On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote:
>> My problem with any view based on entropy is that entropy doesn't appear >> to be fundamental to physics; it is the statistically likely result when >> objects are put in a certain configuration and allowed to evolve randomly. >> > > > There is, however, an interesting parallel to be made with Shannon's > entropy, which is a measure of information content and not just a > statistical effect. Once in the realm of digital physics, it becomes > questionable if physical entropy and information entropy are separate > things. > I think the second law of thermodynamics is the most fundamental law of physics, in fact it's almost a law of logic rather than physics; entropy will always increase just says that there are more ways to be complicated than simple, so any change in a system will probably make it more complicated and not simpler. Or to put it in Shannon's language, it takes more information to describe a complicated thing than a simple thing. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
