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.

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

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

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Georgina Woodward: on 1/20/19 at 23:41pm UTC, wrote Thank you for explaining your use of "singularity'. Rather than consider...

Georgina Woodward: on 1/20/19 at 23:19pm UTC, wrote Wilhelmus! thank you. There are some points of similarity that I can see in...

Wilhelmus de Wilde: on 1/20/19 at 14:30pm UTC, wrote Dear Georgina, Thank you for your reactions. I will try to answer point by...

Kuyukov Vitaly: on 1/20/19 at 13:02pm UTC, wrote My idea. Perhaps time can be expressed as [equation] Where S is the...

Kuyukov Vitaly: on 1/20/19 at 12:34pm UTC, wrote perhaps time is not just an additional dimension to space-time, but arises...

Georgina Woodward: on 1/20/19 at 0:49am UTC, wrote Wilhelmus, I don't like singularities. They seem to me to be theoretical in...

Georgina Woodward: on 1/19/19 at 23:02pm UTC, wrote Hi Wilhelmus, kind regards.

Georgina Woodward: on 1/19/19 at 22:56pm UTC, wrote Uni-temporal Now, the temporal expression for the configuration of the ...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Dear Anonymous, All objects have always had a VISIBLE surface. Joe..." in Thermo-Demonics

Steve Dufourny: "I saw this feigenbaum constant and the correlated fractal.It is very..." in YouTube Video Lectures:...

logan grace: "We use all professional equipments to work for our customer and make the..." in YouTube Video Lectures:...

Giulio Prisco: "Very interesting! I didn't know that the gravitational wave memory effect..." in Gravity's Residue

Steve Dufourny: "Hi all, Mr Prusis,I have difficulties to accept that time is..." in The Nature of Time

Zeeya Merali: "Bumping this thread to remind people that the deadline for the Information..." in Information as Fuel — A...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Thermo-Demonics

Ilgaitis Prusis: "To Erick, Georgina and all. Now I read your discussion about reversibility..." in The Nature of Time

RECENT ARTICLES

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.

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

Constructing a Theory of Life
An all-encompassing framework of physics could help to explain the evolution of consciousness, intelligence, and free will.

FQXi BLOGS
March 19, 2019

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Defining Information [refresh]

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Jan. 8, 2014 @ 18:10 GMT
Ok, so I'm a little out of synch in terms of blogging, and technically this should have been the first post about FQXi's Physics of Information meeting, but hey, causality's indefinite at the fundamental level, right?

Anyway, the first panel discussion on Monday addressed "Perspectives on Information in its many forms" and Max Tegmark asked participants to each give a one sentence definition of what information *is*. Enjoy:

Alex Vilenkin: Indexical information is information an observer has about himself.

Carlo Rovelli: The notion of information useful in physics is Shannon Relative Information between two systems.

Fred Adams: Information is a MEASURE of the CONTENT of a signal or structure.

Giulio Tononi: Integrated Information is how a system or mechanism constrains its past and its future.

Jos Uffink: Fisher Information measures how easily distinguishable different probability distributions are by statistical inference.

Kevin Knuth: “Information is that which constrains our beliefs.” – Ariel Caticha

Luis Garay: Horizon Entropy counts microstates of the black hole.

Marcelo Gleiser: Knowledge is meaningful information.

Matt Pusey: The information of X is the length (in bits) of the shortest program to generate X.

Olimpia Lombardi: The concept of information deserves a pluralist interpretation.

Steve Giddings: Quantum information is a characteristic of quantum-mechanical systems or subsystems - corresponding to the different possible states that they may realize - that is conserved for a closed system under quantum-mechanical evolution and can be transferred between subsystems of a larger quantum system.

Wayne Myrvold: Information is the change of belief state that occurs when an agent learns something new.

this post has been edited by the forum administrator

report post as inappropriate

Lorraine Ford wrote on Jan. 9, 2014 @ 14:26 GMT
Re Alex Vilenkin "Indexical information is information an observer has about himself.":

So how would you label information an observer has about the rest of reality? If you add the 2 types of partial information together do you get a whole? Isn't an observer, in essence, a subject?

Re Kevin Knuth "Information is that which constrains our beliefs. - Ariel Caticha":

Presumably our beliefs are themselves formed by "information", which may be "true" or "false" - we can't always tell.

Re Marcelo Gleiser "Knowledge is meaningful information.":

Surely information is subjective experience? The numbers letters and squiggles on the pages of an unread textbook or computer screen REPRESENT information, but actual meaningful information requires subjective experience i.e. it requires a subject to be able to read and understand the squiggles.

Re Wayne Myrvold "Information is the change of belief state that occurs when an agent learns something new.":

That "something new" might be true or false, you can't always tell. If a particle could be considered to be an agent, presumably this would be the simplest possible case of the apprehension of information ; but if the agent were complex (i.e. a living thing composed of particles) the apprehension of information would be more complex, allowing "true" and "false" information?

report post as inappropriate

John Brodix Merryman wrote on Jan. 16, 2014 @ 01:22 GMT
What? No fuss about the next essay contest??? How Should Humanity Steer the Future?

report post as inappropriate

Pentcho Valev replied on Jan. 16, 2014 @ 08:46 GMT
"What? No fuss about the next essay contest??? How Should Humanity Steer the Future?"

Physics is dead and FQXi are going to replace it with information, free will, ethics, magic, black magic perhaps, humanitarianism, futurism. The process is irreversible - why should there be any fuss?

Pentcho Valev

report post as inappropriate

Akinbo Ojo replied on Jan. 16, 2014 @ 09:10 GMT
I was taken aback by the essay contest title as well. We are not politicians or sociologists. I was similarly taken aback by the title of the 2013 contest though I confess not as much as this time, however some essays relevant to physics still managed to come forth. I think with some imagination one should give it a try. But I think for the 2015 the community should have a say or suggestions on the essay topic. I think Armin Shirazi and someone else made some more relevant suggestions on topics.

Akinbo

report post as inappropriate

Don C Foster replied on Jan. 11, 2019 @ 20:57 GMT
We are now in the vicinity of January 11th 2019. The essay contest page says "Stay tuned ... FQXi will be announcing its new Contest before the end of the year!" I have been checking it since November. Que pasa?

report post as inappropriate

Eckard Blumschein wrote on Jan. 16, 2014 @ 18:38 GMT
Don't forget, we have to forget at least 99,999% of the information on structures we receive via eyes and ears during our lifetime. Too much information is a burden.

report post as inappropriate

Robert H McEachern replied on Jan. 16, 2014 @ 23:13 GMT
Eckard,

Actually, about 99.99999999999% of the information content of light is lost, before it ever reaches the optic nerve. An input bandwidth of 2.5x1014 Hz is reduced down to just 10 Hz!

Rob McEachern

report post as inappropriate

John Brodix Merryman replied on Jan. 17, 2014 @ 00:40 GMT
Knowledge is information. Wisdom is in the editing.

report post as inappropriate

Plato Hagel wrote on Jan. 17, 2014 @ 19:48 GMT
Wouldn't information lie at the heart of what energy/matter begins as it forms as an emergent property of what we as consciousness use? In this way it begins as a asymmetrical expression from a state of symmetry?

One might say that energy valuation is determinant of an aspect and use of that consciousness? An energy level?

this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate

Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Jan. 18, 2019 @ 10:07 GMT
INFORMATION:

The through a conscious agent observed difference between two past space/time locations/moments.

The NOW cannot yet be compared because the “input” of the “data” is not yet accomplished by consciousness. (The NOW is still non-existing until observed)

So, ALL information is an emerging phenomenon inside an emerged reality.

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Jan. 18, 2019 @ 22:23 GMT
Wilhelmus, I like your "The NOW cannot yet be compared because the “input” of the “data” is not yet accomplished by consciousness. (The NOW is still non-existing until observed)" W d W.

Though I would add .."still non-existing," as far as any observer is concerned, "until observed" (and no longer The Now).

But your 'the Now' is different from my 'uni-temporal Now'. Your 'total simultaneity is different from the simultaneity of my uni-temporal Now and I'm not sure if 'the Now' you mention is related to the 'eternal Now moments' you have talked about elsewhere. Slices of timeless simultaneity?

I wish we were 'on the same page'. I can see some overlap but also big differences in our explanations.

this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate

Anonymous replied on Jan. 19, 2019 @ 10:21 GMT
Hi Georgina,

Good to meet again...(in this past)

Your "uni temporal now" implicates to my understanding that NOW can be at crossing point of several "flows"(lines) of time, each with its own reference of passing. The relative stationary location of a conscious agent is his reference point (you always experience the world move and the I in a non-moving point). In essence a non-moving...

view entire post

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Jan. 19, 2019 @ 22:56 GMT
Uni-temporal Now, the temporal expression for the configuration of the existing material/physical universe; The same time everywhere. Very different from your 'total simultaneity',"ALL crossing points of ALL time-lines are assembled in a timeless and space less “point”.WdW. It is hard for me to imagine and comprehend what that means. I understand the words but not what the construct is. Why timeless and space-less? I can understand that the time and space of the emergent reality are not applicable but isn't your total simultaneity itself somewhere or when? My -Now is an abbreviation of 'uni-temporal Now'. Your 'eternal Now moment' seems to correspond to what I call the present or experienced present; generated by the observer, but not eternal.The similarity of the words we use makes misunderstanding and talking at crossed purposes likely.

this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate

Kuyukov Vitaly wrote on Jan. 20, 2019 @ 12:34 GMT
perhaps time is not just an additional dimension to space-time, but arises from the entropy of entangling regions of space

this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate

Kuyukov Vitaly wrote on Jan. 20, 2019 @ 13:02 GMT
My idea. Perhaps time can be expressed as

$t=\frac{Gh}{c^4}\int\frac{dS}{r}$

Where S is the entropy of entanglement of an arbitrary closed surface. r is the radius to the surface point. Integration over a closed surface.

This is very similar to the analogy. Time behaves as a potential, and entropy as a charge.

From this formula there are several possible consequences.

1.Bekenstein Hawking entropy for the event horizon. Light cone case

$r=ct$

$S=\frac{c^3}{Gh}r^2$

2.Gravitational time dilation. The case if matter inside a closed surface processes information at the quantum level according to the Margolis-Livitin theorem.

$dI=\frac{dMc^2 t}{h}$

$\Delta t=\frac{Gh}{c^4}\int\frac{dI}{r}=\frac{GM}{c^2r}$

3.The formula is invariant under Lorentz transformations.

4.If this definition is substituted instead of time, then the interval acquires a different look, which probably indicates a different approach of the Minkowski pseudometric with a complex plane

$s^2=(l^2_{p}\frac{S}{r})^2-r^2$

Where is the squared length of Planck

$l^2_{p}=\frac{Gh}{c^3}$

Is such an interpretation possible? Sincerely, Kuyukov V.P.

report post as inappropriate