Hi meekerdb Can be is not the same as is.
[Roger Clough], [[email protected]] 12/20/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-19, 14:30:29 Subject: Re: the only truth we can understand is a man-made object On 12/19/2012 8:34 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Hi meekerdb and Stephen, If information is stored in quantum form, I can't see why the number of particles in the universe can be a limiting fsactor. Information has to be instantiated in matter (unless you're a Platonist like Bruno). No particles, no excited field modes -> no information. Also there are ways of storing information holographically, so size gets a bit ambiguous. The holographic principle says that the information that can be instantiated in spherical must be less than the area of the bounding surface in Planck units. So there's a definite bound. If we looks at the average information density in the universe (which is dominated by low energy photons from the CMB) and ask at what radius does the spherical volume times the density equal the holographic limit for that volume based on the surface area we find it is on the order of the Hubble radius, i.e. the radius at which things are receding at light speed. This suggests the expansion rate of the universe and and gravity are entropic phenomena. Brent [Roger Clough], [[email protected]] 12/19/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: meekerdb Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-18, 16:44:29 Subject: Re: the only truth we can understand is a man-made object On 12/18/2012 1:12 PM, Stephen P. King wrote: We have many entities that are available to agree that 2+2=4 (for all sizes of 2 and 4 that we can find), 2^90 entities at least! Every particle that exist in our universe that can hold a bit of data and all possible combinations of them that agree on some "laws of physics". I've only been able to communicate with a few of what I call 'human beings'. All those particle are inferences that I and the other 'human beings' have put in our model of the world to explain the 'facts' on which we have intersubjectively agreed. In our model, the particles don't have opinions. In fact the whole idea of particle is something which has very few properties and hence is completely understandable (wouldn't be much point in making a theory out of pieces you don't understand). Brent No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2637/5969 - Release Date: 12/18/12 -- 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 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.
