Is photon a basic unit of information?

[morg]

I have a simple question: can we assume that a photon is the basic unit of information? And the photon movement is the information flow?

It seems strange, but wherever I try to find anything about information flow basics, there is no mention about photons. Shannon's or Mazur's information theory does not include a word about photons, also any memetics' theories do not mention photons. Both of them seem to tread information flow as some abstract idea. Entropy in shannon theory of information seems to be a different thing than entropy in pure physics, but I see the direct corelation.

 

[DrChinese]

OK, if that were so, how would photons be different than other quantum particles? Are photons different (in your "informational" view) in some way than an electron, for example?

 

[JDude13]

I like to think of photons as the most basic particles because they are
massless
can have a range of energies
can have a range of frequencies
move at the speed of light
have no charge
have no anti-particle
are plentiful

 

[AstrophysicsX]

I read somewhere that every particle has a symmetric anti-particle. Dark matter could be that for a photon.

 

[nnnm4]

Sure, there are many philosophical interpretations of science. Perhaps mathematics is just a framework in which we develop ways to codify everything we observe, like a generalization of a chart of data? I don't necessarily think this is the case, but I'm sure an argument could be made. However, there are certain ways of thinking of a photon that allow us to understand the physics in a more intuitively physics related way. This is simply the most pragmatic interpretation for developing experiments to verify or refute the predictions.

 

[IsometricPion]

I read somewhere that every particle has a symmetric anti-particle. Dark matter could be that for a photon.

The photon is its own http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiparticle" .

I have a simple question: can we assume that a photon is the basic unit of information? And the photon movement is the information flow?

This would seem to be equivalent to saying that in a world without photons information could neither be stored nor transmitted. If there are other (unrelated) things that can store or transmit information, I don't see how photons could be the basic unit of information.

 

[morg]

Okay. Thanks for replies, but I still have the dilema about it,

Let's say, I stare at a horseshoe hanging on the wall (in a room lit by a 60W bulb). Photons from a bulb hit the cluster of atoms of an entity we, humans, call a horseshoe, and these photons "beat out" photons from horseshoe atoms; photons from the horseshoe are now spreading with proper wavelenghts (colours) in all directions. Some of horseshoe photons pass through our eyeballs and by special chemical process (i forgot the name) are turned into an electrical current, which also is actively sent through electromagnetic interactions between atoms of an 'optical nerve', so photons are still the motor of this flow. Then, the impulses go to the complex interpretation areas in my brain, and - depending of my experience (physical structure of connections in my brain) - I percieve this entity as a horseshoe or bad luck symbol or a piece of a metal on the wall.

During this information flow there are many background noise sources that distort the information, but in our case there is enough light to see the horseshoe without distractions. Brain also is focused here on the point of view, so there is no background noise of other impulses.

The same would be with a man listening to a radio (with noise or not), smelling horse-sh.t, sending an email, writing and sending a letter, and so on.

I do not assume that photons are the only thing that determines the information flow. But aren't they most important carrier of information?

(I assume: yes, but I need to confront this idea with others)

 

[San K]

I have a simple question: can we assume that a photon is the basic unit of information? And the photon movement is the information flow?

It seems strange, but wherever I try to find anything about information flow basics, there is no mention about photons. Shannon's or Mazur's information theory does not include a word about photons, also any memetics' theories do not mention photons. Both of them seem to tread information flow as some abstract idea. Entropy in shannon theory of information seems to be a different thing than entropy in pure physics, but I see the direct corelation.

A photon could be with the properties mentioned below. Thus if matter was torn apart into photons, electrons etc...the information could be lost because photons would entangle and dis-entangle with various other particles and this could result in loss of information i guess.

this is in the sense that even if we did a time evolution of the events we could still not get back to the information about the states prior to entanglement and disentanglement...

 

[IsometricPion]

I do not assume that photons are the only thing that determines the information flow. But aren't they most important carrier of information?

They are, of course, very important for human perception. When it comes to information technologies and long distance communication, the electron is probably more important. Their importance depends on the context (and what is considered to be information).

Clearly, in order for information to be stored or transmitted, at least one particle must interact with the source of information. So, if one uses light, one must have at least one photon in order to store or transmit information. However, one can store more than one bit of information on each photon (using different properties, such as its spin/helicity, energy, etc.).

 

[AstrophysicsX]

The photon is its own antiparticle.

How could a particle be it's own antiparticle?

Light could be the basic unit of info. Without it, we couldn't detect anything.

 

[IsometricPion]

How could a particle be it's own antiparticle?

Light could be the basic unit of info. Without it, we couldn't detect anything.

From the link in the post you quoted:

However, other neutral particles are their own antiparticles, such as photons, the hypothetical gravitons, and some WIMPs. These are called Majorana particles and can annihilate with themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majorana_particle"

As to the second statement, many things (some completely unrelated to light) can convey information: sound, electrons, and (theoretically) gravitational waves just to name a few.

 

[Pythagorean]

information is not a particle, information is the change in geometry of the particles in time and space.

 

[morg]

So, my next three questions are (please, if possible, adress answers to the numbers)

1. Is there a possibility to information flow without photons included at all?

2. In electrical circuit - where electrons go in rows through cables - are photons needed at all?

3. During sound wave propagation - when pressure of air changes in an ordered way, are photons needed at all?

 

[Pythagorean]

1. sure, photons are only 1 force carrier, there's also the strong force carriers and the hypothesized gravitational force carrier.
2. yes, photons mediate electric force
3. yes, they mediate repulsion between the electron clouds of the air molecules

http://www.fnal.gov/pub/inquiring/matter/madeof/standardmodel.jpg

 

[morg]

pythagorean,
I know this standard model table very well, thus I am not sure:

is "force carrying" equal to "information carrying" ?

from what you say, answering my question 1:

"sure, photons are only 1 force carrier, there's also the strong force carriers and the hypothesized gravitational force carrier."

it sounds like any force is always a form of information.

is that correct?