Creationists take heed

[Cruddy]

Off topic skywalker - but it's not a bad idea for a poll.

Belief without "proof" is illogical. Unfortunately, "proof" is a rare commodity - evidence is all around, but determing its significance depends on one's beliefs.

A truly circular argument. Flawed though.

[Lincoln]

Has anyone ever heard of "Maxwells paradox"?

[Lincoln]

Since I am bored today, here is the essential problem:

quote:

The program to re-investigate the fundamental principles of physics from the standpoint of information theory is still in its infancy. However, it already appears to be highly fruitful, and it is this ambitious program that is summarized here.

Historically, the concept of information in physics does not have a clear-cut origin. An important thread can be traced if we consider the paradox of Maxwell's demon of 1871.

Recall that Maxwell's demon is a creature that opens and closes a trap door between two compartments of a chamber containing gas, and pursues the subversive policy of only opening the door when fast molecules approach it from the right, or slow ones from the left. In this way the demon establishes a temperature difference between the two compartments without doing any work, in violation of the second law of thermodynamics, and consequently permitting a host of contradictions.

In this illustration the demon sets up a pressure difference by only raising the partition when more gas molecules approach it from the left than from the right. This can be done in a completely reversible manner, as long as the demon's memory stores the random results of its observations of the molecules. The demon's memory thus gets hotter. The irreversible step is not the acquisition of information, but the loss of information if the demon later clears its memory.

A number of attempts were made to exorcise Maxwell's demon, such as arguments that the demon cannot gather information without doing work, or without disturbing (and thus heating) the gas, both of which are untrue. Some were tempted to propose that the 2nd law of thermodynamics could indeed be violated by the actions of an "intelligent being.'' It was not until 1929 that Leo Szilard made progress by reducing the problem to its essential components in which, the demon need merely identify whether a single molecule is to the right or left of a sliding partition, and its action allows a simple heat engine, called Szilard's engine, to be run. Szilard still had not solved the problem, since his analysis was unclear about whether or not the act of measurement, whereby the demon learns whether the molecule is to the left or the right, must involve an increase in entropy.

[Dr Strangelove]

Uhhhh, If this engine doesn't exist then what's the problem? It's a fantasy!

[Lincoln]

So are you ready for the solution?

[Lincoln]

Have to go for now. Here is the solution:

quote:

...A definitive and clear answer was not forthcoming, surprisingly, until a further fifty years had passed. In the intermediate years digital computers were developed, and the physical implications of information gathering and processing were carefully considered. The thermodynamic costs of elementary information manipulations were analyzed by Landauer and others during the 1960s (Landauer 1961, Keyes and Landauer 1970), and those of general computations by Bennett, Fredkin, Toffoli and others during the 1970s. It was found that almost anything could in principle be done in a reversible manner, i.e. with no entropy cost at all. Bennett (1982) made explicit the relation between this work and Maxwell's paradox by proposing that the demon can indeed learn where the molecule is in Szilard's engine without doing any work or increasing any entropy in the environment, and so obtain useful work during one stroke of the engine.

However, the information about the molecule's location must then be present in the demon's memory. As more and more strokes are performed, more and more information gathers in the demon's memory. To complete a thermodynamic cycle, the demon must erase its memory, and it is during this erasure operation that we identify an increase in entropy in the environment, as required by the 2nd law. This completes the essential physics of Maxwell's demon.

Classical information theory is founded on the definition of information. A warning is in order here. Whereas the theory tries to capture much of the normal meaning of the term "information", it can no more do justice to the full richness of that term in everyday language than particle physics can encapsulate the everyday meaning of "charm". "Information" for us will be an abstract term. Much of information theory dates back to seminal work of Shannon in the 1940's (Slepian 1974)...

[Dauphin]

I don't see why Maxwell's gremlin requires a memory at all. When a sliding door opens or closes by sensory input it has no memory of the event, it merely reacts.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Lincoln
How do you figure that God is not intelligent? And it is a paradox, but that does not make it false.

That is if there is a god which I doubt.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Lincoln


I guess you have never read where Jesus said to forgive the woman rather than stone her to death. And you apparently do not understand that Jesus said to turn the other cheek when offended. And I suppose that you do not undesrtand that the New Testament teaches that "mercy rejoices over judgment" or that we are under "the law of grace" now because of the death and resurection of Jesus. No, Chrisitans are not bigots if they believe what Jesus said.

IIRC, he doesn't tell them to forgive the woman, but just says "let he who is without sin cast the first stone." That's neither here nor there, however.

The New Testament says a lot of things, certainly, and not all of them consistent.

Since mercy rejoices over judgement, what about the mercy that is going to be shown to those non-Christians after death? Oh wait, they get cast into Hell for eternity. How merciful!

Jesus himself practiced bigotry with the Caananite woman (if you called someone a dog because of their ethnic background, wouldn't that make you a bigot?). He also tells his disciples to only go out and do good deeds among the Jews (Matthew 10:5), not the gentiles. Non-Jews weren't worthy of healing, cleansing etc., and this was after the Good Samaritan!

If Jesus himself was a bigot, and his adherents should follow his example, what else should one conclude?

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Big Crunch
I don't see why Maxwell's gremlin requires a memory at all. When a sliding door opens or closes by sensory input it has no memory of the event, it merely reacts.

I guess that is one reason why they call it information theory. The so-called proof was found in the computer age because of the storage of information. Erase your hard drive and see what happens.

[Lincoln]

Boris, you still take passages out of the context of the whole. Jesus called Peter "Satan" and he was a Jew. He also called some of his followers "fools". He does not single out the gentiles for reproach in fact he calls all people sinners. If you read his teachings carefully you will find that his main objection is toward hypocrites.

And no where does it say that only Christians go to heaven, nor does it say that all that call themselves Christian escape condemnation. He is an equal opportunity saviour.

And there is no way that you can call the true followers of the teachings of Jesus "bigots." He even instructed us to love our enemies.

[Cruddy]

Lincoln - I've lost the thread, but I beleive that you said something along the line of "those that BELIEVE what Jesus said are not bigots".

Had you said something along the lines of "Those that PRACTICE what Jesus taught are not bigots" I would have agreed with you, in so far as loving your God and your neighbour goes.

The problem a lot of your mockers have is with those people who describe themselves as Christian but who do neither of these things.

[Lincoln]

Well I agree with you. Jesus didn't care for hypocrites either.

[cinch]

Skywalker:

The Universe isn't "expanding into something". When they say the Universe is expanding, it can mean two things - in an infinite universe, that the distance between any two points has increased, and in a curved (spherical, torus, etc.) universe, that the circumference has increased. You are trying to picture yourself looking down on the Universe, which is again impossible because there is nothing outside the Universe. Picture it from inside the Universe, especially from inside a curved Universe, and it makes sense.

I'd like to see your answer to GePap's main question: What would you see/encounter if you were able to catch up to the outermost expanding particles of the universe? I suppose you could never 'catch them', as one could never reach the speed of light, only approach it... But could you look beyond it, if you became infinitely close to 'c'?

On second thought... It'd probably just be black, eh?

Oi, existence...

[Cruddy]

Living that close to a propogating causality effect would probably be a major health hazard.

You probably wouldn't "see" anything before you popped your clogs.