Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.dsp > #6644

Re: information theory?

Cross-posted to 5 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

BJACOBY@teranews.com wrote:
> On 11/1/2011 12:29 PM, RichD wrote:
>
>> I read Shannon's paper long go, and found it fascinating
>> ever since. In the most general sense, it's applicable
>> to so many areas. For instance, people have recast
>> thermodynamics as information processing. Or, you
>> could model the entire universe as a computer, and
>> information theory applies. It even describes human
>> nature - manipulating symbols is what separates us
>> from the apes.
>
> Actually, Shannon's "paper" is a book. And the unfortunate part is that
> physicists in particular for the most part have developed little
> understanding of Shannon's association of information with entropy. This
> one fact alone blows a huge hole in classical physics. Yet, (nearly) all
> physicists go blindly on barfing the sad dogma of how entropy always
> increases, how the universe is "running down" etc. etc. They know even
> less about the relationships between signal processing and
> Electromagnetic theory. They can't understand the transform
> relationships between the amplitude of a wave in free space at one point
> and it's far field angular expansion. They are snowed by self-inductance
> because they haven't bothered to understand the nature of feedback
> systems. In short they are stuck in ignorance and the past and have NO
> desire to move out of it.
>
> But the unfortunate facts are that information theory especially
> combined with things like classical thermodynamics holds the key to
> physics in the 21st century! And what exactly IS physics going to be in
> the 21st century? I can tell you. It will be the physics of the things
> that physics of today has so LOUDLY avoided. Namely, the physics of
> life! The grass under my brick sidewalk is ALWAYS striving to take the
> chaos of the dirt down there and turn it into ORDER! It insists on doing
> this every year in spite of my best efforts to stop it! But still
> "traditional" science pretends to move "forward" while ignoring the fact
> that Shannon shot all their dogma to hell back in the MIDDLE of the the
> 20th century.
>


Eh? Physics guys loudly accept that entropy can go up locally. They
just  say universal ( meaning at the scale of the universe ) entropy
is what goes up. Sagan at one point assigned values to the relative 
entropy/order increases from reading something, for example.

Penrose/Hawking and everybody else since have used
communications theory quite a bit to do physics. I
don't even think it's settled yet.

Penroses' "Emperor's New Mind" misses quite a bit ( he
skyhooks some stuff ) but that alone should show they're
thinking about it.

If physics has a problem, it is that the experiments have all gotten
too expensive for a 1920s-1950s level of progress to occur. That, and
string  theory becoming too precious and abstract.

--
Les Cargill

Back to comp.dsp | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

information theory? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-31 20:55 -0700
  Re: information theory? eric.jacobsen@ieee.org (Eric Jacobsen) - 2011-11-01 04:57 +0000
    Re: information theory? Chris <chris.santoro@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 05:58 -0700
      Re: information theory? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-01 10:29 -0700
        Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 11:13 -0700
          Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 14:39 -0700
        Re: information theory? robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2011-11-01 16:04 -0400
          OT: information theory? Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> - 2011-11-01 18:06 -0400
          Re: information theory? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-11-01 22:46 +0000
        Re: information theory? "BJACOBY@teranews.com" <benj@iwaynet.net> - 2011-11-01 22:38 -0500
          Re: information theory? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2011-11-02 17:06 -0500
            Re: information theory? "steveu" <steveu@n_o_s_p_a_m.coppice.org> - 2011-11-02 19:41 -0500
            Re: information theory? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2011-11-03 06:58 -0500
              Re: information theory? "GO-HERE .NL" <gdewilde@gmail.com> - 2011-11-03 08:57 -0700
          Re: information theory? Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 19:44 -0500
            Re: information theory? "Christopher J. Henrich" <chenrich@monmouth.com> - 2011-11-02 22:40 -0400
              Re: information theory? Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2011-11-03 23:21 -0500
        Re: information theory? Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2011-11-02 08:47 +0000
          Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) JohnF <john@please.see.sig.for.email.com> - 2011-11-02 09:48 +0000
            Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2011-11-02 10:02 +0000
              Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2011-11-02 16:46 +0000
              Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) Bernd Jendrissek <bernd.jendrissek@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 15:04 -0700
            Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) David Eather <eather@tpg.com.au> - 2011-11-03 04:00 +1000
              Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) unruh <unruh@physics.ubc.ca> - 2011-11-02 19:05 +0000
            Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) "J. Clarke" <jclarkeusenet@cox.net> - 2011-11-24 08:42 -0500
              Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) Richard Outerbridge <outer@interlog.com> - 2011-11-25 01:37 -0500
                Re: information theory? (copyright question followup) Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2011-11-25 11:37 -0600
          Re: information theory? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-02 11:38 -0700
            Re: information theory? Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2011-11-03 08:51 +0000
        Re: information theory? Chris <chris.santoro@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 08:02 -0700
          Re: information theory? robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2011-11-02 09:38 -0700
          Re: information theory? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-02 11:51 -0700
            Re: information theory? VWWall <vwall@large.invalid> - 2011-11-02 15:08 -0700
              Re: information theory? Richard Outerbridge <outer@interlog.com> - 2011-11-02 19:59 -0400
                Re: information theory? Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-04 20:41 +0000
                Re: information theory? "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> - 2011-11-04 16:59 -0500
                Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-04 15:28 -0700
                Re: information theory? Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> - 2011-11-04 21:09 -0400
                Re: information theory? ggr@nope.ucsd.edu (Greg Rose) - 2011-11-05 02:11 +0000
                Re: information theory? Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-05 11:53 +0000
                Re: information theory? "Mike Terry" <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2011-11-05 17:32 +0000
                Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-06 18:41 -0800
              Re: information theory? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-03 21:54 -0700
                Re: information theory? "BJACOBY@teranews.com" <benj@iwaynet.net> - 2011-11-04 03:42 -0500
                Re: information theory? "Peter Webb" <webbfamily@optusnetDIESPAMDIE.com.au> - 2011-11-04 20:33 +1100
                Re: information theory? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-04 05:10 -0500
                Re: information theory? kym@kymhorsell.com - 2011-11-04 10:50 +0000
                Re: information theory? "Peter Webb" <webbfamily@optusnetDIESPAMDIE.com.au> - 2011-11-04 22:14 +1100
                Re: information theory? "Jesse F. Hughes" <jesse@phiwumbda.org> - 2011-11-04 09:13 -0400
                Re: information theory? Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2011-11-04 10:32 -0400
                Re: information theory? "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics.October.2011> - 2011-11-04 18:02 +0000
                Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-07 15:54 -0800
                Re: information theory? VWWall <vwall@large.invalid> - 2011-11-04 09:50 -0700
                Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-04 12:41 -0700
                Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-04 13:40 -0700
                Re: information theory? "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics.October.2011> - 2011-11-04 11:35 +0000
                Re: information theory? Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2011-11-04 10:31 +0000
                Re: information theory? "Peter Webb" <webbfamily@optusnetDIESPAMDIE.com.au> - 2011-11-04 21:51 +1100
                Re: information theory? "BJACOBY@teranews.com" <benj@iwaynet.net> - 2011-11-04 14:18 -0500
                Re: information theory? Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> - 2011-11-04 15:56 -0400
                Re: information theory? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2011-12-21 17:49 -0800
                Re: information theory? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2011-12-21 20:07 -0600
                Re: information theory? Richard Outerbridge <outer@interlog.com> - 2011-12-22 03:08 -0500
                Re: information theory? Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2011-12-22 08:30 +0000
                Re: information theory? John Devereux <john@devereux.me.uk> - 2011-12-22 10:12 +0000
                Re: information theory? "Peter Webb" <r.peter.webbbbb@gmail.com> - 2011-12-22 21:14 +1100
                Re: information theory? "Androcles" <Headmaster@Hogwarts.physics.October.2011> - 2011-11-04 11:00 +0000
                Re: information theory? Casper H.S. Dik <Casper.Dik@OrSPaMcle.COM> - 2011-11-04 09:45 +0000
                Re: information theory? unruh <unruh@physics.ubc.ca> - 2011-11-04 19:05 +0000
              Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-06 17:11 -0800
                Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-07 06:23 -0800
                Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-07 11:29 -0800
                Re: information theory? jim <retnuh2011@gmail.com> - 2011-11-08 04:41 -0800
                Re: information theory? "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2011-11-08 13:46 -0500
            Re: information theory? "BJACOBY@teranews.com" <benj@iwaynet.net> - 2011-11-03 03:32 -0500
            Re: information theory? Chris <chris.santoro@gmail.com> - 2011-11-03 08:39 -0700
            Re: information theory? Chris <chris.santoro@gmail.com> - 2011-11-03 08:28 -0700

csiph-web