Wolfenstein3d
- 21
- 0
My guess is the number is huge,but I don't know what transformations from the hip Iwould use to figure this out.
Wolfenstein3d said:My guess is the number is huge
Wolfenstein3d said:I think it's huge relative to a computers memory.
Because hup defines a lot of detail being packed into matterPeterDonis said:Again, why? Either you have some basis for thinking this or you don't. If you do, what is it? If you don't, why are you guessing?
Wolfenstein3d said:Because hup defines a lot of detail being packed into matter
Wolfenstein3d said:My guess is the number is huge,but I don't know what transformations from the hip Iwould use to figure this out.
Wolfenstein3d said:if the hup was smaller by a factor of a million, you would expect the amount of information present in an atom to be higher by a factor of 1 million.
PeterDonis said:Why?
You keep making these general assertions without anything to back them up. Where are you getting this understanding from? What QM textbooks have you studied?
hsdrop said:It also does not help anyone understand anything when someone answering a question with another question
Heisenberg uncertainty principle: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/uncer.htmlhsdrop said:i would like to know what a "hup" is wolf if possible
The uncertainty principle is a relation and a relation can't be a million times smaller. However, Planck's constant h could be, at least for thought experiments...Wolfenstein3d said:I'm asking how much detail is packed into an atom. Like if the hup was smaller by a factor of a million, you would expect the amount of information present in an atom to be higher by a factor of 1 million. Follow? (my bolding)
Right. I basically mean that hup puts an upper limit about how detailed the universe is.. In a way its like the size of pixels on a screen. From a pixel density on a computer screen you can infer the amount of data needed to encode the image displayed. There cannot be infinite detain in a given system, bc infinite detail would form a black whole due to endless energy density.right?DennisN said:Heisenberg uncertainty principle: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/uncer.html
Edit:
And when I read the original post I saw it was pretty strangely worded:
The uncertainty principle is a relation and a relation can't be a million times smaller. However, Planck's constant h could be, at least for thought experiments...![]()
Wolfenstein3d said:I basically mean that hup puts an upper limit about how detailed the universe is.. In a way its like the size of pixels on a screen.
Wolfenstein3d said:There cannot be infinite detain in a given system, bc infinite detail would form a black whole due to endless energy density.right?
PeterDonis said:That's not how the HUP works in standard QM or in standard QFT. There are speculations about spacetime being made of discrete "pixels" at the Planck scale, but those are just speculations.
No. I don't know where you are getting this from.
Wolfenstein3d said:People definitively answered a question i had on stack saying that the HUP is the precise reason there is not infinite information or infinite detail present in any sort of matter or energy.
Wolfenstein3d said:i wouldve assumed you knew this PeterAdonis
Wolfenstein3d said:Also read this in an article
Wolfenstein3d said:the reason you can't store infinite data on a hard drive or it would collapse into a black hole
Wolfenstein3d said:Storing information takes energy or mass equivalent.
Wolfenstein3d said:Again, how do u not know this?
PeterDonis said:Did they give any references to textbooks or peer-reviewed papers? Can you give a link to the discussion?
I know a quantum particle doesn't have an exact position and an exact momentum at the same time, yes. I have not seen anything in a QM textbook or peer-reviewed paper about the claims you are making about the HUP and information.
What article? Can you provide a link?
This is silly. The reason you can't store infinite data on a hard drive is that it stores data in finite size cells and it has only a finite number of them. But this limitation is imposed by our limited technology, not by the laws of physics.
This is true. However, I don't think it means what you think it means.
There is a physical result called the "Bekenstein bound" which says that only a finite amount of information can be stored in a finite volume, and uses characteristics of black holes to make the argument for what that finite amount is. It's possible that you are reading garbled versions of this.
Know what? Know the vague, confused things you are claiming, taken from sources you have provided no links to, and paraphrased by you so I don't even know that what you think the sources said is what they actually said?
I have asked you repeatedly to provide references for where you are getting your understanding from, because the things you are saying do not seem like things that I know from textbooks and peer-reviewed papers and my understanding of them. It's possible that you are misunderstanding or mis-stating actual true pieces of physics that you've read. It's also possible that you are reading pop science sources that are misrepresenting the science. Unless you give some actual references, I have no way to tell. Either provide some references or this thread will be closed.
PeterDonis said:Did they give any references to textbooks or peer-reviewed papers? Can you give a link to the discussion?
I know a quantum particle doesn't have an exact position and an exact momentum at the same time, yes. I have not seen anything in a QM textbook or peer-reviewed paper about the claims you are making about the HUP and information.
What article? Can you provide a link?
This is silly. The reason you can't store infinite data on a hard drive is that it stores data in finite size cells and it has only a finite number of them. But this limitation is imposed by our limited technology, not by the laws of physics.
This is true. However, I don't think it means what you think it means.
There is a physical result called the "Bekenstein bound" which says that only a finite amount of information can be stored in a finite volume, and uses characteristics of black holes to make the argument for what that finite amount is. It's possible that you are reading garbled versions of this.
Know what? Know the vague, confused things you are claiming, taken from sources you have provided no links to, and paraphrased by you so I don't even know that what you think the sources said is what they actually said?
I have asked you repeatedly to provide references for where you are getting your understanding from, because the things you are saying do not seem like things that I know from textbooks and peer-reviewed papers and my understanding of them. It's possible that you are misunderstanding or mis-stating actual true pieces of physics that you've read. It's also possible that you are reading pop science sources that are misrepresenting the science. Unless you give some actual references, I have no way to tell. Either provide some references or this thread will be closed.
Wolfenstein3d said:closing this thread would be immature and completely on you Peter
Wolfenstein3d said:i know I am not as inept as you seem to believe.
Wolfenstein3d said:im trying to find the articles.
Wolfenstein3d said:I cleaned up my post just now and reinforced the points I am making please read through it.
Wolfenstein3d said:infinite detail in a confined space would cause the creation of a black whole because of concentrated mass or energy density
Wolfenstein3d said:The density of info on the hard drive is limited by the ability of transistors to function
Wolfenstein3d said:and raw information is limited by tbe HUP.
Wolfenstein3d said:I'm asking how much detail is packed into an atom. Like if the hup was smaller by a factor of a million, you would expect the amount of information present in an atom to be higher by a factor of 1 million. Follow?
Wolfenstein3d said:My guess is the number is huge,but I don't know what transformations from the hip Iwould use to figure this out.
PeterDonis said:No, it isn't. A hard drive is not relying on quantum effects anywhere near the point where the uncertainty principle would significantly affect its operation.
PeterDonis said:Rather than editing an existing post, you should make a new one if you have more information to post.
Re-reading your post I don't see any new information that's useful.
No, that's not correct. What is correct is that if a physical system has anything close to the maximum information per volume that it can have, according to the Bekenstein bound, it is already a black hole. There is no such thing as having an object that is not a black hole but is "close" to one, and then packing a little more information into it and having it become a black hole. The system would collapse to a black hole well before you got anywhere close to the limit on information storage given by the Bekenstein bound.
Also, the Bekenstein bound has nothing whatever to do with the uncertainty principle. It has to do with applying classical thermodynamics in the context of a classical black hole as described by General Relativity.
Actually, the key limitation for hard drives is the ability to reliably distinguish the magnetic domains that signify 0 and 1 bits.
No, it isn't. A hard drive is not relying on quantum effects anywhere near the point where the uncertainty principle would significantly affect its operation.
Wolfenstein3d said:I don't have any disagreement with what you said
except;
To use an example, say in another universe the HUP was shifted in the direction that would make it much harder to get precision measurements of position/momentum than it is in our universe. As if you could hardly know anything about a particles position/momentum duo. Wouldnt you consider this universe as being less detailed per unit mass/energy than ours is?
Wouldnt this be vaguely similar to having a computer monitor fudge together pixels whenever it is uncertain of the location of each colored pixel?
Why do you think a computer screens pixel density isn't a fair comparison to the intrinsic information content in matter or energy?
Wolfenstein3d said:how can the HUP not be considered the limiting factor for how detailed the universe is?
Wolfenstein3d said:The Heisenberg uncertainty principle directly addresses not only how much you can know about a particle, but also how much THERE IS TO KNOW, about a particle.
Wolfenstein3d said:Wouldnt this be vaguely similar to having a computer monitor fudge together pixels whenever it is uncertain of the location of each colored pixel?
I'm sure it helped!Wolfenstein3d said:Yeah, as if he needed a PhD to do his his thought experiments
Wolfenstein3d said:Wouldn't you need a photon with a wavelength approaching 0 to locate a particle to an exact point location of the center of mass?
Wolfenstein3d said:when I asked the hup detail question on this forum in 2013
Wolfenstein3d said:the hup was the speed limit on detailedness of a particle
Wolfenstein3d said:Yeah, as if he needed a PhD to do his his thought experiments
Wolfenstein3d said:The consensus when I asked the hup detail question on this forum in 2013 was that the hup was the speed limit on detailedness of a particle. Like 4 people concurred about that. Did something happen in between then and now?
Drakkith said:Of course he did! Without years of studying physics Einstein ...
Wolfenstein3d said:Also i didnt see you disagree with anything i said other then
Wolfenstein3d said:An office clerk physicist who basically freestyled GR because it followed the way he thought things should work is pretty much equivalent to an armchair physicist. Not bad company tbh.
Vanadium 50 said:That's not how the forum works. You can't post incorrect statement after incorrect statement, and when one isn't immediately countered then conclude people must think it's correct.
So your saying it was right for so many discoverers to be labeled heretics and sometimes stoned to death when they dared to question the traditional way of thinking?
You want to ostracize me even when the result of this will be a better
Theres actually some debate as to whether space is quantized Peter. Even with continuous space events can still occur in a quantized manner, Like the spinning wheel on the price is right. The wheel spins smoothly, but the point points in an all-or-nothing, quantized manner.PeterDonis said:You seem to have the misconception that the HUP means the universe is discrete, not continuous. That's not the case. Position for a free particle is a continuous observable in standard QM, not a discrete one. The HUP doesn't change that.
As I mentioned before, there are speculations that spacetime might be discrete instead of continuous at the Planck scale, but those are just speculations.
Also, as has been discussed, what we know of black hole thermodynamics and the Bekenstein bound suggests that only a finite amount of information can be stored in a finite volume. But that has nothing to do with the HUP.
No, it doesn't. The HUP says that a quantum system's allowed states do not include certain kinds of states that classically would have been expected--for example, a state which has both an exact position and an exact momentum. But that is not the same as the allowed states being discrete or the information that can be in principle stored in the state being limited. It just means the continuous state space in QM is not the same as the continuous state space you would expect from classical physics.
As above, there are indeed reasons to think that only a finite amount of information can be stored in a system with a finite volume; but those reasons have nothing to do with the HUP. I've said this repeatedly now and you have not appeared to grasp it.
No. The HUP is not the same as "uncertainty about the location of each colored pixel". It has nothing to do with pixels. I've said this repeatedly, and others have said it as well, and you have not appeared to grasp it.
So your saying it was right for so many discoverers to be labeled heretics and sometimes stoned to death when they dared to question the traditional way of thinking?
Wolfenstein3d said:Even with continuous space events can still occur in a quantized manner, Like the spinning wheel on the price is right. The wheel spins smoothly, but the point points in an all-or-nothing, quantized manner.