Information theory

Dunno. Might need one of these?

I don't think information theory discounts entropy, the clock continues to run...though all the information about your egg is preserved in some form, it's not necessarily the original form...If you had enough energy to reverse time, you might get your egg back theoretically, but that would take an infinite amount of energy....good luck with that...

You gotta' want them eggs girl....

Well, running over an egg 1000 times constitutes a sizeable increase in entropy.

One theory is that quantum entanglement accounts for the direction of time's arrow. A cup of coffee cools as coffee particles become entangled with particles of air, and the entanglement spreads.

New Quantum Theory Could Explain the Flow of Time | WIRED

As a hot cup of coffee equilibrates with the surrounding air, coffee particles (white) and air particles (brown) interact and become entangled mixtures of brown and white states. After some time, most of the particles in the coffee are correlated with air particles; the coffee has reached thermal equilibrium. IMAGE: LIDIA DEL RIO

The problem is that there is dead matter and live matter. Dead matter is completely predictable. It has no choice. Living matter has choice. That choice and that time of choice follows the rational of the living matter, not dead matter predictions. No choice is random. That choice is a comparative choice. A sensory choice.

Even so, if you can determine the state of universe(all real time factors), all actions are deterministic. Even the living ones. Good luck on quantifying the needed factors.

Randomness, probability, chaos are not permitted. The only stimulus for these concepts is in the mind of man.

The unknown and the un-explainable without admitting ignorance. A face saver.

Life modulates dead matter. For a short time. We humans have taken it a step farther, we modulate thinking.

That modulation is the human condition. Modulating thought is information. We live with the results.

Thoughts are chemical in origin.Chemicals react to form electrical pulses,which fire neurons,etc.Since all actions are preceded by a previous action,and are accompanied by an equal and opposite reaction it follows that the original action goes much deeper down a nearly infinite chain of dominoes.

The mind and the brain are separate things.A dead rabbit and a live rabbit have the same brain structure at he instant of death of one of them,yet one is alive and the other is dead.The brain remains,but the energy to power it is gone,call it the life force or whatever you choose.

IMHO:The thoughts are external,and the brain is simply a physical mechanism to enable action on a physical universe,which itself is pure energy.Matter is simply concentrated energy(E=MC²⁾.

Humans,and all mammals, are very powerful.

They produce more energy-per-pound that even the sun.

Think about it.

I beg to differ, dead matter is not predictable, there are many forms of decomposition so how it will decompose is not predictable, not even the time frame of decomposition. is Dead matter really dead or existing on a different time frame?

Radioactive atoms are not alive. One cannot predict when such atoms will transmute to a different element. This is a purely random process.

Radioactive decay is influenced by solar activity,even before the solar flare occurs.

It is still basically unpredictable on a large scale because Neutrinos are not supposed to interact with anything,and decay is not supposed to be influenced by anything external,yet it is happening.

The cause is either Neutrinos,or some heretofore unknown force or particle..

https://phys.org/news/2010-08-radioactive-vary-sun-rotation.html

Changing the likelihood of radioactive decay of a specified atom to occurr still means that it happens due to a random process. This is like changing your bet on a roulette table from 00 to RED. One is more likely to win with RED but a random process still determines if one wins.

IF all the variables were known and understood,the result would be predictable.

Here is a link on laminar flow.The ink droplets separate and mix after 5 revolutions,and can be reversed.

After a few more revolutions the mixing becomes too complicated to analyze or reverse by normal means.Yet every molecule in the mixture has a part in the final result,even if mixed 1000 times.Action/reaction at work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p08_KlTKP50

Sorry but some things just are not predictable. The field of chaos theory does show that some systems that were previously believed to be random do have patterns within the apparent chaos. But when a Radium-228 atom will decay is a random act. Put another way, given a full mole of Radium-228 atoms, half of them will probably decay to Actium-228 atoms by emitting half a mole of Beta particles in 5.75 years. Which half of the Radium atoms decay is unknown and random. Describing anything with a probability is a dead giveaway of a random process.

According to information theory,the ink blots could be restored if all the pertinent information was available,which implies that every action to achieve the result is important.The number of interactions becomes very large very quickly,and escaped our ability to analyze.Things that appear random now will give way to knowledge if our species survives long enough.

Somewhere,before the decay of the Radium 22,there are a lot of unknown series of actions taking place that we cannot detect or analyze,even perhaps our relative position in space time as we move through it.

Imagine a gear with a large prime number of teeth,connected to another larger gear with prime number of teeth,and that the ratio is approx. 4.5 billion to one.

When the gears begin to rotate,how long will it take for the starting alignment of teeth to occur?

It may be spooky action at a distance.Our whole universe may be entangled with another,and whatever happens there,will affect what happens here,and vice versa.

IMHO:No action is created without a prior action to cause it,except the BB,and even that is debatable.

You cannot violate Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. You cannot know the position and velocity of one subatomic particle at an instance with absolute certainty, let alone the two hundred twenty-nine particles of a single atom of Radium-228. Wishing that one day we can know all does not make it true.

I consider it a "Unknown Principle".

Many ideas that sounded preposterous in the past have been proven valid later.

Nothing can be observed or measured without affecting it in some manner.

Put a thermometer into the ocean to measure temperature,and it will affect the ocean's temperature as well as the sensor in the thermometer;A microscopic amount,to be sure,but an effect nonetheless.Even using a non contact- laser thermometer will have an effect.

Thinking that anything is impossible does not make it impossible.We cannot know what we do not know until we know it,then it becomes cotidianus.

Now you're attempting to change an observed, fundamental quantum mechanic law to suit your fantasy. It doesn't work that way.

The spooky part of entanglement is Knowledge.

The knowledge of the states cannot travel faster than light.

Claims can be made that it happens faster than the speed of light,but how can that be proven when all measurements are limited to C?

We cannot even prove the one way speed of light,only the speed of a round trip of the light.

Before the first sentient being existed in the universe, was it in a state superposition?

So did the first knowledge of the universe collapse the universe from a quantum state into a "real" state when first perceived?

Are the unseen galaxies in a state of superposition until we see them?

Do they collapse into existence when we see them?What power we must have!What hubris!

Without knowledge of the information,everything is in a state of superposition.

Knowledge is spooky at any distance.

We don't know what we don't know, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, just that we have no knowledge of it....Science dodges reality because it has no knowledge of the unknown, therefore it must deny it's existence because it can't define it...but there can be no doubt that the majority of the universe is unknown, and that we live in a very small part of reality and some of it makes no sense at all because of that....

According to Heisenberg, everything is in a state of uncertainty till it is observed,then it collapses into "reality".. a "known" state.

So,by that standard, the entire unknown universe is in a state of uncertainty(superposition) till we observe or know about it.

"Reality is merely an illusion,but a very persistent one." A. Einstein

Who can win an argument with him?

I don't think Heisenberg said that. That's not what his uncertainty principle (ΔxΔp ≥ h/4π) says or implies, anyway. You seem to be talking about something else such as the Copenhagen Interpretation of QM, due more to Niels Bohr.

Most, but not all, physicists consider radioactive decay (and other quantum events) to be genuinely random. A notable exception is David Bohm, who thinks there are hidden variables yet to be discovered. But then, everybody on this forum knows that your humble opinion outweighs that of the vast majority of physicists.

You know what they say about opinions:everybody has one,including you,and of course your sarcasm is noted but merely reveals a closed mind and limited vocabulary,but that is just my opinion,you see.

IMHO,we don't know everything,and never will.

Assume the cat in the box is opened and two persons are viewing the box.One is in close proximity to the box,and the other is viewing from a monitor connected by a 1light year long cable,and has no other view or knowledge of the result.

For the close viewer,the superposition collapses more or less instantly,but for the second viewer,it takes a year to collapse.The reality of each observer is different,unless the signal can travel down the fiber cable in a superposition state in zero time interval,which would exceed C.

So reality is relative and unique to the observer.

I have to agree with Einstein.."Reality is merely an illusion..."

A majority is not always right.Consider Lemmings.

The unknown universe may exist in your imagination,but it does not become reality till it is observed by one or more of our senses,or converted into one of our senses by technology,still it is observed,so it becomes reality.If you see the effects of an unseen object,you have indirectly observed it,so you imagine it must exist.

There is a quantum computer that solves a problem before it is even run by using "counterfactual computing".

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/02/060223084147.htm

Now that is Spooky!

I like your analogy.

It's like a known number times a random number is a random number.

Back to the topic...

Is radioactive decay reversible? If you could reverse the momentum of a thorium atom and an alpha particle after a decay, would the thorium change back to uranium?

Thank you for the comment on my analogy.

There is one number that can be multiplied by a random number and not result in another random number. It's the only way I know of to never lose at gambling. However, adding a known number to a random number will always result in a random number.

Again getting back to the topic...

I vaguely remember one of the fundamental reasons that radioactive decay cannot be reversible comes down to again Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. The tiny uncertainty of the momentum of the alpha or beta particle after decay makes the uncertainty of its position to be greater than the heavier nucleus diameter. That physics class was so long ago I can't remember if that was found to be true or one of the early proposals that didn't compute.

IMHO: Random is simply a cop out for not understanding all of the variables,as are the terms infinity and infinite.

They are designed to create a resting place for your thoughts:"Well,it is random", or"It is infinite"and beyond further comprehension.

A cloud's movement can be predicted as a whole,but the individual molecules and their interactions are too complex to follow with present technology or skills,yet they all do interact,individually and as a whole to form a cloud.

At the second "if".

If the universe really is deterministic then you'd already know the answer to your question. You would also know what I'm about to type:

Pelicans.

So black holes do not dribble out information;it is preserved.?

All information is preserved,living or dead.?

I did know you were going to type that.

I am psychic(or psychotic?,can't remember which).

I had a psychic girlfriend,but we broke up before we met.

I knew that would happen.

..."Do black holes release information?

But Hawking found that black holes release radiation, and can eventually evaporate entirely, in a process now known as Hawking radiation But that radiation didn't carry any information itself. Indeed, it couldn't; by definition, the event horizon of a black hole prevents information from leaving."...Mar 21, 2022

https://www.livescience.com/black-hole-paradox-solution

The information could be quantumly entangled with the radiation, thus providing an exit strategy... it could involve wormholes somehow, nobody knows for sure....

We know that determinism is true, for we base our society and our existence on it. We have always had to. Without it, a tool would not work. We use and apply it, we re-enforce it. We stake our futures on it. It gives us what we have. We push a button, the house heats and the car starts. We build and assemble big determines, out of small determines.

Trying the same thing over and over and getting the same result is not insanity, it determinism. It's why some things work and some things don't work. The impedance/restriction of reality. Fit. Fit makes every and all determine. Fit(the boundary of reality) can only father and abide the determine. The particles of CERN do not fit and are discarded.

Your argument is valid that society is based on determinism if you limit the scope of the argument to tools and the physical, as you have done. The legal system of our society, however, is not based on determinism. It is based on the belief that humans have the freedom to choose. If our legal system were founded on determinism, there could be no moral judgement of actions. In every case brought before the court, after hearing the evidence the judge would be obliged to say to the accused, "Well, it is clear that you had no choice to do what you did, therefore the court can apportion no blame or fault. Case dismissed.", and our legal system would collapse.

Astronomers-shocked-when-black-hole-burps-out-star

Determinism does not eliminate choice. Or invalidate a choice. If that is your discernment of determinism, then we are talking of different concepts. It bounds the affect/effect of choice. It relates the choice to other choices with happenstance, that have the same boundaries.

Determinism does not set all events as predetermined. That's fate. Determinism is a set of boundaries where all events must take place in. It's the underlying stage for reality.

Human law and the concept of it, have nothing to do with physical reality. Law only exposes the human condition, it can not prevent it. Law is human judgement of human choice.

Let's call it boundary-ism, instead of determinism, to eliminate the set fate aspect from it's old understanding.

Very well, but to quibble, your example in post #10 of our dependence on tools and the certainty of outcome in using them, does not convey a concept of boundary-ism as described in your post #14, but rather of direct cause and effect (ie: determinism as it is usually understood).

"Where did my train of logic jump the tracks?"

Entropy?

The spooky part is Knowledge.Knowledge cannot exceed the speed of light.

And we do not even know the one way speed of light,only the round trip speed.

Until we know the state of one of the particles,we do not know the state of the other particle.

Are the unknown parts of the universe in a state of superposition until we discover it?

If a tree falls in the woods,and no one sees or hears it,did it really fall,or does it even exist until someone sees it?

What about undiscovered galaxies?Do they collapse into reality when we first see them?

So who or what collapsed the universe into it's present state of reality?

Did we do it by our knowledge of it?

What power we must have to bring galaxies and the universe into existence!

What ego,what hubris.

Maybe some other form of life observed the universe billions of years ago...? Maybe that's what caused the Big Bang...Something or somebody measured something and everything else had to assume it's proper relative state of being...

Okay.Who or what collapsed the first sentient entity into existence,presumably in another dimension?

We must journey far and long into the void, all the way to the 11th dimension, a dimension of pure energy, this dimension does not age and has existed for all time, is infinite in scope and contains all the knowledge of the universe, as such it is a great intelligence and responsible for the first observation that spurred today's reality of both the known and unknown....in this dimension we are aware of....

Put on your twilight zone cap before reading this ,it is just a bunch of wild thoughts strung together by an excess or Gentleman Jack,Pinch Scotch, and caffeine.

(Guess you could call that Mc Hillbilly Jack coffee?)

Before there was time,there was space.Before there was time,there were objects* in that space in relative motion.Without objects in motion thru space,there can be no time.Time is based on the relative motion of at least two objects.

So it takes all three to construct our observable universe.

The speed of light is the speed of knowledge.

Anything moving faster than C is not observable or detectable within the constraints of our universe.

Einstein did not say nothing could move faster than light,but that we could not observe it any faster than light.

So we are limited within a bubble of space-time-(matter/energy) that is rising through another ocean of space and increasing in diameter like a bubble rising through water,increasing speed as it goes.

There may be dimensions where our version C is the minimum speed,and others where you cannot return from a place the same way you arrived in that spot...any direction except the original path will get you back to the start.Time running backwards from our time,and that would be normal and C would be considered the maximum speed.

That universe would be continually shrinking,compressing,getting denser and hotter.All of our rules are reversed,until it compressed into a critical mass and explodes,to create another bubble.

Object* Anything. Including energy or matter.

Bishop Berkeley would probably say that God did that. Not everyone would necessarily agree.

I think that physicality comes from two dimensions. Length and time. I think that a one dimensional line has area. A 1 meter length has 1 meter of area. Not a square area, a linear area.

If the difference between a dimension is just direction or axis, then we have infinite dimensions. Some believe this. I say only one.

Motion gives the length, a duration. The duration is relative, depending on the velocity and the angle.

Area is also relative to velocity and angle. Area is the interaction zone. And can be varied with duration also.

So far, we have velocity, angle and area, that are relative to duration. In our macro world, we are use to velocity and angle. But at the sub-atomic scale, there is another dynamic in which we are not use to. And that is the expansion-contraction dynamic. It's not that physics changes with scale.........it's this unfamiliar dynamic.....and it confuses the hell out of us.

When a sub-atomic particle changes size, it changes it's interaction area.....it's capture area and it's target area. So area is relative also. On all scales. We are not use to it, for we don't see huge differences in area, during a dynamic. Our everyday objects do not change dimensions while in motion.

Try to imagine a baseball contracting to the size of a gnat while accelerating to 100 MPH. Imagine an oscillation of two objects, where one, changes size when approaching or withdrawing from the other object.

This is the only difference between the macro and the sub-atomic. Quick, large area changes with motion.

We see and measure this as a fuzz ball....or a blur. Or a collapse.

The motion need not be linear. A speed up of spin will contract a particle. And a slowing of spin will expand it. This is expressed as a constant velocity of spin, with a variable RPM of spin. And only set RPMs are permitted. A requirement from keeping constant velocity of spin. Only certain RPMs can be satisfied. Causing an emission of the left overs. Excess spin. Set RPMs is the cause of light. The expansion and contraction is the pump.

So what area or length is purple or yellow? What length is an F7 chord on any musical instrument? Oh sorry, they're not physical items, or are they? They all manifest on or from physical items. Sorry and grief have the same length but misery is longer than either by one.

If we shoot a line thru space like an arrow, it has a front point and a back point. These points have the same speed and direction of velocity. If we bow and connect these points, the line will stop translation and begin rotation around a point in space, giving a constant duration. A being there. A one dimensional being with duration.

The easiest way to torque and bow a line is to twist it. And since the line only has one dimension, that twist can only result in a forward spin or helix. Now we have perpendicular linear area......or volume.

From one length dimension and with duration. One unit of physicality.

Purple, yellow and F7 chords are constant velocity, area accelerations. They are accelerations of area.

Expansions of area.