Log In | Register
Entropy and information may be crucial concepts for explaining roots of familiar force
A New View Of Gravity
Seeded on Thu Sep 16, 2010 10:57 PM EDT
Article Source: Science News- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (15)
- Tricuspidata (1)
I suppose that the concept of "information" and the attributes and properties which govern its behavior, will have to be included in any efforts to fully define something to its most fundamental level. It is information that constructs the reality we perceive, and the task of science is merely to decipher the various "protocols" and data structures that information is conveyed by...
- 8 votes
#1 - Thu Sep 16, 2010 11:13 PM EDTYeah, I can see how easily the universe can be reduced to informational basics. In the quantum foam scale of the universe, there is only one question of relevance: is existence observed? Its a digital, quantized realm when the only possible answers are yes or no, but we get an analog continuum world when yes and no fuse into a new answer, "maybe." All relationships and complexities beyond this level are fundamentally just an expression of countless debates on meta-data schema that can recursively accommodate all future observations.
That was me playing the role of an eccentric genius, a man whose inane babble is readily construed by most as great wisdom, and which only sounds cryptically obscure as a result of its utterly profound nature...☺
- 6 votes
#2 - Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:36 AM EDTCryptic obscurity of a simple truth is probably a good description of what profound nature means. Something strikes us as profound when it immediately makes sense, seems so obvious in retrospect, that it becomes cryptic how it was obscure at all.
Or something like that. :)
- 5 votes
There is such profundity in EM's 'cryptic obscurity.' ..That reminds me of our attempts at deciphering perception vs. reality.
PureScience - how true about that overwhelming feeling of cognizance when it happens - then we wonder why we didn't 'see' it before. ..then, as you say, it becomes "cryptic" in trying to figure out why -- wow, a brain-teaser!
- 5 votes
Thank you for the recent FR. I am sincerely honored and appreciative. I enjoy learning and speculating in this field of science as well as others. I am not a professional; just an interested person. However you noticed me, I am glad you did, as I can see I will enjoy your findings. (I enjoy questioning the same as my genius NV friend above, "is existence observed?") ---I employ all of the theories in that regard and find correlation and relevance - a little like the author in the article pointing out congruence going from Newton to Einstein and adding in traditional and new properties in conjunction with theoretical speculation. ...Thank you for this article. I really enjoyed reading it! (btw, I will understand if you choose not to maintain the FR status - my interests are varied and may not follow yours. Or you can always detrack me if I become annoying (lol). ..Thanks again.
- 5 votes
#3 - Sat Sep 18, 2010 2:05 PM EDTYou're too humble CL1, as your comments are generally pleasant, lucid and often quite insightful. This is sufficiently rare on Newsvine, and even scarcer elsewhere on Teh Internetz, that one is a fool not to "bookmark" you as someone whose posts merit reading...whether or not there is a divergence in topical interests.
As a side note, be aware I only play an eccentric genius on here. In real life, I'm a @!$%#ing idiot most of the time. ☺
Also, why do my watchlist show new contributions on your column, when my occasional visits reveal what seems to be a sort of aggregation site composed of RSS feeds from selected news outlets. Nothing like any other column...no recent comment list, or seeds/articles, etc. I assume you're among the chosen few involved in the Newsvine v2.0 beta, but your utilization is quite unlike what others seem to be doing with the new capabilities. Do your earnings now originate only from the page-views accrued by this one page? Actually...I'm way off topic in this thread, so perhaps you could simply write a personal narratives/meta article addressing my questions.....hint, hint. ☺
- 4 votes
Hi EM!
Hopefully, "Purescience" will allow me to go OT for a second to reply to you. ;-)
Thank you so much for the ego boost; that is very kind! I sincerely mean this when I say that you even giving me the time of day - is a tremendous confidence booster! I have always read you with anticipation and interest. (No way do I believe for a second that you are a "fing idiot most of the time.":)
I recently encountered a newer Viner that rakes me over the coals for my lack of 'lucidity' in their opinion. Ironically, I thought the same of them!! Oh well, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. lol.
Hmm, I don't know why your watchlist would show new contributions. Yes, I have been one of the original 'beta testers', and as you can see, I didn't test the CSS (if that is the correct term) capabilities. Lauhal gave me her code to play with, and then I lost confidence with where to go with it (sorry, lauhal, if you read this). Then I ran into some issues on the Vine where a few antagonists were following me and trying to bait me into a feud. I couldn't report it because of the esoteric and innuendo nature of their comments, if you know what I mean by that. Also, other tactics were used that were just annoying and not necessarily a CoH violation. It was just easier to shut down my column as I did. That further complicated my allowing my column to be 'fully and openly' viewed using the new program. I didn't want a completely 'blank page' so I filled it in with the RSS feeds in topics of interest to me - much the same as others would seed in topics of interest to them. I hope to eventually bring back a more typical look for my column with bringing in more modules. ..Yes, my earnings come from page views since I'm not writing or seeding. ..I recently submitted a small entry to A.Mac and Sara's contest (if you know what I'm talking about - info is on A.Mac's column), and after Oct. 1st, I might add it as an article to my column if I can figure out to get it there in the beta format.
You've always encouraged me to write articles, and I appreciate the nudge. ;) ...My troll-followers will probably attempt to annoy me or make a mess of things if they can; hopefully I'll figure out how to deal with it.
Thanks, EM, and it's good to see you again; hope you're doing well.
- 4 votes
I am not a professional; just an interested person. -CL1
An interested person is of more value to the intellectual endeavor than aloof professionals whose educational credentials are their principle support in a debate, instead of logical arguments and corroborate-able information.
I'm a @!$%#ing idiot most of the time. -EM
Something only acknowledged by the honestly intelligent, as everyone is an idiot most of the time, some even all of the time. Yet most seem to be ignorant of this simple truth, and among those who do recognize it, many foolishly try and conceal their innate idiocy. A deceptive ploy intended to make them appear smarter than their peers, yet actually unmasks their stupidity with the passage of time.
- 4 votes
PureScience - Thank you. ..I hope to come back, as "redshadow," after re-reading and giving the topic more thought. This article is an opportunity to 'put it all together' so to speak, even though I'm still learning about each theory. I think it's very interesting and thought-provoking.
- 4 votes
Good article. Science is amazing and always interesting. This theory may or may not be true but it is worth further study. I need to reread it before discussing it further. Thanks for posting.
- 5 votes
#4 - Sat Sep 18, 2010 3:39 PM EDTWow, whereas so many feel comfortable posting their thoughts after merely skimming the preview summary, its delightful to run across someone candid enough to acknowledge a need to reread the article in order to add value to the contribution their posts provide to a discussion thread. Why haven't I run across you previously? Oh...I'm a Viner-outsider whose sparse participation and frequent hiatuses make everyone a stranger....
- 5 votes
Science is amazing and always interesting. -rswgb
I concur with both this sentiment, as well as
...its delightful to run across someone candid enough to acknowledge a need to reread the article... -EM
It is always pleasant to encounter those whom find value in contributions that aren't merely new chapters in the horribly repetitive, and ultimately pointless tale of partisan differences.
- 5 votes
I actually read the paper about this the other day for the first time (apparently it was published in January or something). I was very, very intrigued by it. But as I'm just a mere biologist, I'm interested in hearing what some physicists have to say on the matter, because although I understand the science and (I think) I grasp the math behind it - I'm far from knowledgeable on the subject.
- 4 votes
#5 - Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:32 PM EDTNice! On a seed posted back in February, I did some speculation about this in relation to time. Maybe someone here can answer the question I asked then:
If gravity is the pressure force exerted by the curvature of space on closed volume objects, which have mass, then it should be affected by entropy since, according to the Special Theory of Relativity, the mass of an object changes in proportion to its kinetic energy. Entropy is the transference of energy from motion to rest of closed volumes. When its rest energy is exhausted, the object becomes an open volume and no longer has mass, so there is no pressure force of gravity to curve space around it. Entropy is the only quantity in the physical sciences that spontaneously evolves (from order, information, kinetic energy) to equilibrium states (of randomness, error, rest energy) but cannot spontaneously evolve away from equilibrium states. This transference (where order, information, kinetic energy, decrease) is known as the arrow of time, and being a function of entropy, time can only proceed from a state of activity (order, information, kinetic energy) to a state of stasis and decay.
In order to derive a universal constant for time, wouldn't you have to measure the energy (from potential to decay) of the particle with the shortest possible discernible lifetime?
- 5 votes
#6 - Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:33 PM EDTGravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
Stars' energy fuels the cosmos expansion
All spin arrays fuel the cosmos expansion
Gravity Simplified
Gravity Is The Other Side Of Inflation
Again: Dark Energy And Dark Matter YOK
A. E=Total[m(1 + D)]
Is the relationship between the cosmic energy(E), mass(m), and spatial expansion distance(D) of travel of the galactic clusters since the cataclysmic E/m superposition resolution.
At singularity all cosmic energy was in mass format. The Big Bang was the start of reconversion of mass into energy. At 10^-35 seconds since big bang, D was already a fraction of a second above zero. This is when gravity started. This is what started gravity. At this instance started the energy space texture, the straining of space texture, and started the space-texture-memory, gravity, that most probably will eventually overcome expansion and initiate impansion back to singularity, again.
The clusters of galaxies behave as accelerating classical Newtonian bodies. Their motion is fueled with energy from myriads of mass-to-energy reconversions, in intertwined evolutions WITHIN the clusters.
B. The mass-to-energy reconversions continuously diminish m, as D continuously increases
The energy spent on increasing D, the clusters expansion, becomes the potential impansion energy that will eventually re-form singularity. This is gravity. This is the striving of the resolved-from-energy mass to return to its singularity wholeness.
m are ALL cosmic formats of mass, regardless of size and complexity, including astronomic-to-smallest-particle bodies and all energy-mass organizations such as black holes environs, biospheres-lifes, all sizes and varieties of spin-arrays.
"No Dark Matter, No Maybe"
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4545
C. Mass is destined to dis-exist. It attempts to postpone-survive this by ingesting of energy
The cosmic expansion will eventually nearly run out of fuel-energy m, when at some value of D it will be overcome by gravity and impansion will thus set in. The universe will then revert towards singularity. D will go on a diminishing course and m will enter a growing course of evolution, very different from the present cosmic evolution course.
D. Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
The present universe came into being with inflation, with the onset of gravity. Gravity has been setting the course and nature of all the aspects of its evolution. Gravity will eventually terminate cosmic expansion and reverse the course of cosmic evolution.
Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/user/profile/1655.page
28Dec09 Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)]
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/184.page#4587
Cosmic Evolution Simplified
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427
- 1 vote
#7 - Sat Oct 23, 2010 5:35 AM EDTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
