Re: why can't we erase information?

From: Russell Standish <r.standish.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:44:33 +1000

On Mon, Apr 10, 2006 at 10:26:17PM -0400, Jesse Mazer wrote:
>
> As I understand it, you don't need exactly need an observer, you just need
> to identify various macro-variables (like pressure and temperature) which
> can be used to "coarse-grain" the phase space of the system, with entropy
> being proportional to the logarithm of the number of possible detailed
> "microstates" (detailed descriptions of the positions and momenta of all the
> particles, within the limits of the uncertainty principle) compatible with a
> given "macrostate" (descriptions of the system which only tell you the value
> of the macro-variables). Once you have chosen your set of macro-variables,
> they should have well-defined values for any system, regardless of whether
> it's being observed by anyone or not. Of course, the choice of variables is
> based on what properties we human observers are actually capable of
> measuring in practice, so I don't necessarily disagree with your statement,
> but I think it needs a little clarification.

That is precisely my point. However, observers are needed to specify
the thermodynamic variables (as otherwise these things are
meaningless). I try to make this somewhat provocatively, sure, but
denying the role of the observer is bit like sweeping it under the carpet.

>
> Likewise, I think "the second law is interpreted as the destruction of
> information" needs a bit of clarification--as entropy increases, there are
> more and more microstates compatible with a given macrostate so the observer
> is losing information about the microstate, but information is not really
> being lost at a fundamental level, since *in principle* it would always be
> possible to measure a system's exact microstate.
>
> Jesse
>

Information also needs an observer. Information is lost from the
observer. I would argue it is not hidden, unless you believe in the
possibility of Laplace's daemon actually existing. (Which I suspect
you are saying with your *in principle* clause).

Also note that exact measurements of microstates is *in principle*
incompatible with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics                         	       0425 253119 (")
UNSW SYDNEY 2052         	         R.Standish.domain.name.hidden             
Australia                                http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Tue Apr 11 2006 - 18:23:12 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:11 PST