Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 22:13pm UTC, wrote Dear Wang Xiong, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the...

Margriet O'Regan: on 8/7/13 at 15:57pm UTC, wrote Hello Wang from Margriet O'Regan from DownUnder ! I liked your essay very...

Cristinel Stoica: on 8/7/13 at 7:37am UTC, wrote Hi, votes are vanishing again.

Michael Popov: on 8/6/13 at 14:14pm UTC, wrote Dear Wang, My later comment, sorry : When you proposed that 'one day a...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/5/13 at 22:13pm UTC, wrote Dear Wang, We are at the end of this essay contest. In conclusion, at the...

Héctor Gianni: on 8/4/13 at 20:26pm UTC, wrote Dear WANG Xiong : ...

Olaf Dreyer: on 8/4/13 at 15:09pm UTC, wrote Dear Xiong: Nice essay! I think that you are absolutely correct in...

john selye: on 8/1/13 at 22:12pm UTC, wrote Having read so many insightful essays, I am probably not the only one to...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Dear Steve Agnew, Naturally provided VISIBLE realty am not a silly humanly..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

James Putnam: "Light bends because it is accelerating. It accelerates toward an object..." in Black Hole Photographed...

Steve Agnew: "Stringy and loop quantum are the two big contenders, but neither has a..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Robert McEachern: "Lorenzo, The nature of "information" is well understood outside of..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Georgina Woodward: "Steve, Lorraine is writing about a simpler "knowing " rather than the..." in The Nature of Time

Steve Agnew: "Knowing information necessarily means neural action potentials. Atom and..." in The Nature of Time

Douglas Hemmick: "begin{quote} For example, in his chapter on Bell's theorem, he concludes..." in Review of "Foundations of...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.


FQXi FORUM
May 19, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: Bit: from Breaking symmetry of it by WANG Xiong [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author WANG Xiong wrote on Jul. 5, 2013 @ 16:59 GMT
Essay Abstract

It from bit or bit from it? These two point of views can not clearly judged only until we truly understand what is information, what's the essential physical definition of information. What is information? What is its relation to “Reality”? To understand all these, we can gain a lot from the history of energy. Energy is also a very subtle concept and we have spend hundreds or thousands of years to understand its physic origin. Finally, we understand that energy is kind of symmetry, is a consequence of the fact that the laws of physics do not change over time. We argue that the essential of information is also related to symmetry, actually its antithesis symmetry breaking. While symmetry is kind of redundancy which means loss of information, breaking of symmetry gives rise to information. In conclusion, \emph{B}it is from \emph{B}reaking symmetry of it.

Author Bio

WANG Xiong has obtained his B.Sc. majoring in math from the Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China. Currently, he is a research student at City University Hong Kong at the Centre for Chaos and Complex Networks. From undergraduate time, he continue an independent solitary quest for a unified foundation for mathematics and physics.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 5, 2013 @ 21:08 GMT
Wang,

If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, “It’s good to be the king,” is serious about our subject.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 6, 2013 @ 11:24 GMT
Wang,

As of 7-6-13, 2:24 am EST, the rating function for your essay is not available. Sorry I can't help you out right now by rating your essay.

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 02:11 GMT
Anybody know what's wrong?

Thanks

Bookmark and Share


Manuel S Morales replied on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 21:04 GMT
Wang,

I have sent an email requesting that FQXi extend to those of you who had their essay posted on July 5, 2013, be allowed additional days to compensate for the days of not being able to rate these essays.

My experience in conducting the online Tempt Destiny (TD) experiment from 2000 to 2012 gave me an understanding of the complexities involved in administrating an online competition which assures me that the competition will be back up and running soon. Ironically, the inability of not being able to rate the essays correlates with the TD experimental findings, as presented in my essay, which show how the acts of selection are fundamental to our physical existence.

Anyway, I hope that all entrants will be allocated the same opportunity to have their essay rated when they are posted, and if not possible due to technical difficulties, will have their opportunity adjusted accordingly. Best wishes to you with your entry.

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Manuel S Morales replied on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 02:54 GMT
Sorry Wang,

I have received word that no extensions to the final deadline will be made. I will keep this in mind when I get a chance to review your essay later this week.

Best wishes,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jul. 7, 2013 @ 09:00 GMT
Dear WANG Xiong

Correct , can be confirmed is : symmetric (or link) when it be breaking will give rise to information .

And to change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition along with demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the Absolute theory as well as to clarify the issues I mentioned in the essay and to avoid duplicate questions after receiving the opinion of you...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 10:20 GMT
Dear WANG Xiong,

I think you raise a valid point that symmetry breaking ought to give rise to information, after all it gives rise to mass, which is information in itself.

Great approach - well done!

Please take a look at my essay if you have the time.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 01:34 GMT
Dear Antony,

Thanks for your attention of my essay.

I'd like to have a good look at your essay, the abstract is interesting, i will enjoy reading it

Best wishes

Xiong

Bookmark and Share


Antony Ryan replied on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 15:33 GMT
Dear Xiong,

Thanks - I'm still trying to get through them all - there are so many to read, but encouragingly, so many good ones! I think yours is very logical and an excellent approach.

Best wishes,

Antony

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Giacomo Alessiani wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 18:29 GMT
Mr. Wang Xiong,

my name Giacomo Alessiani, congratulations. I really like Your essay.

Interesting, i produced mine, the same night of June 28.

Into it , i used an example based on a flexible straw, to explain my themes,

i think it is really similar to Your example, i mean SIM card (4.2).

But , You are first and I am last in the list :-) :-)

Well, i still working on 'classic shape' formula for quantum phenomena.

Question: it is possible that the symmetry of photons or particles, as source

of bit in nature?

And, can be the Higgs field behind this process ? As provider of both mass and energy ? ( mass= energy)

Thanks and my Best Regards.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 01:45 GMT
Dear Giacomo Alessiani,

Thanks for your attention of my essay.

and I am so glad we share similar idea.

The rating now is unstable and temporary, the good and more important thing is to attract more attention on this direction

I believe we are on the right direction that «Symmetry breaking give rise to information» to unlock the secret of information

It's a great Question: it is possible that the symmetry of photons or particles, as source of bit in nature? but i still have no idea about it...

no doubt that there is a long way to go to finally «We can conjecture that one day a more complete theory should unify all the three basic concepts Matter-Energy-Information. Then we can fully understand what is information, what's its relation with reality, and the ultimate relation of it and bit. »

I enjoy reading your essay and vote 9

Best wishes

Xiong

Bookmark and Share



Chidi Idika wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 18:56 GMT
Dear Wang,

If the bit emerges by breaking symmetry of the it will be correct then to assume that the universal "it" qualifies as the "Higgs field"?

My answer is "yes". And I actually make this assertion in my essay. Here is how it comes to be:

I think of the Noether current simply as a constant (of Peano’s) and in a wave motion idiom as the “phase space” (i.e. “wave...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 01:54 GMT
Dear Chidi,

Thanks for reading my essay

1 the universal "it" qualifies as the "Higgs field"

very interesting idea, at least to mass you may say so, this is it for mass

2 thanks for your nice essay,

to understand wave function we should understand dirac spinor, i think

I enjoy reading your essay

Best wishes

Xiong

Bookmark and Share



eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Jul. 10, 2013 @ 22:30 GMT
Dear Wang,

Excellent essay.

Some questions, please :

What relationship is there between symmetry and duality. Which is the first to appear ?

What are the ultimate components between matter, energy and information?

Thank you for taking a look to my work.

Best regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 02:00 GMT
Dear amazigh mabrouk hannou

Thanks for reading my essay

1 symmetry and duality, i believe symmetry is more basic,

see in geometry algebra, duality(electricity and magnetism) is a kind of symmetry, but for other duality AdS/CFT correspondence,, i don't know

2 What are the ultimate components between matter, energy and information?

really big question, long way to go like in the end of my essay «We can conjecture that one day a more complete theory should unify all the three basic concepts Matter-Energy-Information. Then we can fully understand what is information, what's its relation with reality, and the ultimate relation of it and bit. »

Best wishes

Xiong

Bookmark and Share



Than Tin wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 03:47 GMT
Xiong

You have given a short course on physics and information, bringing together different kinds of relevant strands from both, organizing clearly and logically. It’s a big help, when one is confused about whether the aphorism is “It from Bit” as Wheeler puts it, or “It from Qubit” as one of the contestant puts it.

Now about the langrangian formulations of physics. In the thought-experiment I made in my essay “Analogical Engine”, a simulacrum or a conceptual derivation of “Planck constant” was obtained. I think the arguments I made have fixed the meaning of the Planck constant as an arbiter of what is real and what is not.

Can you relate to any of those arguments?

My essay can be found at this link http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1865.

Best wishes

Than Tin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Edwin Eugene Klingman wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 05:53 GMT
Dear Wang,

Thank you for your essay. Yours is the most original suggestion in over 175 essays. It is compatible with the explanation I present in my essay, but is a higher level of abstraction. I think your idea has the potential to clarify the current confusion about information which is so completely revealed by the entries in this contest.

I will give you a score designed to keep you on top so that more people will see your essay.

Congratulations, and thank you for writing your essay!

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 07:12 GMT
Hello Xiong,

I am glad to welcome you again in the contest! World Competition FQXi - this is a competition for new ideas in fundamental science. You have presented a lovely, clear and distinct, as the Rene Descartes, essays and profound ideas. It is extremely important conclusions: «Symmetry breaking give rise to information» and «We can conjecture that one day a more complete theory should unify all the three basic concepts Matter-Energy-Information. Then we can fully understand what is information, what's its relation with reality, and the ultimate relation of it and bit. "...

"Great Trinity" (Matter-Energy-Information) to open all its secrets for physicists and lyrics. It remains only to deal with the deep structure of matter, energy, and how to understand what is «in-forma». In the words of Nobel Laureate David Gross, we need to construction a «general framework structure». I'll add: with the ontological justification. That "general framework structure" will give the opportunity to see the fundamental "symmetry" and "asymmetry" of "the self-aware Universe" (Basil Nalimov), "grab" the nature of the information.

I invite you to comment on my essay and fairly priced. I believe that we are close to you in our search for theSpirit and walk in the same direction: you as a physicist, and I as a lyricist.

Good luck in the contest and best wishes,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 03:09 GMT
Dear Vladimir Rogozhin,

Thanks~

we share the same taste and i enjoy reading your essay very much and gave a high rate

the great beauty of unification is ahead of us, from physics and from lyric

Good luck and best wishes,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share



Michel Planat wrote on Jul. 11, 2013 @ 08:37 GMT
Dear Wang,

You develop the far reaching idea that information is created by symmetry breaking.

I found at least one relevant paper for this issue "Information Originates in Symmetry Breaking"

by John Collier, Symmetry: Science and Culture 7 (1996): 247-256, available on line.

At first sight, this "bit from it" perspective seems to contradict Wheeler's observer participancy

when symmetry breaking ideas are implemented in the quantum domain. This aspect is developed

at length in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness
/

Pierre Curie (the father of piezoelectricity and thus of modern quartz cristal clocks) explained to us

that "symmetry breaking has the following role: for the occurrence of a phenomenon in a medium, the original

symmetry group of the medium must be lowered (broken, in today's terminology) to the symmetry group of the

phenomenon (or to a subgroup of the phenomenon's symmetry group) by the action of some cause."

I still plagiarize the encyclopedia

"Goldstone theorem. In the case of a global continuous symmetry, massless bosons (known as “Goldstone bosons”)

appear with the spontaneous breakdown of the symmetry according to a theorem first stated by J. Goldstone in 1960.

The presence of these massless bosons, first seen as a serious problem since no particles of the sort had been

observed in the context considered, was in fact the basis for the solution — by means of the so-called Higgs mechanism"

Now I switch to my own essay which claims that contextuality has to do with Grothendieck's drawings: they correspond to

subgroups of the free group on two generators. Thus your approach does not contradict mine and the "it from bit"

perspective. I am happy of that.

Thank you and best wishes.

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 03:15 GMT
Dear Michel

Information Originates in Symmetry Breaking

yes, i have no doubt about this, it's important to develop a full theory to study symmetry and symmetry breaking and relation with information, entropy, thermodynamics, quantum gravity,

put all these together , we then could understand what is information

Very glad, you understand that"

Thus your approach does not contradict mine and the "it from bit"

Regards

Wang

Bookmark and Share



Chidi Idika wrote on Jul. 13, 2013 @ 08:05 GMT
Dear Wang,

On a second thought, your response above to my question of 10th July underrates the power of your postulate.

Going strictly by your thesis information (the bit) emerges from the it via symmetry breaking. Now by definition information is not merely about mass. Or is it? Consider that to qualify as the essential "it" that gives rise to ALL PHYSICAL INFORMATION your "it" should be more appropriately a wavefunction by any other name be it "Higgs field", phase space, uncertainty, big bang etc.

You say that to understand wave function we should understand dirac spinor. The little i do understand is that Dirac's equation basically renders Schrodinger's equation relativistic. Now if you can please look again at my equation (1) it presumes Dirac's electron-positron pair and then at equation (3) we are able to get easily the Hartree approximation of the n-body wavefunction of the electron. Seems to me that if you read between the lines you can actually see hints of your dirac spinor.

My essay may not be elegant but the data it presents should convince you to face up to the power of your postulate. And, Wang, don't be afraid to push the boundaries,it is what we are here for.

And please remember to actually log in as community and rate me. Why not!

Sincerely,

Chidi

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 13, 2013 @ 14:18 GMT
Hello Wang,

I like your essay. I also like the way you describe information as: general, technical and physic. On the general way of describing information, will you say "existence" is information, so that existence/non-existence becomes a binary choice (Bit) that can be represented technically as 0 and 1?

Also, can a line with length and zero breadth carry information?

If you agree that existence/non-existence can be a Bit, check my essay here and give me your comments.

Good luck in the contest.

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 07:38 GMT
Dear Wang,

I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

Regards and good luck in the contest,

Sreenath BN.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 08:58 GMT
Hello Xiong,

I am pleased to read your essay. Great, deep new ideas, important conclusions: «We argue that the essential of information is also related to symmetry, actually its antithesis symmetry breaking.» .. «We can conjecture that one day a more complete theory should unify all the three basic concepts Matter-Energy-Information. Then we can fully understand what is information, what's its relation with reality, and the ultimate relation of it and bit. »

Indeed, it is an in-depth understanding of the new, a new interpretation and representation of the concept "matter", "energy", "information", "symmetry", "asymmetry". Need a new understanding of "the great trinity" in the foundation of the Universe. Assistant there can be no traditional knowledge, in particular, a modern interpretation of the "magic matrix Lo Shu" (Chinese Simplified. 洛 书, pinyin: luò shū) «magic square is a 3 × 3". Physics and philosophy have go together, hand in hand, helping each other, as taught by A.Einstein: "At the present time, a physicist has to deal with philosophic problems to a much greater extent than physicists of the previous generations had to deal with" and J. Wheeler "Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers". Please see also my essay.

Luck in the contest and best wishes,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


JOSEPH E BRENNER wrote on Jul. 14, 2013 @ 13:39 GMT
Hello, Xiong,

I also liked your very condensation of physics with the problem of information. However, I feel your analysis is weak at one critical point, where you say "If the physical system is invariant. What if the physical system is not invariant? And where did the system comes from in the first place? Please look at my essay on this, if your would. I am sending you an E-mail on a related matter.

Best regards,

Joseph

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


KoGuan Leo wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 05:25 GMT
Dear Wang,

Excellent job! I rated your essay accordingly. The issue now how the symmetry was broken? By what action? How? If I may posit that KQID theory can illuminate this symmetry breaking event. If I may quote a full version of my essay Child of Qbit in time:

Wang Yaming's one bit

Fu Xi heaven triagram ☰ as the element that are creative, innovative and proactive...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Thomas Howard Ray wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 12:17 GMT
Dear Wang,

Very nice! I think you will find that your essay and mine precisely agree on the important issue of symmetry breaking (although I use the topological term "orientability" for this phenomenon).

Indeed, there is no life without it. I like your concise statement: "Symmetry means you can not tell the different, under some change, according to a particular observation. This means information is lost." Or it means that no information is instantiated -- or differentiated -- until, as Brouwer put it, one performs the act of a "move of time." In a 2007 conference paper I conjectured that time, energy and information are identical phenomena.

May your tribe increase. Best wishes in the competition.

Tom

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 10:45 GMT
Hello Xiong,

As the contest in Wheeler's honor draws to a close, leaving for the moment considerations of rating and prize money, and knowing we cannot all agree on whether 'it' comes from 'bit' or otherwise or even what 'it' and 'bit' mean, and as we may not be able to read all essays, though we should try, I pose the following 4 simple questions and will rate you accordingly before July 31 when I will be revisiting your blog.

"If you wake up one morning and dip your hand in your pocket and 'detect' a million dollars, then on your way back from work, you dip your hand again and find that there is nothing there…

1) Have you 'elicited' an information in the latter case?

2) If you did not 'participate' by putting your 'detector' hand in your pocket, can you 'elicit' information?

3) If the information is provided by the presence of the crisp notes ('its') you found in your pocket, can the absence of the notes, being an 'immaterial source' convey information?

Finally, leaving for the moment what the terms mean and whether or not they can be discretely expressed in the way spin information is discretely expressed, e.g. by electrons

4) Can the existence/non-existence of an 'it' be a binary choice, representable by 0 and 1?"

Answers can be in binary form for brevity, i.e. YES = 1, NO = 0, e.g. 0-1-0-1.

Best regards,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Richard N. Shand wrote on Jul. 18, 2013 @ 01:13 GMT
Xiong,

Thank you for your explanation of how information arises from symmetry breaking. Your exposition was very clear.

The emergence of information can also be explained as the loss of quantum entanglement, which is time-symmetric in Lagrangian mechanics. Whereas you see a Matter-Energy-Information trinity, I formulate a duality between momentum/energy and position/time symmetry. (See my essay "A Complex Conjugate Bit and It".)

You have given me food for thought. My theory is also a trinity if the observer is included as a third subsystem in the creation of information.

Best wishes,

Richard

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 18, 2013 @ 12:55 GMT
Dear Richard,

the observer is quite an important concept to information...

if included as a third subsystem in the creation of information.

this is a very important issue, which deserve more future research

Thanks for your nice essay, i rated it with high mark

Regards,

Xiong

Bookmark and Share



Yuri Danoyan wrote on Jul. 18, 2013 @ 15:48 GMT
Dear Wang

You are right.

Symmetry as a silence.

Breaking of symmetry mean birth of information

Regards

Yuri

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jul. 19, 2013 @ 15:29 GMT
Wang,

I commend your excellent essay, with a well considered proposition well argued and in a nice writing style.

I also thank you for your very kind comments on mine.

I agree with you that "the fundamental concepts of physics are matter, space-time, and motion" but firmly disagree with using 'partial time derivatives' as I've found they are the root of all nonsense in physics. If they are replaced with a real physical mechanism for transforms we can then recover linearity and full coherence. Do see my previous essays (both 7th in the Community rating lists). A simple change of speed by inertial system v from propagation speed c in one frame to c in the other implements the Doppler shift (contraction/ dilation) and recovers all laws of physics. A similar observer acceleration ensures REAL findings are then also co-variant.

I'd be delighted to answer any queries on the above which will not be at first intuitive. I confirm your good work has earned a high mark from me, and wish you luck in the final 'roller coaster' ride home.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sergio Miguel wrote on Jul. 20, 2013 @ 00:03 GMT
Dear Wang,

Your idea about "symmetry breaking gives rise to information" it is very interesting.I give you a good rate. However, you know better than me that conservation of quantities is a key element to calculate and predict the evolution of a physical system. So, at the same time, symmetries give us a lot of information because conservation comes from symmetry. Have you thought about it?

Best regards,

Sergio

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Member Howard N Barnum wrote on Jul. 22, 2013 @ 22:46 GMT
Interesting idea that symmetry breaking is related to increase or coming into existence of information. Certainly symmetry breaking in modern field-theoretic accounts of the early universe is intimately related with the coming into existence of most of the structured content of the universe.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author WANG Xiong replied on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 14:24 GMT
Dear Howard Barnum

Certainly symmetry breaking in modern field-theoretic accounts of the early universe is intimately related with the coming into existence of most of the structured content of the universe.

Yes,

very awesome to ask who/what break the symmetry at the very beginning? and which determine most of the structured content of the universe today...

Thanks for your comments

Regards

Bookmark and Share



Than Tin wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 22:26 GMT
Hello Wang

Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/19
65/feynman-lecture.html)

said: “It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the relationship. And example of this is the Schrodinger equation and the Heisenberg formulation of quantum mechanics. I don’t know why that is – it remains a mystery, but it was something I learned from experience. There is always another way to say the same thing that doesn’t look at all like the way you said it before. I don’t know what the reason for this is. I think it is somehow a representation of the simplicity of nature.”

I too believe in the simplicity of nature, and I am glad that Richard Feynman, a Nobel-winning famous physicist, also believe in the same thing I do, but I had come to my belief long before I knew about that particular statement.

The belief that “Nature is simple” is however being expressed differently in my essay “Analogical Engine” linked to http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1865 .

Specifically though, I said “Planck constant is the Mother of All Dualities” and I put it schematically as: wave-particle ~ quantum-classical ~ gene-protein ~ analogy- reasoning ~ linear-nonlinear ~ connected-notconnected ~ computable-notcomputable ~ mind-body ~ Bit-It ~ variation-selection ~ freedom-determinism … and so on.

Taken two at a time, it can be read as “what quantum is to classical” is similar to (~) “what wave is to particle.” You can choose any two from among the multitudes that can be found in our discourses.

I could have put Schrodinger wave ontology-Heisenberg particle ontology duality in the list had it comes to my mind!

Since “Nature is Analogical”, we are free to probe nature in so many different ways. And you have touched some corners of it.

Good Luck,

Than Tin

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Christian Corda wrote on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 13:00 GMT
Dear WANG Xiong,

I have read your pretty Essay as I promised in my Essay page. The idea that breaking of symmetry gives rise to information is very intriguing and the example of the SIM card of iPhone is both simple and enlightening. Do you think that your conclusion "Bit is from breaking symmetry of it" could be conciliated with my statement "Information tells physics how to work. Physics tells information how to flow"? In any case, I strongly appreciate your Essay and, in turn, I will give you an high score.

Cheers,

Ch.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Don Limuti wrote on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 14:19 GMT
Dear Wang,

Very good presentation. Clearly links symmetry and information and brings it to the forefront. If I may add it links directly to complexity via your Sim Card example. I am a visual thinker and I appreciate your making information visual.

Worthwhile essay to which I give a good mark.

Don Limuti

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 09:49 GMT
Dear Wang Xiong,

We humans are like children, we always keep asking WHY and HOW.

The origin of creation of information by symmetry breaking may also pose us the question What was the origin of the FIRST symmetry breaking ? Accepting the idea means that the ORIGIN was symmetrical, and something had to happen to CAUSE this event.

This kind of thinking is indeed causal and deterministic, if we agree that the origin of our causal universe has a non-causal base and accept the possibility that causal universes cannot be infinite, then the problem is partly solved.

Infinities exist in our consciousness but not in the materialistic universe, singularities have no dimensions, no CAUSAL dimensions, so they are not existing in the causal universes. But they exist in our minds .

In my essay : "THE QUEST FOR THE PRIMAL SEQUENCE" I try to explain these perceptions, which might also be the origin of the symmetry breaking.

I hope that you can find some time to read/comment and also rate my contribution. I am not a professional scientist, it is more the philosophical side of the latest results of physics that I try to interpret.

I respect your essay and give it a good rating.

best regards

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Member Carlo Rovelli wrote on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 16:52 GMT
The fact that a broken symmetry gives rise to some additional information does not imply that information is broken symmetry. For instance, sometime is the opposite: there is no information in a random pattern, but one with symmetries allows us to code information. Physical laws give us information about reality by indicating patterns of symmetries. No?

carlo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Patrick Tonin wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 16:47 GMT
Hi Xiong,

I agree with you.

In my essay I say that "existence" is a disruption in the standard pattern of alternating black and white CBUs. (you will see what I call a CBU if you read my essay). And for me, existence and information is the same thing.

If you have the time to read my essay, it would be great to have your feedback. If you like it, you can read more here.

I enjoyed reading yours,

Cheers,

Patrick

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


john stephan selye wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 22:12 GMT
Having read so many insightful essays, I am probably not the only one to find that my views have crystallized, and that I can now move forward with growing confidence. I cannot exactly say who in the course of the competition was most inspiring - probably it was the continuous back and forth between so many of us. In this case, we should all be grateful to each other.

If I may, I'd like to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Member Olaf Dreyer wrote on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 15:09 GMT
Dear Xiong:

Nice essay!

I think that you are absolutely correct in pointing out that symmetry breaking and information are related. In fact your point can be made clearly using Shannon's original definition of information. The information produced by cutting off one side of the square SIM card would then be 2 bits. In my essay I focused not only on the symmetry breaking itself but more on the dynamical aspect of generalized rigidity in an attempt to provide an internal definition of information.

All the best in the contest.

Cheers

Olaf

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Héctor Daniel Gianni wrote on Aug. 4, 2013 @ 20:26 GMT
Dear WANG Xiong :

I am an old physician and I don’t know nothing of mathematics and almost nothing of physics. maybe you would be interested in my essay over a subject which after the common people, physic discipline is the one that uses more than any other, the so called...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 5, 2013 @ 22:13 GMT
Dear Wang,

We are at the end of this essay contest.

In conclusion, at the question to know if Information is more fundamental than Matter, there is a good reason to answer that Matter is made of an amazing mixture of eInfo and eEnergy, at the same time.

Matter is thus eInfo made with eEnergy rather than answer it is made with eEnergy and eInfo ; because eInfo is eEnergy, and the one does not go without the other one.

eEnergy and eInfo are the two basic Principles of the eUniverse. Nothing can exist if it is not eEnergy, and any object is eInfo, and therefore eEnergy.

And consequently our eReality is eInfo made with eEnergy. And the final verdict is : eReality is virtual, and virtuality is our fundamental eReality.

Good luck to the winners,

And see you soon, with good news on this topic, and the Theory of Everything.

Amazigh H.

I rated your essay.

Please visit My essay.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michael Alexeevich Popov wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 14:14 GMT
Dear Wang,

My later comment, sorry :

When you proposed that 'one day a more complete theory should unify all the three basic concepts Matter-Energy-Information ' , you probably made an assumption that the law of information conservation in future physics is quite possible.

But, sceptics may suggest that in comparison with energy conservation law , Hawking -like law of information conservation (The information remains firmly in our universe. Thus, if you jump into a black hole, your mass energy will be returned to our universe but in a mangled form which contains the information about what you were like but in a state where it can not be easily recognized.( Hawking, 2005 )) can be violated ? Moreover, speaking exactly, there is no such thing as physical measurement of bits of thermal information or generally - universal information in physics.

Best

Michael

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristinel Stoica wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 07:37 GMT
Hi, votes are vanishing again.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Margriet Anne O'Regan wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 15:57 GMT
Hello Wang from Margriet O'Regan from DownUnder !

I liked your essay very much; you asked all the right questions - & then at the end you say 'one day a more complete theory should unify all the three basic concepts Matter-Energy-Information. Then we can fully understand what is information, what's its relation with reality, and the ultimate relation of it and bit'.

As it is so late in the community rating's time frame I will not parry words ! In my essay I claim to have discovered 'information's' true identity & I further claim that knowledge of information's identity most certainly does enable us to come to a much better understanding of reality !!

I was fascinated by the fact that you are able to list fifteen different kinds!!! Although I don't discuss 'energy' in my essay my findings in relation to my understanding of 'information' (see my essay) has enabled me to understand exactly what energy is too. But that's for another time.

Best regards

Margriet.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 22:13 GMT
Dear Wang Xiong,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-
V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.