Information and Potential

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Vkothii, Nov 4, 2008.

  1. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    Math? pffft.


    The philosophy of informative connections
    (a dissertation)

    Potentials are things we use to establish a baseline or first point of informative connection, to plot a graph of some evolution, in terms of "work".
    How the system works, compared to 'requirements' any output has, in thermodynamic terms. (How much fuel produces how much output).

    A potential (as unused fuel for the engine), forms a 'non-moving' reference for a moving one. A potential is only possible because of movement.
    Any object is 'stationary' only in any sense that other objects are not. All motions and so all potentials, are relative (A. Einstein).

    The universe is discrete (there's only one, that we can see), and continuous - because the single universe is in constant (continuous) motion; it's expanding, more or less continuously, though there is no reason for the expansion to be a "single-movement", and there is some evidence it is at least two kinds of expansionary motion.

    Continuity and elasticity are invariants; discrete or algebraic relations with continuous elastic connectivity, evolve dimensionally.
    Heat and convection are limited, by geometric continuity, and elasticity. Discrete states as modes, evolve algebraically; information is discrete and continuous.
    The universe is information, potentially and in 'working' form.

    'Particles' in motion are the equivalent of work and information content.
    Content is a volume, which is in relative motion across a surface area. Any discrete state with algebraic content (potential) evolves by diverging around a center, which is an informational 'zero-point'. This reference is another potential, moved or scaled to be motionless relative to the 'working system'.

    Informational divergence or dissipation, scales as \(\,k_B ln(2) \,\) algebraically (discretely).
    Heat is continuous (but also evolves as discrete particles of 'energy'), a volume of heat has an equivalent volume of information. A glass of (continuous) water has an equivalent discrete content of 'drops of water'. A 'bit' in your computer is a quite large number of these individual particles (electrons), that we say represents a single potential, a glass of water is a 'bit', of information (an empty glass is too).
    When we can scale information content as single atoms, then as single 'fractions' of atoms, we'll be near the 'informational limit', although black holes are at this limit, which is elastic, and thermodynamic.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    Just as a discrete universe implies the existence of a medium, the existence of a discrete medium implies its own non-existence. "The universe exists", conveys the information that the universe didn't exist (or another one still doesn't).

    Information has to have a phase, it has to 'flow' or change from one discrete state to another, or a continuous flow has to be of discrete states, or algebraic modes. An elastic medium implies modes, of vibration or oscillation. Discrete states imply a difference in phase in the oscillations, including the polarity of the same 'discrete' oscillations.
    That is, an oscillation goes 'up and down', or 'forward and back', by definition, an external frame 'sees' a center move away and return, or rotate around a central equilibrium, a reference point.

    Phase changes evolve around a critical point, near which either of two discrete modes are 'mixed' so that they are equivalent (indistinguishable). When the critical point moves (the system moves, equivalently), discrete modes appear.
    In a liquid, with continuous translational symmetry, the disorder is equivalent to a lattice with indistinguishable points (each vertex, or molecule, has an equal translation parameter or vector, no position is unique).

    A transition to a solid phase breaks this symmetry. Now there's a regular lattice (no disorder or translational equality, every molecule has to 'report' a unique position). A chemical way to say this, is the more symmetric phase is seen above the critical point which is thermodynamic (elastic).

    The Hamiltonian (transition function) of a system 'exhibits' all possible symmetries, and higher temperatures mean that more states are available. The Hamiltonian (the algorithm), finds more 'solutions' as modes - thermal symmetries - across a broader spectrum.
    This broadening of available states, is not seen at low temperatures; near absolute zero the potential of thermodynamic 'informative connections' is attenuated, or confined. A certain continuity is lost.

    Energy 'drives' the transition function, or the Hamiltonian processes the available states as energy allows it to find them.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    Consider a curved surface. Curvature in 2 dimensions can be 'convex', or the opposite: 'concave'. Positive and negative curvatures are the only possible 'states' available to a surface.
    A bowl is a curved surface. A bowl is symmetrical (it has a center at which curvature is locally flat; there's a horizontal neighbourhood near the central point of the bowl). It has a symmetrically located 'rim' or edge, at a constant radius from the central point.

    If a 'particle' (a marble, say), is positioned 'on' the edge, (the edge has a 'width' that's sufficient so the marble finds a static position on it), at a constant radius.
    Then assume this marble is given just enough momentum to leave the edge and roll towards the center - it will continue past the center point and towards a point on the opposite edge, but it won't get there.

    It won't because gravity and friction mean energy will be lost (as sound, and heat), from the marble to the surface it's moving along.
    The opposite edge is 'unreachable'; it expands away from the marble's potential to reach it.
    If the marble and the surface were frictionless, it would have enough energy to potentially reach the other edge.

    Instead it's 'forced' to reflect or invert from a point which is short of the outer diameter - it scatters back from the opposite side of the bowl towards the center again. This repeats until sufficient momentum is absorbed from the marble that it finds a static position near the center (in the flat neighbourhood of it).

    This models what photons scattering from the last visible surface, at the edge of visibility of the universe do. Well, they don't 'bounce' back and forth between edges like a marble in a bowl, but they do most certainly get halfway - to the central neighbourhood, where we are.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. swarm Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,207
    We seem to be lacking a thesis and some foundationa definitions.

    Also the foundational claims don't seem well established and there seems a fair amount of seemingly irrelevant information, but I'm willing to consider that I'm missing a point here.

    Are you using "informative connections" in the same sense as these fellows?
    Discovering Informative Connection Subgraphs in Multi-relational Graphs
    http://lsdis.cs.uga.edu/library/download/SIGKDD-FinalCameraBWLatest.pdf

    Why is it a "philosophy?" It would seem you are striving more for a "physics" of informative connections.
     
  8. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    Galileo was a philosopher. He did several thought experiments - so did Archimedes.

    If the universe has a geometry and a photon looks like a particle, then it's like something that's a message from the void. If Galileo had been able to see that the universe was expanding or figure out a bit more about geometry (that wasn't figured out back then), he could have beaten Einstein, maybe not Maxwell, though.

    The idea is that any connection is like a process that delivers something (a "channel"), a photon has a certain frequency, you can measure this by interacting with it, or capturing it. A connection means there are two ends, in the case of a distant galaxy or star, we can see it because it can see us. So the edge of the universe that we can see, must be able to see us.

    Information is a connection. If we did reflect a beam of light from the most distant object back towards it, it wouldn't be able to get back because the object will have accelerated to beyond the limit, the velocity the beam can have.
     
  9. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    What we know about the geometry of marbles, and the geometry of bowls, means we know a marble will accelerate from the edge of a symmetrically curved surface, which is convex (negatively curved) and has a locally flat center. It will decelerate correspondingly as it moves away from the center.

    Its movement is confined; the geometry of this cavity will 'process' the marble's momentum symmetrically, it will oscillate in a damped way and lose momentum, decaying to a minimum potential (static position).

    When it has momentum, it has velocity at every point on the surface it interacts with; it accelerates toward the center then decelerates away, so logically it has an acceleration of zero at the center. A 'free' particle can move from one edge to the midpoint to the other edge, but will not evolve 'at' the midpoint, only beyond it. Curvature is locally flat, any accelerations toward the midpoint are countered by equivalent decelerations away from it. At the midpoint, acceleration is zero (velocity is constant). A surface can accelerate a particle to a constant velocity, QED.
    The bowl and marble can be described by an equivalent constant velocity from one edge to the other of a surface that 'admits' constant velocity marbles.

    One that looks like the marble in a convex cavity looks like, in the central neighbourhood where it has a constant velocity.
    Marbles arrive (from infinity) and pass through the centrally flat neighbourhood, on to infinity. The curvature has to be different; instead of being locally flat, maybe it looks locally curved, and the 'cavity' has zero curvature. The surface could be described as having a tension, which the marble deforms somehow, or the marble is deformed - the tension 'squeezes' on the marble somehow, on its surface, and it gets pushed along.

    What sort of transforms are needed to retain the geometric picture?
     
  10. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    One other thing about a real marble (a really nice spherically symmetrical one. an 'ideal marble'), and the mechanics or dynamics of rolling, which means friction and sound are 'lost energy': the motion is non-adiabatic. If the marble could accelerate slowly enough, it would make a minimum level of noise, although friction is an inevitable outcome of being against a surface, so can only be minimised by making the surfaces as smooth as possible (there's a big marble that got made out of a single crystal of Si, as a standard, with a surface that is supposed to vary overall by no more than 3 atoms).

    Non-adiabatic changes are what happens when two phases mix too quickly, a discontinuity occurs or a symmetry "breaks" (diabatically); if two phases mix slowly enough, or the discontinuity is smoothed, or a symmetry-point is "maintained" (equilibrium, and reversibility) so the system doesn't condense into one or the other (or the phase-difference doesn't appear suddenly, like a bump in the road), the phase-change is adiabatic.

    Photons are adiabatic, and incompressible, they aren't multi-body systems but look more like 'traveling bumps', for them. Heat is a vibration of atomic lattices (a crystal is a lattice with discrete positional information for each vertex, a liquid or a gas is a lattice with no discrete positional information); heat is also photons with a certain range of energies.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2008
  11. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    Any 'substance', such as water for example, can be in different states which depend fundamentally on the 'energy' available. At high energies, molecules of water are separated, they're individual particles that bounce around in a space, average distance is because of the average energy a molecule has.

    A single molecule of water can't "be" a gas or a solid molecule - it needs other molecules to interact with. The level of interaction or communication is determined by thermodynamics.
    A gas is compressible, because of intermolecular distances. A liquid is not compressible because these distances are minimised - liquid molecules are 'close together', but retain translational freedom.

    You can't compress a liquid because the molecules are free to translate away from any local pressure on them (a gas has to 'surrender' some of its intermolecular space to an applied pressure). Liquid molecules are already at a distance limit, determined by electrostatic repulsion, a gas has more space to 'explore' than a liquid does. A gas condenses into a liquid when all the 'free space' of intermolecular distance is absorbed, by lowering temperature or increasing pressure.
    This means that temperature is what processes these average distances between molecules in a gas - a gas absorbs thermodynamic energy as intermolecular distances increase.

    Water molecules condense into a solid when the molecules stop 'moving around' and energy is absorbed by electrons when they bond with neighbour atoms - a regular lattice of stationary molecules appears with energies determined by vibrational modes which are structural - bond lengths and angles.
    Nuclear vibrational modes are 'stationary' in a solid; in a liquid or a gas, nuclei are 'free' to move around a space.

    So the state, or phase of a substance - solid, liquid or gas - such as water, depends on the kinds of interactions molecules have with each other. A molecule is a nucleus surrounded by electrons. Nuclei interact through vibrational and translational states, so do electrons, which are usually 'bound' to the nuclei and constrained to behave in certain ways. In a gas, nuclear modes have the greatest freedom, electrons repel each other - they look like an electrostatic envelope around the nuclei; there's a thermodynamic gap between molecules.

    In a solid, nuclei are bound in a lattice, electrons form an extended structure by interacting with neighbouring nuclei, rather than looking like an envelope for individual 'free' nuclei, electron interaction forms an extended envelope for all of them which confers structure and 'long-range' order.

    A liquid is like a mixture of these two extreme 'end-states', liquids retain the ability to flow like a gas, but they preserve their volume (it's at a limit already), and don't expand to fill a container like a gas does. Thermal expansion is the same kind of order as in solids, which is why bulb thermometers use liquids with high expansion 'coefficients', instead of solids or gases, generally.

    P.S. the word 'adiabatic' is a compound (ex latina) of 'diabatic', which starts out as 'abatic'. From the L. abatus meaning "to the beat/rhythm".
    A diabatic change is literally: "half to the beat", so adiabatic means "as half to the beat". Asymmetrical means "not symmetrical", except it really means "like/as (a) symmetrical, nearly symmetrical", etc. This is so we can horribly confuse all those Romans.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2008
  12. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    If you're still here, then the universe is expanding (if it wasn't, would you be able to tell if you were still here?).

    The surface of the universal bowl looks flat locally, except it does have a 'local' curvature after all - it deforms, and deformations affect particles that 'interact' with any such local deformities. We can presume that the surface looks like this at the edge too (as far away as we can see).

    This is uncle Albert's primary postulate, that the laws of physics we can observe affecting the evolution of 'particles' is universal. A photon or an atom, or any group of them will behave at the edge of visibility, like they do right next to us. The nature of spacetime is invariant over the entire surface.

    The speed of light is determined by the curvature of spacetime, but this means a global curve (like a bowl) and a local curve (like the central neighbourhood of a bowl).
    A local plus a global curvature, which is determined by singularities (masses), which are themselves groups of particles. These have a more-or-less spherical symmetry, and angular momentum, but spacetime has a global symmetry which is more-or-less hyperbolic.

    There's a connection between a local 'spherically symmetrical' potential (the gravity well we're in), the shape an object with mass assumes (a hanging cable is a good example), and the edge of the visible universe (including all the universe in between).

    You can connect a sphere or a circle, to a curve like this by constructing a circle with a constant radius (i.e. \(\, x^2\, +\, y^2\, =\, (2r)^2\, \) ) and plotting the curve \(\, x^2\, -\, y^2\, =\, r\, \) (it helps to assume r = 1).

    It shows that the area of a right triangle in a single quadrant of the circle, is equal to the area of a hyperbolic right triangle with its apex on the latter curve. I'm working my way through this 'proof from first principles', that relates ordinary circular geometry to hyperbolic geometry (in 2 dimensions). How you can induce the existence of transcendental numbers like e, with trigonometry. And the imaginary roots of "1". It also demonstrates that gravity has a hyberbolic/spherical structure to it, to do with distance and potentials.
     
  13. swarm Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,207
    You still seem to lack a thesis and are still not making much sense.
     
  14. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    "Sense"? What's that?

    Can you supply a definitive meaning for that term? How about "lack a thesis"? Can you supply some indication of what you are saying with that?
    Or can you indicate why you feel the need to mention either of these?

    Does the universe make "much sense"? Does it have a "thesis", or would you say it "lacks a thesis"? Is the statement: "gravity has a hyperbolic/spherical structure", one of these "thesis" thingamys?

    Has the possibility occured to you, that none of the previous posts are in any way related to yourself, but to myself (I'm talking to the latter, not the former?)

    It's occured to me that your previous post mentioned "foundations" that aren't "well-defined" or something. What does that mean? What's a "foundation"? Is it like the big tortoise that supports the four elephants holding up the planet?
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2008
  15. Tnerb Banned Banned

    Messages:
    7,917
    Similar is my thread "No" which seems to explain

    anyway all good philosophies about the world, what we do need as he stated is some general foundation, some general statement. Like commenting "reword that to 3 sentences or one paragraph" or something ...
     
  16. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    Nope, still not very clear on the "foundation" thing. It's "general" then?
    Can someone at least comment on why a "foundation" is a requirement, or why anyone would comment that there is none?

    It's just that I don't seem to be able to make an informative connection to this, whatever it is...
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2008
  17. Tnerb Banned Banned

    Messages:
    7,917
    General may be a good word, ...... idk I suppose hard to finda central theme, I have looked at it and it appears to be very good but lacking a clear progress (like i said, idk)
     
  18. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    What's a "clear progress"??

    Does the thread title: "Information AND potential", suggest a connection? I think it does.
     
  19. swarm Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,207
    A dissertation requires a thesis aka a proposition stated or put forward for consideration.

    In otherwords, when you said it was dissertation that implied there was actually some point being made.

    But it seems to just be random psuedo scientific ramblings without real rhyme or reason.

    Rant on McDuff. Rant on.
     
  20. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    Not at all.
    There is no "requirement" in any dissertation, that's what a dissertation is: something that "disserts".

    You seem to be labouring under some sort of illusion? Can you point out any "ramblings" that are pseudo-scientific? Can you offer anything, at all? Can you make a point of some kind?
    (Other than bland, dismissive comments, I mean)

    Or better, fuck the fuck off. Go and post vague, somewhat meaningless comments some other place?
     
  21. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    OK, for those who are otherwise too mentally challenged, this is the guts of all the above:

    1) we live in a continuous universe - it expands continuously

    2) we live in a discrete universe - it has singular objects in it; there is a single, discrete universe

    3) the universe has curvature - you can see this by simply standing in a potential well (in an inertial field, that extends from a local singularity - the planet we happen to be on)

    4) you can construct a logical 'map' of the universe, and see that it extends like a surface with hyperbolic and spherical distances and 'paths' in it. A sphere can fit inside a cone, an hyperbola (and a parabola) are conic sections

    5) the universe has discrete particles in it that represent the singular spherical geometry of the surface, which is because of mass potential

    6) these particles are in various 'phases' between themselves, three 'major' states of matter exist in relation to a local thermodynamic level or background - another potential

    7) a surface can accelerate a particle to a constant velocity, which is then a constant potential

    8) the particles can interact with each other's spherical potentials, by 'relaxing' their hyperbolic shapes into elliptical shapes or curves - they orbit each other
    (and yes, an ellipse is also a conic section)

    9) these symmetries, and how they evolve 'potentially', depend on the discrete conic sections, of each potential (mass, charge, and so on)
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2008
  22. swarm Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,207
    While its vaguely interesting that you think these things. So what?

    At the moment they are vaguely contradictory mismash of some what sciency some what mathy sounding statements which make no points and from which you draw no conclutions.

    Unless you are seeking the write dadaist poetry you should give all this direction with your thesis and then show how these points come together to support your conclution.
     
  23. Vkothii Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,674
    So, there are no "conclusions"? Isn't "the universe has a curvature" a conclusion?

    Isn't "potentials evolve continuously, and have a spherical/hyperbolic geometry" a conclusion?

    They might not be conclusions that I've suddenly come to all by myself, though. unlike yourself, who seems to be able to jump to conclusions for lack of anything less boring to do.

    I bet you've managed to form some kind of a thesis, despite the overwhelming pointlessness of it all? I mean, so fucking what??

    You should try to give your comments some direction, then show how you've managed to say anything that's remotely meaningful.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2008

Share This Page