![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
wolven7Ego Likeness - [Traveling Son]--- So, where am I going with the Quantum stuff, you ask. Where am I taking this sum-over-histories information and the fact that we can obtain quantum and classical properties from the same substance?
"I'm takin' it straight to ya dome," as my friends from New York would have said, in the mid- to late-nineties.
We're imperfect measuring devices, and, paradoxically, the more we know, the more we don't know. It's a fucntion of the universe (just ask Heisenberg). The more niformation we gain about a system, the more we bring it to a structured working, but if that information is about the things that we don't know, abotut how to studiously not observe something, not measure it, then our entropy remains the same, while our ability to exhibit quantum superpositioning increases.
Here: Entropy is a function of systems. It is unknown information, in a sense, regarding the sytem under observation. Entropy is subjective. What I know and what you know are not the same, and so we do not have the same measurements of entropy for the same systems. However, when we gain knowledge of a system, the entropy is transfered to us, in the sense of unknown bouncing and collisions.
W/P Duality is the nature of the universe, possibly (probably) due to strings, possibly not. (System of a Down - [Atwa]). When we measure the wavelike nature of, say, an electron, we collapse the wave (all the potentially infinite places it could be) to a single place. We need not actually detect the thing in a place, directly, but the act of measurement makes it so. Observations affects outcome. The position with the highest probability at the time of observation tends to be the one on which the form collapses, or around which it decoheres.
Pearl Jam - [Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town]--- So. We confer entropy to ourselves, in learning anything, and the act of observation/interaction/measurement helps to collapse wave functions. Therefore, if we know the nature of the system about which we learn, the entropy conferred to us, about that system, should serve to allow our faulty measurement of that system (we do not detect completely accurately, at all times), and allow us to manipulate the ways and amounts in which we observe quantum superposition states.
Chumbawamba - [Outsider]--- If I know that what I don't know relates to a certain system, or is a result of my having learned about a certain system, then I can know that there will be certain holes in my application of new knowledge to that system. Properly apprehended, I can use those holes, and affect their workings, in an observable fashion.
"The spread of entropy (ignorance) is based upon the interactive observation that collapses the waveform," as I said, so the more we learn, the less we know. (AFX - [Bit]). So that's what this is about. (Emmet Swimming - [Arlington]). It's about knowing that we know less, all the time, and using that dearth of knowledge to control what we do know, and learn more, such that the ignorance we gain is only applicable to the things we safely understand.
Pratchett talked about this when he said: "'How do you know it’s not possible until you’re tried?' . . experiments with Hex, the University’s thinking engine, had found that, indeed, many things are not impossible until they have been tried.
"When something is tried, Ponder found, it often does turn out to be impossible very quickly, but it takes a little while for this to really be the case. . .-- in effect, for the overworked laws of causality to hurry to the scene and pretend it has been impossible all along."
Ladytron - [I'm With The Pilots]--- What I'm saying is, we can beat the rush.
I need to go to bed.
That barely made sense to me.
"I'm takin' it straight to ya dome," as my friends from New York would have said, in the mid- to late-nineties.
We're imperfect measuring devices, and, paradoxically, the more we know, the more we don't know. It's a fucntion of the universe (just ask Heisenberg). The more niformation we gain about a system, the more we bring it to a structured working, but if that information is about the things that we don't know, abotut how to studiously not observe something, not measure it, then our entropy remains the same, while our ability to exhibit quantum superpositioning increases.
Here: Entropy is a function of systems. It is unknown information, in a sense, regarding the sytem under observation. Entropy is subjective. What I know and what you know are not the same, and so we do not have the same measurements of entropy for the same systems. However, when we gain knowledge of a system, the entropy is transfered to us, in the sense of unknown bouncing and collisions.
W/P Duality is the nature of the universe, possibly (probably) due to strings, possibly not. (System of a Down - [Atwa]). When we measure the wavelike nature of, say, an electron, we collapse the wave (all the potentially infinite places it could be) to a single place. We need not actually detect the thing in a place, directly, but the act of measurement makes it so. Observations affects outcome. The position with the highest probability at the time of observation tends to be the one on which the form collapses, or around which it decoheres.
Pearl Jam - [Elderly Woman Behind the Counter in a Small Town]--- So. We confer entropy to ourselves, in learning anything, and the act of observation/interaction/measurement helps to collapse wave functions. Therefore, if we know the nature of the system about which we learn, the entropy conferred to us, about that system, should serve to allow our faulty measurement of that system (we do not detect completely accurately, at all times), and allow us to manipulate the ways and amounts in which we observe quantum superposition states.
Chumbawamba - [Outsider]--- If I know that what I don't know relates to a certain system, or is a result of my having learned about a certain system, then I can know that there will be certain holes in my application of new knowledge to that system. Properly apprehended, I can use those holes, and affect their workings, in an observable fashion.
"The spread of entropy (ignorance) is based upon the interactive observation that collapses the waveform," as I said, so the more we learn, the less we know. (AFX - [Bit]). So that's what this is about. (Emmet Swimming - [Arlington]). It's about knowing that we know less, all the time, and using that dearth of knowledge to control what we do know, and learn more, such that the ignorance we gain is only applicable to the things we safely understand.
Pratchett talked about this when he said: "'How do you know it’s not possible until you’re tried?' . . experiments with Hex, the University’s thinking engine, had found that, indeed, many things are not impossible until they have been tried.
"When something is tried, Ponder found, it often does turn out to be impossible very quickly, but it takes a little while for this to really be the case. . .-- in effect, for the overworked laws of causality to hurry to the scene and pretend it has been impossible all along."
Ladytron - [I'm With The Pilots]--- What I'm saying is, we can beat the rush.
I need to go to bed.
That barely made sense to me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-08-01 06:25 am (UTC)the real bitch of it is tryin to recreate everyone elses reality so that it matches up with the only true reality, yours.
no subject
no subject
Date: 2006-08-01 06:37 am (UTC)the only thing an axe shares with a tree is impact
no subject
no subject
Date: 2006-08-01 06:59 am (UTC)it says:
The more I study
The more I know
The more I know
The more I forget
The more I forget
The Less I know
SO WHY STUDY?
they were sold out of the shot glass that said it, otherwise she'd have gotten me that instead. that one said:
The more I study
The more I know
The more I know
The more I drink
The more I drink
The more I forget
The more I forget
The less I know
CHEERS
thinking about getting that engraved on a flask, if i ever have the money.
no subject
Date: 2006-08-01 03:20 pm (UTC)Reminds of the Inuit
Date: 2006-08-01 05:15 pm (UTC)The Inuit was dealing with a preacher from a newly-developed mission, and the concept of hellfire was being discussed.
"What about people who have never heard of your religion? Do they go to hell anyway?"
"Well, no," replied the minister. "Of course they don't go to hell just for not knowing."
At which point the Inuit man grabbed him by the collar, lifted him off the ground, and shook him violently.
"THEN WHY DID YOU TELL ME?"
Re: Reminds of the Inuit
Sensible people, those Inuit. Proper role-models, and such. *nods*