long term state? Control theory.
- Certain systems are impenetrable under any algorithm that's truly random.
- Two systems act entropically when put together lead to entropic state, bad or good, but otherwise systems for which there is no pair (love and life).
- Energy is conserved.
- Entropy is not fundamental. It is a convenient dynamical assumption. A shortcut principle for predicting the final state. Whether a certain arrangement of mass..
- Entropy Demystified
Virsmo taškas: kaip maži dalykai daro didelę įtaka - žemos entropijos esmė - valdymo teorijos esmė.
Entropy and local structure
I've been reading through parts of "The Road to Reality" by John Penrose. (Here is a free download).
It's 1,000+ pages. I wish I had gotten to read it in grad school. It's a very explanatory survey of the mathematical ideas behind all of physics. I'm jumping around, reading the end, the beginning, and chapters in the middle. He provides a lot of intuition so that on a first read I don't have to worry about understanding all of the details. So it's very inspiring to feel that I have a chance to grapple with the big picture and learn about different mathematical structures and why it might be worthwhile to study them.
I've come anew to this subject because of my interest in entropy. I've been trying to summarize my philosophy, especially the different ways of looking at things from God's point of view. The concept of entropy distinguishes the bad kid's point of view (that we live in "justice", a closed system that is zero-sum and can only get worse) and the good kid's point of view (that we live in "grace", an open system that is fed by an external source of love). There is a key ambiguity between these two points of view: Is our system open or closed?
Taking up Penrose's book, I've gotten interested in physics more generally, trying to get an inkling of quantum field theory. Overall, it's interesting that the idea of entropy seems to be quite central to the big picture. I have very much to learn and relearn.
Penrose's book has quite a lot to say intuitively about entropy. For example, he notes that, counterintuitively, as regards gravitational force, entropy is lower when matter is spread out in space, and entropy is higher as matter comes together in a small area. He is also critical of the kind of open/closed system distinction that I made as regards an external energy source. He notes that the earth reflects the same amount of energy as it receives from the sun. The key point is that the energy coming in from the sun is qualitatively different. It is fewer photons of higher energy. The reflected photons are greater in number and lower in energy. The entropy is lower when there are fewer photons.
The main idea that comes to me is that there should be a very conceptual accord between the global, external geometry of the universe (an ever expanding "big bang") and the local, internal geometry of the universe (an ever refining grid as per an ever shrinking Plank's constant). Conceptually, they should be inverses of each other. This would address many issues:
- The universe unfolds in complexity, manifests as space-time both expanding globally and refining locally, with both of equal importance.
- The universe evolves not from an infinitesimal point but rather from a mid-scale unity of the lowest possible entropy (=1). Which is to say, the universe is most deliberate.
- The universe manifests a clear teleology towards a 3-dimensional Euclidean space. Globally it tends towards infinite height, width, length and locally it tends towards a real number continuum. This is why classical physics works. It is based on the ultimate ideal towards which the universe is tending.
- Whereas the universe that we actually experience is but a finite model that is tending towards the ideal. Locally it is limited by Plank's constant, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which however becomes ever more refined as the universe unfolds.
- The act of measurement is what drives the unfolding of the universe. This is an act that needs to be defined. But basically it is an intervention which indicates that a particular possibility manifested among a variety. It really should be thought in terms of a refinement of the local grid of uncertainty. It's not so much that certainty was created but that uncertainty was given structure. Entropy can thus be defined not in terms of particles and their states but rather in terms of the quanta of uncertainty which keep increasing as the grid grows more refined locally.
- Measurement also shifts from the complex valued "current model" to the real valued teleological "ideal".
- We thus live in a world where there is a lot of instability, logically.
- A lot of quantum structures are internal to particles and as such do not participate in the unfolding real space. For example, as Penrose describes based on twistors, the electron consists of a zig and zag, both moving at the speed of light but in opposite direction, coupled by the mass of the electron. Quantum interactions would be rethought in terms of how they give shape to "the edge" of the universe locally and globally.
- The major error in current theories is that they presume an infinite number of states. This is a confusion and conflation of the current-finite-complex state and the ultimate-infinite-real state. The correct theory would have simply a finite series of states of possibly unknown length. The current theories thus yield infinite nonsense which has to be worked around through renormalization.
- Built into the notion of entropy is the idea of a coarse grid, and I imagine, a hierarchy of several grids (perhaps three or four) of increasing refinement. So these grids would have explicit physical meaning.
- The difference between gravitational and quantum perspectives would be fundamental and related to the different ways that they exhibit entropy, where gravity is low entropy when it is spread out, and quantum behavior is vice versa.
- There would be pairing of global and local phenomenon. For example, an electron would pair with a white-dwarf (composed of electron-degenrate matter), a neutron with a neutron star, and so on. Which is to say, both phenomemon would be considered equally fundamental. A neutron locally has the same complexity, conceptually as a neutron star globally. They are at opposite ends of the spectrum and remain so as the universe unfolds.
So these are some of the kinds of ways that physics could be thought of as describing the unfolding of "the edge" of the universe, which happens both locally and globally.
I was surprised to hear that there might not have been much thinking along such lines because it seems to suggest itself.
Entropy and coincidence
I have a bucket of ash in my room which I accidentally knocked over. So that created a mess.
That helped me realize what it means that from the point of view of the law of physics, it would be possible for all of the interactions to be reversed so that the ash climbed back into the bucket. It means that there is heat energy - kinetic energy of particles - such that if the momentum was all reversed, then those particles would all coincidentally work together and impart their energy to push all of those specks of ash and knock the bucket vertical with all the ash inside, and knock my foot, too. Such a coincidence is possible but it would be amazing.
It seems the main point is that when we have an interaction, the outputs can exceed the inputs. In which case it would require an enormous amount of coincidence to reverse it. So entropy is the measure of that coincidence.
And coincidence is a concept that brings together time and space, although I have yet to understand it. Coincidence has to do with the relationship between subsystems and systems. In physical modeling it's crucial that we be able to talk about subsystems. But how do those subsystems come back together?
Low entropy: increasing ambiguity combined with increasing distinctness of choice - clarity of choice increases
Deliberateness decreases with time (repetition)
Užrašai
- Same goes to different. To become different requires a coordinate system. Where does the coordinate system come from?
- Petvarkymai - tarpas - tarp viršsistemos ir posistemės.
- What is pressure and how is it affected by a single particle.
- Number systems are cognitive - the laws of nature relate continua but presumably not by way of number systems as we do.
- What is intuitively the difference between classical entropy and quantum entropy? Nobody knows
- Entropy = deliberateness - causal state - how instrumental? "interest" as an instrument for a cause.
- Instrumentality - distribution of agency - is one-way disentanglement. Equilibrium - recurring activity. Defines "object" like an "ideal gas". Not just a random meaningless subset. An additional science of recurring activity - deliberateness - interest/intentionality.
- Recurring activity can be manifested as a single particle over very long time (so that fluctuations get averaged out); different but similar particle acting in parallel; a hierarchy of combinations of similar particles, across a surface. This gives a range of models.
- Patricia Palacios talk. Gibbs interpretation carves up the domain like Riemannian integration; Boltzmann interpretation carves up the range like Lebesgue integration. Gibbs is human (how, what) and how we think and how our physical quantities that we measure make sense, but Boltzmann is divine (why, whether) and how nature actually is. Relate to the Yoneda lemma.
- Gap between time-asymmetric macrodynamics (one science - "not every cause has had its effects") and time-symmetric microdynamics (another science - "every effect has had its cause"). The crucial role of the gap as in pertvarkymai.
- Unfolding - macrosystem open, time asymmetric; microsystem closed, time symmetric.
- Collapse of wave function - invert it - closed with no symmetry