But no support for was provided. — L'éléphant
Reference? — jgill
I don't know about this OP. It is uncharacteristic of Benj96 topics. — L'éléphant
Perhaps "the randomness and information are essentially the same thing" simply means that you cannot compress something that is random or you will lose information (about the random sequence). At least that is the way I understand it.In a statistical mechanics book, it is stated that "randomness and information are essentially the same thing," which results from the fact that a random process requires high information. . . . .
But, later it says that entropy and information are inversely related since disorder decreases with knowledge. But, this does not make sense to me. I always thought that entropy and randomness in a system were the same thing. — Gnomon
Perhaps "the randomness and information are essentially the same thing" simply means that you cannot compress something that is random or you will lose information (about the random sequence). At least that is the way I understand it. — ssu
Sorry, I tried watching it. But the minute I heard the word "random" I lost interest. They were talking about examples such as the sun rising. Randomness is not the opposite of atmospheric stability or climate stability.Interesting. What is characteristic of my topics? I'll admit perhaps I jumped the gun on this one but I was captivated by veritasiums video on the notion and wished to share it here.
Please see reference link — Benj96
That's what I tried to say, but that's a better way saying it. And the statement describing "information" is basically about this inability of compression. I guess.You can't compress a random sequence of characters or a random collection of objects, you can only describe it, and that description will be 1:1. — Wayfarer
I think the problem is that the meaning of "information" here is quite specific and doesn't relate to what we usually think of "information". Perhaps using the term "raw data" would be more appropriate. Data refers to "things known or assumed as facts, making the basis of reasoning or calculation", so that isn't helpful either. I think people would understand the difference between "information" and "data" better.- chaos doesn't contain or convey information of any kind. — Wayfarer
They were talking about examples such as the sun rising. Randomness is not the opposite of atmospheric stability or climate stability. — L'éléphant
I don't know if I agree with Verisatium's reasoning in this regard (that's the video that is referred to above which was the source for this thread) - chaos doesn't contain or convey information of any kind. It can't be compressed but how is that a criterion for 'information-bearing'? At 3:17 where he says that a completely compressed file is completely random - not sure about that, either. Otherwise, how could it be de-compressed, or intrepreted, at the receiving end? If it were totally random, then there'd be nothing to interpret. So I'm still not sold on the 'information=entropy' equation.
But I like that he recognises that quantum physics undermines LaPlace's daemon. Kudos for that. — Wayfarer
At 3:17 where he says that a completely compressed file is completely random - not sure about that, either. — Wayfarer
I don't see how a compressed file can be both random and decryptable — Benj96
Again you missed.The sun rising is not an atmospheric stability nor climate stability phenomenon. Let's not conflate the cosmological with local planetary climate trends. — Benj96
How does the atmosphere rotate with the Earth?
Robert Matthews
Asked by: Rod Lennox, Colchester
Bound to the Earth by gravity, most of the atmosphere spins along with it as a result of friction with the ground and the viscosity or ‘stickiness’ of the different layers of air above it.
Above 200km, however, the incredibly thin atmosphere actually spins faster than the Earth. The cause of this bizarre ‘super-rotation’ effect remains unclear, but has also been detected on Venus.
But the error I think the Verasatium presentation makes is then to equate non-compressibility with information - that a completely random string carries the greatest amount of information, because it can't be compressed. Whereas I think a random string embodies no information whatever. — Wayfarer
There was never a point in the universe, that the nothing existed. This is what is hard to comprehend. — L'éléphant
Yeah, I guess that is fair. I haven't watched the video so I can't comment too much. Maybe it again comes down to this whole use of the word 'information' being ambiguous again. — Apustimelogist
Yes, but then it is another issue how that might relate to what people call information. — Apustimelogist
I indicated in my post. — fishfry
That would suggest you are implying information is randomness; the original point of my post presupposes this is not necessarily the case. — Apustimelogist
I'm having trouble following your posts. — fishfry
I just don't understand what the intention of your initial comment was. From my perspective it doesn't follow from the rest of the thread I was following. — Apustimelogist
I gather this had been exposited by 3Blue1Brown Youtube channel, — fishfry
...nobody really knows what entropy really is so he will have the advantage in winning any arguments that might occur... — Wayfarer
It's from a channel now called Verisatium, although under an earlier name. The original video wasn't cited until the top of page 2, you can review it here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMb00lz-IfE . (I've viewed quite a few Verasatium presentations and overall found them pretty good, but I'm very dubious about some of the claims in this one.) I can definitely see the relevance of the Kolmogorov complexity idea, the video would have been better if it had been informed by it. — Wayfarer
the unintelligible is adequately hidden within what is proposed as intelligible, and it will appear like you are saying something intelligent. — Metaphysician Undercover
You just described your own posting style. — fishfry
That's very observant of you fishfry. Generally speaking, one's language use is a reflection of the conventions and habits which the society has immersed that person in. I like to seek, determine, and then exaggerate within my own usage, the various ambiguities, misleading implications, false representations, and overall misgivings of deceptive habits and conventions which permeate our communications, thereby laying them bare, exposed for the world to see, so that perhaps, at some point in time, the general population will start to realize that something needs to be done about this situation. — Metaphysician Undercover
Wayfarer knows me as the obfuscator. — Metaphysician Undercover
Your thesis is that someday, Internet archeologists are going to discover this thread and go, "My God, math is wrong!" — fishfry
It's actually an ongoing process, the evolution of thought. Look at Russel's paradox for example. — Metaphysician Undercover
In the evolution of thought, people are going to decide math is wrong because it doesn't actually refer to anything? I thought that was a feature. — fishfry
From what I can see, the Lounge is now the best part of this site. — fishfry
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.