The idea that information comes into being in a receiver sort of precludes the idea of radio. I know Wheeler said the Sun wouldn't radiate if there was nothing to receive the radiation, but this doesn't help me with the idea the Goon Show isn't on World Service because I'm not listening to it or my radio is on in another room. I accept my students may well get very different information from what I intend or the actual content of what I'm saying-doing. I don't know what the heat from dark matter is, but would no doubt warm my feet at its fire if suitably adapted. Molecules have managed to get into information exchange without us even if we have found ways to explain some of this and change some of what happens. Affect one end of a molecule and different information appears at the other end. Jon Frum cargo cultists no doubt glean different information from a convenient plane crash than I would. We used to say it was all about information exchange and the hard facts of observation were probabilities. Now we are 'detecting' stuff we can't sense as our 'reception devices' become more driven by theory to ground the information in our understanding - but our assumptions are still that the information was there before we could get at it. Maybe our understanding of what is 'out there' is still too primitive and information is not something we can yet 'see' in operation and will become a redundant concept.
On Monday, December 12, 2011 3:18:45 PM UTC, sadovnik socratus wrote: > > Where does the information come from? > / Quantum Theory as Quantum Information / > ===… > # > Does information begin on the quarks level? > No. Quark cannot leave an atom. > Maybe does proton have quant of information? > No. Single proton has no quant of information. > Why? > Because information can be transfered only by > electromagnetic fields. And we don’t have a theory > about protono-magnetic fields. > # > In our earthly world there is only one fundamental > particle - electron who can transfer information. > Can an electron be quant of information? > Maybe at first glance this seems to be a rather senseless questions. > But . . . . . > Energy is electromagnetic waves (em). > In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron > It means the source of these em waves must be an Electron > The electron and the em waves they are physical reality > ============== > # > 1900, 1905 > Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f. > 1916 > Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c, > it means: e = +ah*c and e = -ah*c. > 1928 > Dirac found two more formulas of electron’s energy: > +E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2. > According to QED in interaction with vacuum electron’s > energy is infinite: E= ∞ > Questions. > Why does the simplest particle - electron have six ( 6 ) formulas ? > Why does electron obey five ( 5) Laws ? > a) Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass > b) Maxwell’s equations > c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law > d) Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law > e) Fermi-Dirac statistics > #. > What is an electron ? > Now nobody knows > In the internet we can read hundreds theories about electron > All of them are problematical > We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics. > But how can we trust them if we don’t know what is electron ? > ====. > Quote by Heinrich Hertz on Maxwell's equations: > > "One cannot escape the feeling that these mathematical formulae > have an independent existence and an intelligence of their own, > that they are wiser than we are, wiser even than their discoverers, > that we get more out of them than was originally put into them." > ====. > Ladies and Gentlemen ! > Friends ! > Electron is not as simple as we think and, maybe, he is wiser than we > are. > ==========. > # > We know, there is no information transfer > without energy transfer. More correct: there is no quant > information transfer without quant energy transfer. > And the electron has the least electric charge. > It means it has some quant of the least information. > What can electron do with this information? > Let us look the Mendeleev / Moseley periodic table. > We can see that electron interacts with proton > and creates atom of hydrogen. > This is simplest design, which was created by electron. > And we can see how this information grows and reaches > high informational level. And the most complex design, > which was created by electron is the Man. > The Man is alive essence. Animals, birds, fish are alive essences. > And an atom? And atom is also alive design. > The free atom of hydrogen can live about 1000 seconds. > And someone a long time ago has already said, that if to give > suffices time to atom of hydrogen, he would turn into Man. > Maybe it is better not to search about "dark, virtual particles " > but to understand what the electron is, > because even now nobody knows what electron is. > ======================= > In my opinion the Electron is quant of information. > Was I mistaken? No ! > Because according to Pauli Exclusion Principle > only one single electron can be in the atom. > This electron reanimates the atom. > This electron manages the atom. > If the atom contains more than one electron > (for example - two), this atom represents " Siamese twins". > Save us, the Great God, of having such atoms, such children! > Each of us has an Electron, but we do not know it. > # > Many years ago man has accustomed some wild > animals (wolf, horse, cat, bull , etc.) > and has made them domestic ones. > But the man understands badly the four-footed friends. > In 1897 J. J. Thomson discovered new particle - electron. > Gradually man has accustomed electron to work for him. > But the man does not understand what an electron is. > By my peasant logic at first it is better to understand > the closest and simplest particle photon /electron and > then to study the far away space and another particles. > ==========. > Best wishes. > Israel Sadovnik. Socratus. > =====… > P.S. > The world of electron. > # > But maybe these electrons are World, > where there are five continents: > the art, > knowledge, > wars, > thrones > and the memory of forty centuries. > / Valery Brusov./ > ===============… > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/dbTNSgscNtQJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
