Signs of Entropy
WARNING: this is an ongoing debate on the forum. This is only MY version of how things are, based on the discussion on the forum, I might discover things that will perfect or change some of the presented theories. Please try to contradict me in a creative way with proof.
http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/topic/5844-the-cure-for-insomnia/page__gopid__49300entry49300
If the theory to describe the mechanism of the Universe was a perfect circle, then everything would be perfectly balanced. But it’s not. We are tempted to think that everything is perfectly balanced because, in our mind, we recreate a cloned system of the universe we’re analyzing, and the copy we are analyzing is, indeed, perfect and fits within a circle. The reality outside our mind is that we are missing information when imagining the world around us. Everything in reality is, indeed, balanced but not perfectly symmetrical. The core starts as a perfect balance, but as you go further into complexity, you discover something else. The universe itself is expanding; it stretches at incomprehensible speed. This causes entropy to be the ruler of events. Everything is more likely to get destroyed than to build itself. The energy you put into destruction is smaller than the energy you put into creation, even if, in theory, they should be the same. This can be seen also in math. Simple levels are balanced, for example addition (+) and subtraction (-) are balanced. If you subtract something out of something else, you will be able to reproduce the original thing by addition. It does not happen the same if we go one complexity level up. Multiplication and division are not balanced as they seem to our logic. There are situations that prove that division, in other words a process governed by entropy, is more powerful than multiplication, a process governed by syntropy.
Take for example 10 divided by 3. It will create a number that is stretching to infinity 3.333333 (to infinity). Such a number, you can not hold, express, or communicate in its full meaning without using a fraction. Regardless how many 3s you write after the dot, it will never be infinity, it will be just a ridiculous amount of numbers. Multiplication alone can not obtain infinity from finite things like division can. You cannot obtain the original number (10) by multiplying 3*3.3333 unless you have an infinite number of 3s after the dot. But you can’t have that without the help of division! So what division can do on its own, multiplication cannot balance alone.
Note: changing the base of the number will give round numbers in this case, but division is still capable of creating these kinds of numbers in other cases. Regardless of the base, you can’t escape it.
That gives a strong clue on how the entropy of the universe is governing things that surround us, and how, in our mind, things tend to be perfectly balanced while they are not. It’s another reason why, in the circle on the cover, there is a gap and not a perfect circle.
Entropy, caused by the expansion of the universe, has unbelievable consequences. Because of entropy, energy can be converted into information, and I will detail this important affirmation next.
Imagine you have a glass, for the sake of example. Let’s say it’s a perfect sphere (or any other ordered, geometrical shape). The quantity of information it contains is small, you could use a simple formula to describe the glass sphere and it will be perfectly accurate. Now use a small energy amount to shatter this glass sphere. The energy you will use will get converted into heat, heat will dissipate and so on. On a large-scale, even if it’s converted into something else, that energy will eventually vanish, because the universe is endlessly big and it’s growing/expanding. Any amount divided by infinity will tend towards zero. So you lose that energy, but what do you get instead? You get that sphere turned into shards. The quantity of information within those shards is a lot bigger than the information contained in the initial sphere. The quantity of matter is the same, the energy is the same, but the quantity of information is higher. In other words, you would need a lot more complex and bigger formulas to describe the shards than you needed for the sphere.
In an indirect way, energy was responsible for creating more information.
If matter can be converted into energy, and it can according to that funny dude with white hair named Einstein (E=mc^2), and energy can be converted into information, it means matter can be converted into information, but only within an entropic system, such as the universe. I make this specification because the same process logic can also be used on other systems, except the universe, and it will not work if they are non governed by entropy, but this in the application part of this book.
The implications of this are amazing when we consider one other thing. Information can multiply to infinity! For example, a fractal has an endless border even if it’s formula is finite. When you print a book in 1 million prints, you multiply that information 1 million times. None of the printed books will lose their power or meaning based on the number of prints. Technology is also a way information is converted back into higher levels. It requires energy just to compensate for the entropy in the system, but within an ideal, imaginary system, the process of matter to energy to information conversion could be reversed and could allow information to be converted back in energy and energy in matter. Just think about it: your mind is an endless source of information, it could change reality, matter, or anything around it just by thought. Now this sounds like fantasy, I know, and it is, because we live in an entropic system, so things will always go down and never up on their own. Understanding the mechanism however, is something of extreme value.
This fantastic conversion backwards actually happens under our eyes and we can observe it if we know where to look. Life itself is a system governed by syntropy, and that means this process is where we could expect this convention to happen, things to go backwards than in the rest of the universe. And it does. Life creates matter out of information, out of nothing virtually. Birth is one of the most powerful and magical moments of existence. Energy, matter, and information all work in creative direction–backwards–when it happens in a syntropic system.
But there is more to life than just syntropy. Living beings are complete systems, that means both syntropy and entropy should happen within same system. And it does. A part of our life is syntropic, while the other part is entropic. The bridge between the two parts of our lives happens at around 25 years, but depends on the person. In the second half of our lives, everything is governed by entropy, we degrade and we die eventually.
Syntropy and Entropy happen in separate time intervals of our lives. That is proof that time itself is part of our system. This means the life of a person can be seen as a whole and not only as a linear, unpredictable series of events. This allows techniques of foreseeing future, change it, and so on.
Hmm. So wait, are there elements of imagination and transposition involved? How you can, like, with a voodoo doll and voodoo magic, make physical things happen through thought? How one can be on the other side of the world and “know” where a favourite object is or how someone related close to them is feeling?
Maybe, like, in mass-praying, by making an information imprint of it in their heads, and through mass exchange in information, all directed in the same way, by lots of people, can make something like this happen.
Maybe we can “access” this thought-stream–a stream of all the thoughts in existence and to ever have existed–and that, if in the same room, we can gather these thoughts from people. Like with “fortune telling”.
Some information you “know” about people without being told. We can instinctively know something. Call it experience, knowing general situations or people. Call it intuition or just accept that sometimes we just know things.
In the events of destruction, we are talking about creation as well. In the breaking glass example, shards may have been the purpose, they could have use. It is very interesting to me how destruction could have positive outcomes.
Many questions come to mind and I’m not sure they would be appropriate. One I wish to ask is this: in a paragraph near the end, you speak of the life cycle and 25 years. Would that be in any way related or based upon Biorhythm? It’s an interesting perspective on time, saying that exactly on our 58th birthday we are experiencing rebirth, in terms of 3 cyclic life aspects.
Apologies if I appear vague.
I don’t know with what it has to do. Until about 25, we experience a syntropy process, then it’s a neutral stage, then we start to break down 🙂 For someone under 25 there is no way to accept that. From within syntropy death has no meaning. Kids think they will live forever.
This isn’t a Contrarian thought, but any base capable of representing non-integer fractions implicitly uses division. So while you can make any rational number manageable by changing how you represent the dividends, that management uses division. I don’t know how this carries into the syntropy-entropy relationship. If we deconstruct the world in a rigid set of basic components (e.g. the classic four elements, any mutually exclusive pair of opposites, good and evil) we will find some things easier to understand, and some things harder to understand, than if we keep allowing for the creation of new sets.
Even the smallest packet of mass-energy can be thought of as a lot of packets moving all over the place, and that by taking information from one of those packets, we get rid of all the other ones.
That’s really confusing. It’s so beautiful to think of the phenomenon as energy becoming information. Which would create an even bigger version of relativity. You’re suggesting that mass and energy and information are all really different manifestations of the same thing. I would love to see this published in an explicit mathematical model, if it explains phenomena like God playing dice more effectively than existing models.
The question of converting information back into energy is the same question as how to build a quantum computer, except that the computer seeks to turn the energy right back into information once it’s done the necessary work.
Energy guides mass, adding to the possibilities for what mass can do: It can move left, right, up, down, around itself (as in melting,) within its components (heat,) et cetera. And when that energy stops guiding a mass, its effects remain.
It seems reasonable to think information would guide energy analogously. It’s not in my abilities quite yet to consider the consequences of such a relationship, but presumably the uses of energy would expand enormously.
Would someone more able, bold, and kind explain how information expands the capabilities of energy?
You asked for a counter theory and proof of it. Well, since this is mainly philosophical I’m afraid I can offer no proof per se, just my own perspective, just like what you said what you believe to be things from your perspective.
First of all, when we talk about math, we should always be reminded that math is an illusion, it does not exist, it is imagination at its best, generated by reasoning, which could only be achieved by human beings (ex: animals can’t see math). When we see a “3” we do not see the number 3 itself, it does not exist; all that we see is a symbol which represents the idea of the number 3 in our minds. It could have been assigned another symbol (# or $) and it would have been the same. What matters is the logic behind the symbol and that is only an illusion we created to try and understand the universe in a more logical way.
That being said, from my point of view, 3.3333… does not really exist either, it is an illusion as well, so is infinity.
Infinity, if it really does exist, is something our minds were not programmed to understand, anyway. We can always try to imagine it, but we could never succeed.
Now about the glass sphere; you said we created information by breaking it. The way I see it is slightly different, all the information and/or mass/energy we needed to make both the sphere and the fragments was there all along; all we did was rearrange it in a different order, and the reason why it cannot be put back together is because the connectors which used to hold the information (fragments) together got accelerated when we transferred our own acceleration energy (punch) and became something else (heat, which then turned into air, etc… the cycle begins anew).
This leads me to my next theory.
Energy: These are what I understood to be your statements:
1) Energy vanishes, it is therefore wasted.
2) It takes a lot more energy to create something than to destroy it.
For statement #1 I will say this: From my perspective, nothing vanishes, nothing is ever wasted, it simply becomes something else. We never create or destroy anything, all we do is alter how the information is laid out for us to see. Back to the sphere example, but let’s use a jigsaw puzzle instead. We open the box and what we see is scrambled information, thousands of bits and pieces which make no apparent sense on their own. We know however that when we put them together in the right order they will display something entirely different. Now as yourself: Have we created anything at all? Do we now have more information than what we used to have? Or the information was always the same and all we did was rearrange it in a ways which made sense to us?
For statement #2: I believe this to be inaccurate, the only reason why it takes a lot more energy to “create” (or the way I see it, “arrange”) than to “destroy” or “dis-arrange” is because the latter uses the energy a lot more effectively than the former.
When we punched the sphere, most of our kinetic energy (energy or movement) was transferred onto the glass itself which accelerated the particles and created a dis-arrangement. In this case, very little energy was put to waste, and even if it did, I must say again, it never vanishes for good, it just got transformed into something else which will then goes back to the cycle.
To re-arrange it, however, takes a lot more energy, simply because most of the energy we put into it (fire, air, etc…) does not affect the object alone, it affects everything around the object, too (fire burns not only the glass but mainly the air around it, etc…). This does not mean we actually put a lot more energy into the object; the energy the object has remains the same, if not less than before, because the particles which used to connect the glass are now a different form of energy.
Example: If we destroy the sphere, remake it and re-destroy it many many many times, we never really gain information or energy, we may actually be losing an indistinguishable amount of energy since the connectors keep becoming air punch after punch, although it is probably too small a difference to even start to notice a change. (I really do not know whether this has been proven or not and therefore it remains as only my work of logic into the subject.)
Well, this is all I wanted to say for the time being. Thanks for taking interest if you ever do.
Again, I do not claim anything I have just written to be law or the higher truth, it is only my point of view against yours.