Entropy in everyday life

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by wegs, May 20, 2019.

  1. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,452
    The orderly shuffle itself produces a pattern, even as it appears random at first. Ordered chronology always produces a pattern.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
    How so?
    An ace has the same surface area as a ten, yet the ten is slightly more massive because of the amount of ink.
    1] If you think the ink doesn't matter to mass, I refer you back to post 90, where I mentioned a magician who has tuned his sense of touch so well, he can tell the difference between cards by their weight.
    2] If you think the extra ink adds greater surface area, it won't make a difference.

    For every cubic unit of ink, the mass will increase by the cube, whereas the surface area will only increase linearly (and along its thinnest dimension at that - which is not the dimension encountering air resistance).
    So, for every doubling of ink, the mass-to-surface-area ratio inrease by four.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
    False.


    Now you weren't able to provide a foundation for your assertion, nonetheless, I will happily provide you with a foundation for its refutation.

    As far as we know the digits of pi are random; there is no discernible pattern to them.
    I take digits 2 through 102 and shuffle then in an orderly fashion that exactly reverses them.

    If your unfounded assertion, above were true, then they would now form a pattern, which would mean we could deduce the digits of pi. But that directly contradicts the initial statement that, as far as we can determine, the digits of pi form no pattern.

    So, your assertion (which, again, is simply your belief, baseless) is shown false-by-contradiction.



    Again, you are too quick to respond.

    The cards have equal surface area, but not equal mass. So Galileo's balls don't apply.

    I forbid you from invoking Galilean Principles that you don't understand.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,452
    Would you say that is true for dropping a hammer and a feather? You think the hammer's greater surface area equalizes the difference in weight?

    Proof of Gallileo's Law of Falling bodieson the Moon
    Apollo Astronaut demonstrates that a feather and a hammer fall at exactly the same rate in the vacuum of space on the Moon, despite the difference in weight. This confirms Gallileo's Law of Falling Bodies.

    p.s. there is a difference between weighing the mass of two different massive bodies and letting them fall.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
  8. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,603
    I'm pretty skeptical about your magician's claim.
     
    Write4U likes this.
  9. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
     
  10. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,257
    Ok. But you have to fix an order even if you do this each time.

    You don't really change the definition, you just fix a different order--a "shuffled" one. But each time you shuffle the deck then look at it, you have a different "message", in information-speak. You're free to compare any two messages, or any three, or whatever you like.

    The entropy is where, in this deck of cards + shuffling operation? What is this "information entropy" and what's the connection to subjective expectation?

    Note, you could build a card-shuffling machine and a card-reading machine, but you can't avoid this expectation thing--what you expect the reading machine to output, say.
     
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,452
    So they should fall at the same rate?
     
  13. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,603
  14. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,257
    And it can't be . . .
     
  15. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,452
    Two points do not make a pattern. The minimum requirement is 3 points.

    And Pi itself is a pattern, it is a non-repeating pattern....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    That does not make it random!
    On the contrary, it is a universal constant!
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2019
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
    Start your own thread please.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  17. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
    The number of the card is how many spots are on it. So, pretty much higher numbers = more ink.
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
    I can't tell if you're drunk or being deliberately obtuse.

    That's one hundred digits.


    Either way, let me know if you start taking this discussion seriously.
     
  19. wegs Matter & Pixie Dust Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,932
    Okay. In reading the last few posts, what I was thinking of re: the shuffled cards example, is the energy of the cards shuffler - the energy / heat produced in causing the cards to become disorderly to begin with. The cards being messy or shuffled multiple times, while they appear disordered, don't have anything to do with entropy, by themselves. No matter how often they get jumbled up. I'm interested in the measurement of disorder, from that perspective.

    So, can we discuss that? Sorry. :-}
     
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
    If I decide that the information I'm interested in is the numerical order as printed on the cards, then a fresh deck contains zero information. Before even opening the package I know exactly where every single card will be. I think you'll agree with this.

    If, on the other hand, I decide that the information I'm interested in is the weight of each card, then a fresh deck contains at least some information. I do not know exactly where every single card will be in a fresh deck. I could not predict where every card (by increasing weight) will be in the fresh deck. I would have to measure them, thereby recording information.

    The point is: by changing what I - a human observer - decide is the most ordered state, the value of information entropy changes. So, in this sense, the amount of entropy is not an objective property of a system; it is dependent on what I - subjectively, arbitrarily and fickl-ly - decide at any given time is of interest to me.
     
  21. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,264
    Yeah. We're sortta drifting into information entropy, as distinct from thermodynamics entropy.

    I used cards as a concrete example, easy to see an order to them - like having 52 molecules of gas in a room.
     
    exchemist likes this.
  22. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,452
    And who gets the benefit of being able to weigh cards? The person holding the cards and seeing their value, or the person across the table who cannot hold your cards? The dealer?

    This makes no sense at all. A visual clue?... OK. Weight in milligrams?...Naaah.
     
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,452
    Seems you started this subject of weighty playing cards. Now you demand I start a new thread on a subject you introduced?
     

Share This Page