What is this equation regarding?

[iBio]

Here is the equation:

I(X) = Ex 1/n E/LOG SI S/T (G)

So, what does this mean? What is it describing? (Or is it just gibberish? I found it from a highly questionable source...)

Note: I wasn't sure if this should be posted in the physics section or the mathematics section as I have no idea what this means beyond the fact that it is a logarithm of some type. (I'm an evo biology student, and I've only taken Physics 111...)

Thanks for your time!

 

[mfb]

Is it given like that (in ASCII)? At least for me, it is unclear how to parse this equation. What is part of the argument of the log? Where do fractions start, where do they end? Are some of those symbols subscripts?
Is there any context to the equation?

I don't think I ever saw something similar, but that does not mean much.

 

[iBio]

Is it given like that (in ASCII)? At least for me, it is unclear how to parse this equation. What is part of the argument of the log? Where do fractions start, where do they end? Are some of those symbols subscripts?
Is there any context to the equation?

I don't think I ever saw something similar, but that does not mean much.

Thanks for the response.

(Note: If what I'm about to say is inappropriate for this forum, I will gladly delete it as it was not my intention to drag a religious argument I was having into this forum.)

I didn't link the source as I imagine this site has a ToS contract which does not allow religion v. atheism argumentation. Long story short, I was given a link to a blog in which the title was "Question that Destroys Atheism." In this blog, there is a picture of electrons whirling around an atom, and this equation lies under the picture. The author then makes a classic begging the question argument in which he states the following:

"A) Matter is information
B) Matter cannot produce it on its own- needs sentient sender.
C) Sentient Sender must be intelligent and Causal/Mover Agent in order to code matter.

Who/What is this sentient sender?"

I was commenting on the fallacies committed, but I was wondering if the equation was relevant to the argument. For context, he mentions information theory in the comments multiple times and states that this information is available in physics textbooks and in Hawking's writings.

Link: << deleted >>

You may be thinking it, but no, I do not normally waste my time with this kind of thing, but it was a somewhat close friend who linked me to this page, and I felt it necessary to refute the "argument."

 

[jtbell]

I followed the link and wasted about ten minutes scrolling through the long discussion/argument on that page. I can confirm that the equation is indeed given only in that ASCII form on that page. I saw no clues as to what the equation actually means, except that the poster claims that it has something to do with information theory and Stephen Hawking. I don't recognize the equation myself. Maybe somebody else will.

 

[iBio]

I followed the link and wasted about ten minutes scrolling through the long discussion/argument on that page. I can confirm that the equation is indeed given only in that ASCII form on that page. I saw no clues as to what the equation actually means, except that the poster claims that it has something to do with information theory and Stephen Hawking. I don't recognize the equation myself. Maybe somebody else will.

I was hoping my mention of information theory and Stephen Hawking's writings would prevent people from wasting their time on that site. I apologize that I did waste your time, though.

(It appears the link has been deleted anyhow. That's probably for the best.)

 

[jtbell]

We prefer not to contribute to boosting the Google rankings of sites like that, by linking to them.

 

[ZapperZ]

Here is the equation:

I(X) = Ex 1/n E/LOG SI S/T (G)

So, what does this mean? What is it describing? (Or is it just gibberish? I found it from a highly questionable source...)

Note: I wasn't sure if this should be posted in the physics section or the mathematics section as I have no idea what this means beyond the fact that it is a logarithm of some type. (I'm an evo biology student, and I've only taken Physics 111...)

Thanks for your time!

Please note that if it from a highly questionable source, it should not be discussed here, per the rules of this forum.

Zz.

 

[iBio]

We prefer not to contribute to boosting the Google rankings of sites like that, by linking to them.

I can definitely understand that, and I wholly agree.

Please note that if it from a highly questionable source, it should not be discussed here, per the rules of this forum.

Zz.

Understood.

If you'd prefer it, I will delete this thread and forget I ever brought it up. Let me know.

[Note: For what it's worth, I did look up the ToS after I posted just to be sure I didn't break any rules and noticed the line, "Discussion of theories that appear only on personal web sites, self-published books, etc." (I didn't look up the ToS beforehand as I was previously a member here a few years back and am familiar with it, but I'd forgotten the username I used.) I inferred that this wouldn't exclude the equation, only the statements that followed. My curiosity got the better of me, and I just wanted to understand if the equation was actually a legitimate mathematical representation of reality or something the author simply made up or copied and pasted from some unknown source.]