Mohsen Ravanbakhsh wrote:
> 
>  Hi,
> It was an interesting hypothesis,
> When we're talking black holes we should consider them as the sources of 
> reduction of entropy; since when something gets into a black hole we 
> have no more information about it and so the overall information of the 
> world decreases and the same happens to entropy.
> In your the world is moving toward black holes so the entropy of the 
> world should decrease! But that seems not to be the the case, it's 
> somehow inconvenient.

It's also wrong, according to our best theory of BHs, the entropy of a BH is 
proportional to it's surface area and the maximum entropy configuration of a 
given mass is for it to form a BH.  The information interpretation of this is 
that the information that seems to be "lost" by something falling into a black 
hole is encoded in correlations between what falls in and the black-body 
Hawking radiation from the surface.  So the entropy increases in that 
microscopically encoded information becomes unavailable to use macroscopic 
beings.  This is where all entropy comes from anyway - the dynamical evolution 
of QM is deterministic (at least in the MWI) and so information is never lost 
or gained.  

Brent Meeker

> 
> If we accept the idea of CA as the fundamental building blocks of the 
> nature we should explain: why some patterns and not the others. Some 
> that have lead to our physical laws and not the other possibilities?
> In this situation the idea of multiverse might help.
> 
> 
> On 3/15/07, *Colin Hales* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     Hi,
>     See previous posts here re EC - Entropy Calculus. This caught my eye,
>     thought I'd throw in my $0.02 worth.....
> 
>     I have been working on this idea for a long while now. Am writing it
>     up as
>     part of my PhD process.
> 
>     The EC is a lambda calculus formalism that depicts reality. It's actual
>     instantation with one particular and unbelievable massive axiom set
>     is the
>     universe we are in. The instantation is literally the CA of the EC
>     primitives.
> 
>     As cognitive agents within it, made of the EC-CA, describing it, we can
>     use abstracted simplified EC on a computational substrate (also made of
>     the CA...a computer!) to explore/describe the universe. But the
>     abstractions (like string theory) are not the universe - they are merely
>     depictions at a certain spatiotemporal observer-scales.  Reality is a
>     literal ongoing massively parallel theorem proving exercise in Entropy
>     Calculus. The EC universe has literally computed you and me and my dogs.
> 
>     Coherence/Bifurcation points in the CA correspond to new descriptive
>     'levels of underlying reality' - emergence. Atoms, Molecules,
>     Crystals....etc...
> 
>     One of the descriptive abstractions of the EC-CA is called
>     'Maxwells-Equations'. Another is the Navier-Stokes equations (different
>     context), another is Quantum Mechanics, the standard particle model
>     and so
>     on. None of them are reality - merely depictions of a surface
>     behaviour of
>     it. In the model there is only one universe and only one justified or
>     needed. Which is a bummer if you insist on talking about
>     multiverses.....they are not parsimonious or necessary to explain the
>     universe. I can't help it if they are unnecessary!
> 
>     You know , it's funny what EC makes the universe look like..... the
>     boundary of the universe is the collective event horizon of all black
>     holes. On the other side is nothing. The endlessly increasing size of
>     black holes is what corresponds to the endlessly increasing entropy
>     (disorder - which is the dispersal of the deep universe back to
>     nothing at
>     the event horizons). The measure of the surface area of the black
>     holes is
>     the entropy of the whole universe.
> 
>     The process of dispersal at the boundary makes it look like the universe
>     is expanding - to us from the inside. The reality is actually the
>     reverse
>     - the spatiotemporal circumstances are of shrinkage  - due to the
>     loss of
>     the redundant fabric of the very deepest layers of reality being
>     eaten by
>     the black holes, dragging it in....whilst the organisation of
>     collections
>     of it at the uppermost layers is maintained (like space, atoms etc).
>     (Imagine a jumper knitted of wool with a huge number of threads in the
>     yarn - remove the redundant threads from the inside and the jumper
>     shrinks, but is still a jumper, just getting smaller....(everything else
>     around looks like it's getting bigger from the point of view of
>     being the
>     jumper.).... our future?...we'll all blink out of existence as the event
>     horizons of black holes that grow and grow and grow and do it faster
>     and
>     faster and faster until..... merging and merging until they all
>     merge and
>     then PFFFFFT! NOTHING..... and the whole process starts again with a new
>     axiom set....round and round and round....we go...
> 
>     Weird huh?
> 
>     So I reckon you're on the right track. You don't have to believe me
>     about
>     any of it... but I can guarantee you'll get answers if you keep
>     looking at
>     it. The trick is to let go of the idea that 'fundamental building
>     blocks'
>     of nature are a meaningful concept (we are tricked into the belief
>     be our
>     perceptual/epistemological goals) ...
> 
>     cheers,
>     colin hales
> 
> 
> 
>     Mohsen Ravanbakhsh wrote:
>      > I'm thinking there's some kind of similarity between string
>     theory and
>     depicting the world as a big CA. In String theory we have some vibrating
>     strings which have some kind of influence on each other and can for
>     different matters and fields. CA can play such role of changing
>     patterns
>     and of course the influence is evident. Different rules in CA might
>     correspond to various basic shapes of vibration in strings...
>      > I don't know much about S.T. but the idea of such mapping seems very
>     interesting.
>      >
>      > --
>      > Mohsen Ravanbakhsh.
>      >
>      >
>      > >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Mohsen Ravanbakhsh,
> Sharif University of Technology,
> Tehran.
> > 


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to