Write4U
Valued Senior Member
Of course, if you train it properly it knows how to vibrate correctly.Yep. For instance, I had to have a word with my guitar string demon this morning.
After which, the bloody strings still need tuning.
Of course, if you train it properly it knows how to vibrate correctly.Yep. For instance, I had to have a word with my guitar string demon this morning.
After which, the bloody strings still need tuning.
When you turn the "start" button, does your car start from memory?This morning, I had to torque to my car.
I don't think "sum over histories" means what you think it means. Perhaps google it?The computer you're using is restricting the flow of electrons, as little units of charge, by controlling the direction and sequence for the small charges, using "gates", so a digital chip is a big "sum over histories" for these charges.
No. While a computer is operating, electrical currents are flowing constantly, and waste heat is constantly being produced. It doesn't matter whether a memory bit is being stored or erased; heat is produced in both processes.Inversely, heat is "erased" when information is stored.
The heat isn't erased. The cooling mechanisms of a chip just put the chip in better contact with a cold reservoir, into which waste heat can be dumped. That prevents the chip overheating.To solve the conundrum, electronics cools the chips down to erase the heat.
It depends on how you are defining the "information content" of an electron-slit system. How are you doing that, exactly?What about a pair of slits with electron deBroglie wavelength dimensions? If you block one, is that an erasure of information?
What system are you considering? What is included in the system, and what is outside it?If you measure how many electrons go through one of the two, is that an erasure of information?
Given a charge q, in a digital computer, which transistor is it flowing through or which capacitor is it in? How many charges in a digital circuit end up flowing to a ground connection? Each charge has a lifetime, and a path through the circuit or part of the circuit. It's called electronics.I don't think "sum over histories" means what you think it means. Perhaps google it?
That contradicts Bennet and Landauer. Storing a bit of information is less costly than erasing it. However in most computers, the energy levels exceed Landauer's limit. Which is an efficiency problem; most computers waste energy.No. While a computer is operating, electrical currents are flowing constantly, and waste heat is constantly being produced. It doesn't matter whether a memory bit is being stored or erased; heat is produced in both processes.
Yes it is. Heat is part of a computational system; if it gets actively pumped to the environment, i.e. dissipated, that constitutes erasure (of a resource). Landauer's limit is the minimum energy needed to erase a unit of information. This is only apparent in a computer which is computationally efficient; it can be shown that not erasing bits, but just keeping them somewhere means there is no waste heat. This isn't usually a practical design consideration--computers don't have the room, so information is erased and it costs more to do that than it does to keep it stored (i.e. it costs less to keep a transistor on once it is on, than it does to turn it off and dissipate the heat).The heat isn't erased.
How would you do it?It depends on how you are defining the "information content" of an electron-slit system. How are you doing that, exactly?
What he means there is heat doesn't constitute an information resource, it's not information as far as the computer is concerned, but it is as far as physics is concerned.Charles Bennett said:Landauer's principle, often regarded as the foundation of the thermodynamics of information processing, holds that any logically irreversible manipulation of information, such as the erasure of a bit or the merging of two computation paths, must be accompanied by a corresponding entropy increase in non-information bearing degrees of freedom of the information processing apparatus or its environment.
https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0210005Conversely, it is generally accepted that any logically reversible transformation of information can in principle be accomplished by an appropriate physical mechanism operating in a thermodynamically reversible fashion. These notions have sometimes been criticized either as being false, or as being trivial and obvious, and therefore unhelpful for purposes such as explaining why Maxwell's Demon cannot violate the Second Law of thermodynamics. Here I attempt to refute some of the arguments against Landauer's principle, while arguing that although in a sense it is indeed a trivial and obvious restatement of the Second Law, it still has considerable pedagogic and explanatory power, especially in the context of other influential ideas in 19'th and 20'th century physics.
--https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.07436.pdfWe endeavour to illustrate the physical relevance of the Landauer principle applying it to different important issues concerning the theory of gravitation. We shall first analyze, in the context of general relativity, the consequences derived from the fact, implied by Landauer principle, that information has mass. Next, we shall analyze the role played by the Landauer principle in order to understand why different congruences of observers provide very different physical descriptions of the same spacetime. Finally, we shall apply the Landauer principle to the problem of gravitational radiation. We shall see that the fact that gravitational radiation is an irreversible process entailing dissipation, is a straightforward consequence of the Landauer principle and of the fact that gravitational radiation conveys information.. . .
That would depend on the particular type of "information" I was interested in, I suppose.How would you do it?
Well, let's iook at what's available. The electron beam has an energy eV; the two slits have a width and a depth; the screen is positioned an appropriate distance from the slits.That would depend on the particular type of "information" I was interested in, I suppose.
Yes. We know now after doing an analysis of the radiation that the best theory is it originated from a universal event.We know one thing. The original source was small and that is not just a deduction from an expanding universe.
The CMB wavelengths are missing very low frequencies (long wavelengths)which is an indication of small size.
I agree and even then my understanding but a best guess by my brain. However the simpler the code the more precise the guess. This is why the fundamental mathematics of the universe allows us to study, understand, and project the future based on the initial coded message. i.e. 1 + 1 = ...........? (2) always.That is obvious about the words I'm sending, in this post. You understand them because of the protocol and an agreed encoding namely the English language. Right?