Scientist are starting to have a better understanding of information. It used to be matter and energy but know it's matter, energy and information.
People use to think that information was just a product of the configuration of matter. So if matter is destroyed in the sense of smashing a TV set,
then the information describing that TV set is destroyed or the coherence is destroyed. This isn't the case. Information determines the 3 dimensional
configuration of matter.
So let's look at a car. A 3 dimensional car falls into a black hole. Information describing that car isn't destroyed, it spreads out across the event
horizon of a black hole. A good analogy is a hard drive on a computer. Information describing the car is stored on the event horizon of the black
hole. The next question is, what happened to the matter?
This is why the 3 dimensional world is an illusion(hologram) or a construct of information. The matter that falls into the black hole is like play
dough. The matter never had an objective 3 dimensional existence. The only reason the car was in a 3 dimensional configuration is because it was a
projection of information stored on a 2 dimensional surface.
It goes to Einstein when he said the distinction between past, present and future is a persistent illusion. The space-time that describes 1945 still
exists today in 2013. It's one big holographic movie. It's like a record. You place the needle at different points on the record you just hear
different parts of the song. In this case our consciousness could be the needle. So the entire record exists as a 2 dimensional boundary of
information so the space-time of 1945 and the space-time of 2013 both exist as one record on this 2 dimensional boundary of information.
This goes back to things like the Akashic Record and Plato in the Allegory of the Cave. He said it would be hard for people to accept that the world
that they're experience isn't an objective reality but a projection of a deeper reality.
Here's one more example and I think what this is saying is the world is like the expression of an idea.
My Mother was telling me that she order this Stufz. I guess it's an invention that allows you to make hamburger patties with the center cut out and
you can add different stuff to the burger. The question is, what's the objective reality? The raw materials used to build Stufz or the idea and
information used to build Stufz? Science is telling us the information is the objective reality and the 3 dimensional configuration is a projection or
an expression of the information on a 2 dimensional surface boundary or in this case the mind of the inventor.
So immaterial information configures the material. Science is moving from materialism to idealism and that's great. It's just logical. I'm looking at
my camera now and the raw materials of my camera didn't configure itself. This came from an idea and information that configured the raw materials
into my camera.
Look at what Atheist David Deutsch said about information.
In a video interview, Oxford physicist (and atheist) David Deutsch argues against reductionism (the idea that material causes can explain
everything), saying that information is not material and consciousness exists. In the process, he makes four very important points:
1. Information is not physical.
2. Yet, information is the proper explanation for some effects.
3. Though it is an immaterial cause, it does not contradict physics.
4. Therefore, we must not impose a criterion of physicality on all explanations in science. Rather, we ought to look for the explanations that
describe the way things really are.
Very interesting stuff. Here's some key points from the interview.
If you think about how to explain physical events like a footprint on the moon…, it happened because of human ideas [not because of mere
configurations of atoms]….
This information can't, in my view, be reduced to statements about atoms because, if you think about what that information does, it is in brains, but
the same information then gets transferred into, let's say, sound waves in air, and then it gets transferred into ink on paper, and then it gets
transferred into magnetic domains inside a computer, which then control a machine that instantiates those ideas in bits of steel, and silicon, and so
on. There's an immense chain of instantiations of the same information…. What is being transmitted, what is having the causal effect, is not the
atoms, but the fact that the atoms instantiate certain kinds of information, and not other kinds. So therefore, it is the information that is having
the causal effect….
If explanation is going to be the fundamental thing—our criterion, for example—about what is or isn't real, then we have to say that information,
and this particular kind which we call "knowledge," is real and really does cause things….
I think that the argument against free will from reductionism is just a mistake. It's a fundamental mistake. It's the idea that all explanation must
be in terms of microscopic things. There's no philosophical argument in favor of that that I'm aware of. It's just an assumption. It has historical
roots in how science centuries ago escaped from the clutches of the supernatural. And as I said earlier, certainly I'm opposed to any kind of modes of
explanation in terms of immaterial things, in terms of abstractions, that contradict physics, but the idea that all such explanations by their very
nature contradict physics is simply false….
We have to accept the physical world as we find it. We have to find the best explanations that explain it, rather than impose, by dogma, a criterion
that explanations have to meet other than that they explain reality.
So General Relativity seems to describe the stuff(matter) at large scales but there needs to be a new physics of idealism that describes how
immaterial information puts this stuff into a 3 dimensional configuration. Could this be the Mind of God? The same way we see a mind use immaterial
information to configure stuff(matter) into a camera or a car?
Here's a very good video called Are we Living in a Holographic Universe?
edit on 22-12-2013 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)
Information describing that car isn't destroyed, it spreads out across the event horizon of a black hole.
its kind of too bad that you appear to be obsessed with 'information' as the key ingredient of reality. this is because the information being
distributed across an event horizon as you have described is no longer information. neither is a hologram composed of information.
the reason for this is simple. information is by definition sequential, the sequence of which is very very sensitive to corruption via 'noise'
(bend in the cable or incorrectly transmitted). on the other hand, a hologram is represented as the noise that is generated as the initial laser beam
and the objective laser beam interfere with each other. further, a hologram is in no which way sequential: each single piece contains a copy of the
whole. this is NOT information.
it may seem as though i am making a semantic argument. i am not.
rather, we as scientists and metaphysicians need to de-emphasize this confusing metaphor and replace it with the real science of the future:
please be mindful of the meanings of the words you choose. it actually is important.
Of course a hologram is information. It's information that describes a 3 dimensional object. Have you studied Black Hole Thermodynamics or read the
debates between Hawking and Susskind? I suggest you start here. Here's a lecture by Leonard Susskind titled The World as a Hologram.
What you said makes absolutely no sense.
this is because the information being distributed across an event horizon as you have described is no longer information. neither is a hologram
composed of information.
No longer information???????
Of course it's information stored on the event horizon of a black hole. Here's more:
The holographic principle was inspired by black hole thermodynamics, which implies that the maximal entropy in any region scales with the radius
squared, and not cubed as might be expected. In the case of a black hole, the insight was that the informational content of all the objects that have
fallen into the hole can be entirely contained in surface fluctuations of the event horizon. The holographic principle resolves the black hole
information paradox within the framework of string theory.
Starting in the mid-1970s, Stephen Hawking and Jacob Bekenstein put forward theoretical arguments based on general relativity and quantum field
theory that appeared to be inconsistent with information conservation. Specifically, Hawking's calculations indicated that black hole evaporation
via Hawking radiation does not preserve information. Today, many physicists believe that the holographic principle (specifically the AdS/CFT duality)
demonstrates that Hawking's conclusion was incorrect, and that information is in fact preserved. In 2004 Hawking himself conceded a bet he had
made, agreeing that black hole evaporation does in fact preserve information.
I honestly don't know what you're talking about. Here's more:
The work sprung out of a long argument with Stephen Hawking about the nature of black holes, which was eventually solved by the realization that
the event horizon could act as a hologram, preserving information about the material that's gotten sucked inside. The same sort of math, it turns
out, can actually describe any point in the Universe, meaning that the entire content Universe can be viewed as a giant hologram, one that resides on
the surface of whatever two-dimensional shape will enclose it.
As far as quantum mechanics is concerned, information about states is never destroyed. This isn't just an observation; according to panelist Leonard
Susskind, destroying information creates paradoxes that, although apparently minor, will gradually propagate and eventually cause inconsistencies in
just about everything we think we understand. As panelist Leonard Susskind put it, "all we know about physics would fall apart if information is
t Hooft described how the disagreement eventually got worked out. It's possible, he said, to figure out how much information has gotten drawn in to
the black hole. Once you do that, you can see that the total amount can be related to the surface area of the event horizon, which suggested where the
information could be stored. But since the event horizon is a two-dimensional surface, the information couldn't be stored in regular matter; instead,
the event horizon forms a hologram that holds the information as matter passes through it. When that matter passes back out as Hawking radiation, the
information is restored.
The Black Hole War: My Battle with Stephen Hawking to Make the World Safe for Quantum Mechanics by Leonard Susskind.
Here's one more video with Physicist Brian Greene called The illusion of third dimension : the universe as a hologram
Greene uses the example of a wallet. When a 3 dimensional wallet falls into a black hole, all the INFORMATION it contains is smeared out across the
event horizon and he compares it to the way information is stored on a computer.
the "preservation of information" is not at all the same as "is still information (proper)".
that is the reason they have called it a paradox and why it was originally thought that the information could not possibly be preserved.
because it is no longer information.... and yet.... the information is preserved.
again, that may seem like semantics.
but. would you agree that the "information" stored in a hologram is in fact the interference pattern of the laser beam? well then, quite simply,
interference is noise. literally. noise.
interference = noise
because noise is categorically incompatible with information: noise is a corruption of the information signal. therefore: a hologram is made of
noise, NOT information. that is why it is called a paradox.
the theory you are looking for is not information. the theory you are looking for is chaos. i promise.
no, not at all. a corruption of the music signal is the static you hear as the radio station fades into the distance. noise on information is
on the other hand, noise in a chaotic system can have incredible results!
have you ever seen a fractal? a fractal is noise. or, more properly, chaos. it is completely unpredictable, and yet, very well ordered.
information is not unpredictable. information is 100% by definition, predictable.
a fractal is what happens when you feed the output of a signal back in to the input. if you do this with an audio microphone, you will get a terrible
noise indeed. however, in most natural systems that feedback.... the noise itself... is the crucial ingredient.
Could it be said that the "music" (to follow that analogy) or information is this chaos or noise? and merely heard a certain way? and that it is us,
not reality, that makes information out of noise?
If all we know about reality is the impulses of our senses—according to what idealism proposes—then it must be that it is our senses doing the
interpreting, and all holograms, mathematics, "knowledge", exist purely within our senses and mind. Therefor, what is outside of sense is chaos
I don't agree with idealism personally—God knows why it would be a good thing—but it is always fun to talk about with other thinkers.
on 22-12-2013 by Aphorism because: (no reason given)
I have done a little study into philosophical idealism. It spans thousands of years, from before Plato to onward. I have read all the arguments for
and against it. For your interest, there are many different kinds of metaphysical idealism out there. I really suggest a look into it if you find it
Immanuel Kant has an interesting version of idealism, as does Schopenhauer. The Bishop Berkley has the best arguments, really dead end arguments
(brought up in the Matrix movies and such), that you might want to look into. Bertrand Russell does some great critiques into both materialism and
idealism all well.
Very difficult yet rewarding stuff to think about.
Could it be said that the "music" (to follow that analogy) or information is this chaos or noise? and merely heard a certain way? and that it is us,
not reality, that makes information out of noise?
i dont agree with your conclusions exactly, but yes, you have received the point. using the music analogy, the information is just as well
represented on the written page (hard drive) as it is coming directly out of the instrument as a sequence. information is sequential.
on the other hand, music, or perhaps more properly, the meaning that we are able to attach to the sequence of musical information, is generated by an
incredibly complex interference of entire phrases of that information all at once. naturally, the information is still preserved. but make no
mistake: it is no longer information.
regarding your anthropomorphic conclusion: chaotic systems are abundant, if not ubiquitous, in mother nature and thus reality. quantum physics is a
mere subset of chaos theory.
I agree with your answer. My conclusions were approached through the lens of idealism, of which I don't usually look at things through.
But to stay on topic, I think the OP is sort of correct in saying that "matter", and thus materialism, isn't adequately enough defined to hold it's
own weight. This is why "materialism" has began to be called "physicalism", to distance themselves from the term "matter", which still hasn't been
That being said...idealism is not the answer. It leads to solipsism and the idea that nothing matters if it's outside of mind. No mind no matter. No
matter no mind. Stuff like that.
edit on 23-12-2013 by Aphorism because: (no reason given)
Again, of course it's information. It's not just the preservation of information because the information stored on the event horizon of a black hole
can be retrieved.
The Entropy of a black hole is proportional to the area of it's event horizon. The information is written on the event horizon with each bit(1 and 0)
corresponding to four Planck units. This INFORMATION is stored on the event horizon of a black hole.
Of course he explained it as being like information stored on a computer because that's a very good analogy. Again I ask, what part of black hole
thermodynamics says it isn't information?
Here's an article from 2003 from Jacob Bekenstein:
This surprising result--that information capacity depends on surface area--has a natural explanation if the holographic principle (proposed in
1993 by Nobelist Gerard 't Hooft of the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands and elaborated by Susskind) is true. In the everyday world, a
hologram is a special kind of photograph that generates a full three-dimensional image when it is illuminated in the right manner. ALL THE INFORMATION
describing the 3-D scene is encoded into the pattern of light and dark areas on the two-dimensional piece of film, ready to be regenerated. The
holographic principle contends that an analogue of this visual magic applies to the full physical description of any system occupying a 3-D region: it
proposes that another physical theory defined only on the 2-D boundary of the region completely describes the 3-D physics. If a 3-D system can be
fully described by a physical theory operating solely on its 2-D boundary, one would expect the information content of the system not to exceed that
of the description on the boundary.
JACOB D. BEKENSTEIN has contributed to the foundation of black hole thermodynamics and to other aspects of the connections between information and
gravitation. He is Polak Professor of Theoretical Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, a member of the Israel Academy of Sciences and
Humanities, and a recipient of the Rothschild Prize. Bekenstein dedicates this article to John Archibald Wheeler (his Ph.D. supervisor 30 years ago).
Wheeler belongs to the third generation of Ludwig Boltzmann's students: Wheeler's Ph.D. adviser, Karl Herzfeld, was a student of Boltzmann's
student Friedrich Hasenöhrl.
Like I said, I don't know what you're talking about. It has nothing to do with black hole thermodynamics and the holographic principle.
The 2 dimensional boundary would be like the holographic plate. The holographic plate is encoded with INFORMATION that projects the 3 dimensional
image. So again, you're not making any sense in the context of this discussion. Here's a holographic plate:
Like I said, you need to watch the Lecture on the world as a hologram from Leonard Susskind and read up on things like Black Hole Thermodynamics.
The images on your computer screen also exist in software as a series of ones and zeros. The music coming from your headphones might come from
those same ones and zeros - or from carefully-pressed plastic, or from laser-etched metal. A lot of things you interact with daily come from
information that's stored in many formats…and so are you. According to physicist Leonard Susskind, the three-dimensional universe is a hologram, a
projection of two-dimensional information stored along the boundary of the universe.
"This is a real disconnect and it's very hard to get your head around," said Susskind in the first episode of NOVA's The Fabric of the Cosmos with
Brian Greene. But the concept of the universe as a hologram arises from the mathematical study of black holes. When an object - say a red rubber ball
- gets sucked into a black hole, it passes the event horizon and is lost. The distinctions that make that object unique, however, do not disappear.
Instead, information about the ball's redness and spherical shape spreads over the surface of the event horizon, forming a
two-dimensional shell of information. Theoretically, a computer could even use that shell to reconstruct a duplicate of the original ball.
Again, I have no clue as to what you're talking about. It's INFORMATION Susskind has told you, Bekenstein has told you, Brian Greene has told you
and the list goes on and on. Like I said, I don't know what your talking about in the context of black hole thermodynamics and the holographic
Say you have 3 cards face down then it takes x amount of bits to reduce the uncertainty. The more uncertain an event is the more information is needed
to reduce classical Shannon Entropy to zero.
So information can describe everything from a basketball to a Christmas present. There's a level of uncertainty before you open the Christmas present
and bits(1's and 0's) are needed to reduce the uncertainty. Our brains stores bits which allows us to process information.
So if a car falls into a black hole the information that describes the car is smeared out on the event horizon of the black hole.
23-12-2013 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)
i have made my point abundantly clear, particularly with the music analogy. if the reason you refuse to accept it is because (you perceive that) i do
not have letters behind my name, then you are no scientist.
entropy is a notoriously tricky concept to navigate. this is primarily due to the fact that there are two exactly conflicting interpretations of
'entropy as information' in regular scientific use. not coincidentally, these two interpretations are related to the question of which has higher
information content: high entropy, or low entropy?
the reason you dont understand what i am saying is that you are attempting to use both of these interpretations simultaneously and getting it all
mixed up in the process.
you are saying:
1 - an object, as an organized and unified singular body (low entropy) is information.
2 - that object distributed across the event horizion (high entropy) is also information.
i am saying:
1 - both uses cannot be simultaneously true.
2 - the object is initially at low entropy (information).... it enters the event horizon and transitions to high entropy (random, noise). maybe are
you confused because i am saying that noise is also a *certain type* of information that is not information? i like to call it "meaning", for sake
the scientific term "information", and its sloppy use, is at fault here. don't worry: even phD's cant seem to agree. incidentally, i wrote this
up earlier this year: information versus meaning
Again, I'm saying you don't understand what you're talking about in the context of black hole thermodynamics and the holographic principle. I'm
not saying this to be derogatory but everyone is ignorant of something and that's why it's good to learn something if you don't fully understand
it. At least that is what I do.
First, information in a high state of entropy is still information. Shannon showed us this.
So I can type fffggghhhjjjdddggg and Mary had a little lamb.
Both are information. One is just in a high state of entropy while the other is in a lower entropy state.
Again, there's nothing that says the information that describes matter that falls into a black hole is in a high state of entropy.
I go back to Susskind:
When an object - say a red rubber ball - gets sucked into a black hole, it passes the event horizon and is lost. The distinctions that make that
object unique, however, do not disappear. Instead, information about the ball's redness and spherical shape spreads over the surface of the event
horizon, forming a two-dimensional shell of information. Theoretically, a computer could even use that shell to reconstruct a duplicate of the
You couldn't reconstruct the ball if the information about the object was in a high state of entropy. If this was the case information would be lost.
Like I said you need to read the Hawking-Susskind debates.
Where is your evidence that information describing a 3 dimensional object falling into a black hole is lost or in a high state of entropy? Like I keep
saying this has nothing to do with black hole thermodynamics or the holographic principle.
I think the debate between materialism and idealism is very interesting. Idealism is just basic common sense. For example, a TV is a construct of
information that comes from the mind of the inventor. When you look at things like the holographic universe it says everything is a construct of
information and therefore the raw materials that make up the universe don't have a 3 dimensional objective existence.
I understand perfectly well what you are saying... what he (PhD) is saying... and what I am saying. my posts have contained only appeals to your
intelligence, and none to authority.
you appear to understand only yourself. you might have watched the debates and read the papers (all of which cited in this thread being popular -not
academic- papers), but you have not understood. for, if you did, you would be able to offer proper refutation rather than the simple insistence that
i am the one lacking understanding.
never once have I said information is lost in the transition to high entropy. in fact, I recall saying specifically, as in the case of music written
(information) versus music heard (chaos, holographic), that the information is preserved.
an event horizon, as a storage medium, is not structured in such a way so as to contain linearized sequential bits aka information. neither is the
human brain. neither is any fractal, holographic, nonlinear, or otherwise chaotic system.
on the other hand, a hard drive is structured with the explicit intent to contain linearized sequential bits.
there is an incredibly important distinction between the two that you're not acknowledging.
Again, everything you're saying has nothing to do with this conversation. Like I said, give me the evidence that black hole thermodynamics and the
holographic principle can't store bits. Here's a picture from Scientific American about the Holographic Universe.
Here's the caption under the picture.
ENTROPY OF A BLACK HOLE is proportional to the area of its event horizon, the surface from within which even light cannot escape the gravity of the
hole. Specifically, a hole with a horizon spanning A Planck areas has A/4 units of entropy. (The Planck area, approximately 10−66 square centimeter,
is the fundamental quantum unit of area determined by the strength of gravity, the speed of light and the size of quanta.) Considered as information,
it is as if the entropy were written on the event horizon, with each bit (each digital 1 or 0) corresponding to four Planck areas.
Again, the planck areas on the event horizon CORRESPOND TO 1'S AND 0'S.
This is black hole thermodynamics and the holographic principle. I have no clue as to what you're talking about. Where's your evidence that black
hole thermodynamics and the holographic principle say it's not 1's and 0's spread out on the event horizon.
When I say you don't understand, I'm not being derogatory. There's things I don't understand but I don't try to debate against them if I don't
You keep talking about music and everything else that has nothing to do with black hole entropy and the holographic universe. Black hole
thermodynamics also tells us that the maximal entropy of a black hole isn't found in it's volume but a surface area 1/4 the size of it's volume
which corresponds to the bits that can be stored in that volume of space.
Entropy is also a measure of the amount of information it would take to describe a system completely. The entropy of ordinary objects—people,
sand buckets, containers of gas—is proportional to their volume. Double the volume of a helium balloon, for instance, and its entropy will increase
by a factor of eight. But in the 1970s, Stephen Hawking and Jacob Bekenstein discovered that the entropy of a black hole obeys a different scaling
rule. It is proportional not to the black hole's three-dimensional volume but to its two-dimensional surface area, defined here as the area of the
boundary called the event horizon. Therefore, while the actual entropy of an ordinary object—say, a hamburger—scales with its volume, the maximum
entropy that could theoretically be contained in the space occupied by the hamburger depends not on the volume of the hamburger but on the size of its
surface area. Physics prevents the entropy of the hamburger from ever exceeding that maximum: If one somehow tried to pack so much entropy into the
hamburger that it reached that limit, the hamburger would collapse into a black hole.
The inescapable conclusion is that all the information it takes to describe a three-dimensional object—a black hole, a hamburger, or a whole
universe—can be expressed in two dimensions. This suggests to physicists that the deepest description of our universe and its parts—the ultimate
theory of physics—must be crafted in two spatial dimensions, not three. Which brings us back to the hologram.
So there's no evidence that 3 dimensional volume exists. In fact this tells us volume can't exist it can only be described in 2 dimensions.
The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.
All content copyright 2015, The Above Network, LLC.