Is Gravity the Ultimate Source of Potential and Kinetic Energy?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between gravity, potential energy, and kinetic energy, exploring whether gravity can be considered the ultimate source of these forms of energy. Participants examine the implications of treating information as a form of energy and the philosophical underpinnings of these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Philosophical
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the definitions of potential and kinetic energy should be redefined in light of new understandings of energy as an information source.
  • Others propose that potential energy may have effects beyond what is currently observed, influenced by the information emitted by surrounding objects, which could also affect kinetic energy.
  • A participant raises philosophical questions about the relationship between energy and information, discussing various reductive statements and their implications for understanding reality.
  • There is a mention of the idea that gravity qualifies as potential energy, with the assertion that gravity's information is limited to its effects, such as causing objects to fall or light to bend.
  • Another participant references previous discussions about whether energy equates to information, indicating that this question remains unresolved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views on the relationship between gravity, energy, and information. There is no consensus on whether gravity is the ultimate source of potential and kinetic energy or on the implications of treating information as energy.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes philosophical considerations that may not be universally accepted, such as the potential for category errors in the reduction of information to energy. The implications of these philosophical positions on the scientific understanding of energy remain unresolved.

disturbed1
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
given information is an energy source. shouldn't the basics of potential and kinetic energy be redifined.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
given reproduced information formulates potenial energy. and two energy patterns are described to even transfer such a signal. it could be said that a pattern of any kind represents information. this would mean that potential energy has more effects than just the obvious observed today. Given any object is affected not only by the objects next to it but by the information given off by these objects, kinetic energy would be affected also.
 
In both philosophy and science, problems always arise when we treat information as distinct from energy. For example, if you took the route of 'Reductionism', it is not clear which of these reductive statements hold:

1) Man is Matter
2) Matter is Energy
------------------
3) Therefore, Man is Energy
------------------

4) Energy Pool is Information source

5) Energy Pool is Information Pool

Or simply...

6) Energy is Information

In philosophy propositions (3) and (6) are critical but profound physicalist statements and they are not taken lightly at all...and according to many philosophers they need to be scientifically proved. That regardless of the level or scale that we reach in any scientific reduction of information to energy and vice versa, these physicalist statements must hold true.

Finally, note that statement (4) appears as if information is separate from energy, with a possible 'metaphysical remainder'. Well, in philosophy this will cause a notorious metaphysical problem...it will manifest into 'Category Error' that some people have identified elsewhere on this PF. Already, as I have noted elsewhere on this PF, Matter on its own, as a unique metaphysical category, appears on the spectrum of reality as if it is 'Self-categorising', which if it is true, metaphysically writes off or overwrites the so-called 'unexplainable remainder' of matter (the immaterial aspect of it, if any).

So the Standard of Proof is this:

If Information is reducible to Energy at any scale of reference, then the following conditions must hold unversally;

1) It must not lead to 'category error'

2) It must not lead to 'unexplainable remainder'

In other words the deductive process must be 'eliminative' in scope and in substance. This process is rightly called 'Eliminative Reductionism'
 
Last edited:
I asked in the thread linked below whether gravity is energy. It seems to have qualified as potential energy. The only information gravity contains is "things fall down" or "light bends here". Gravity adds potential to kinetic energy because of the reaction between the two. Philosophically potential and kinetic energies
have their root in the single concept of energy.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=138215

Also, this deleted member has asked the question

"Does energy = information"
without making much headway toward an answer.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=122587
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K