On Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:55:03 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: Thanks, that make my point exactly:
"This entropy, H(S|O), depends on the information that a given observer, O, has about S, and the work necessary to erase a system may therefore vary for different observers." Craig > > Or have a look at: > > arXiv:1009.1630v2 <http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.1630v2> [quant-ph] > *The thermodynamic meaning of negative entropy* > Lídia del Rio <http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Rio_L/0/1/0/all/0/1>, > Johan > Aberg <http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Aberg_J/0/1/0/all/0/1>, Renato > Renner <http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Renner_R/0/1/0/all/0/1>, Oscar > Dahlsten <http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Dahlsten_O/0/1/0/all/0/1>, > Vlatko > Vedral <http://arxiv.org/find/quant-ph/1/au:+Vedral_V/0/1/0/all/0/1> > (Submitted on 8 Sep 2010 (v1 <http://arxiv.org/abs/1009.1630v1>), last > revised 27 Jun 2011 (this version, v2)) > > Landauer's erasure principle exposes an intrinsic relation between > thermodynamics and information theory: the erasure of information stored in > a system, S, requires an amount of work proportional to the entropy of that > system. This entropy, H(S|O), depends on the information that a given > observer, O, has about S, and the work necessary to erase a system may > therefore vary for different observers. Here, we consider a general setting > where the information held by the observer may be quantum-mechanical, and > show that an amount of work proportional to H(S|O) is still sufficient to > erase S. Since the entropy H(S|O) can now become negative, erasing a system > can result in a net gain of work (and a corresponding cooling of the > environment). > > Where is shown explicitly how extract energy by erasing information. > > Brent > > > > > > You can't compress the substance, because it is not information. >> Information is a subjective (or intersubjective) measurement, nothing more >> and nothing less. >> > > If information is just subjective then when you've had a few too many > drinks and a charcoal briquette starts to look like a diamond to you then > it really is a diamond because the only difference between the two is the > information on how the carbon atoms are arranged. If your above statement > is true then it is also objectively true that you Craig Weinberg can turn > charcoal into diamond with nothing but the power of your mind. Sounds like > a comic book superhero. > > John K Clark > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > 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/everything-list?hl=en. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/nri7a3GD_TsJ. 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/everything-list?hl=en.
