Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Classical Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum Interpretations
Special and General Relativity
Atomic and Condensed Matter
Nuclear and Particle Physics
Beyond the Standard Model
Cosmology
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Other Physics Topics
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum analog of Boltzmann entropy?
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="Fra, post: 6867244, member: 76451"] What I meant is that I that a agent/observer doesn't need to be human - not that can't be human, or a dog for that matter. I only want to get away from those associating "epistemology" as a human phenomena. The generalized physical concept I imagine is more how one part of the universe can "learn" via interactions, about other parts of the universe. The parts does not need to have brains. As I see it, an agent needs at least a structure for encoding information, and a way to process this information and respond to input. This processing in my vision does not imply brains, or computers, it can be "natural processes". Ultimaltey, the instruction set would somehow be related to the laws of physics, but at the same time these laws are subject to constant evolution. So, sure a dog can be an agent, or a a molecule can also be an agent in the general sense. In the ordinary sense of observer a la Bohr, where it's essential the macroscopic(or "classical") environment that is the observer, then the role of the human is that it can _control_ the laboratory and the procedure of preparation and detectors, electronics etc. In this sense the physicist at least in principle have control, and access to the whole macroscopic environment, at least to the extent technology and economy allows. The exeprimental uncertainty there is, is IMO a manifestation of the ambigousness of the macroscopic observer still. This uncertainty would be larger if the negineers at LHC were dogs, but the principles are the same. Surely a dog can't do this, and dogs would not produce QED or QCD. Those "theories" are certainly human inventions. So what I entertain at this point are "toy models" of primordal observers, which is like the simplest possible "agents" one can imagine. It's nowhere near a dog or a molecule in complexity, it's imaginary things that I envision would perhaps been dominating in some TOE era in early big bang. One idea is similar to string theory, where my "interpretation" of string theory, would be this: the "string" is the mathematical description of a primordal observer or a living "measure". The modes of the string represents it's way of encoding information. But the problem is that the strings also lives in a background spacetime, whose dynamics is poorly understood still it seems. The various dualities in string theory in my mind, corresponds to agents different "internal recodings" or alternative representations, which also gives different dynamics. But one would need to understand the interaction between strings, and systems of strings, to understand how the background is selected. Then one can imagine largers objects constructed by strings interacting and consider the evolutionary pressure of making transition to other bakgrounds (via dualities). But I have realise this is not how string theorists think, i can't recall ahving seen one paper in this direction. So I have chosen another path. /Fredrik [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Physics
Quantum Physics
Quantum analog of Boltzmann entropy?
Back
Top