Sunday, November 13, 2016

The Theory of Everything: Newton, Information, Complexity, and Evolution

Quoting from the Polaris Project website, Isaac Newton’s first law can be stated as “Every mass, or body, be it at rest or moving, will not alter its present state unless acted upon by an external force.” The other laws of Newton flow from the logic that is implied in this first law.

By merely stating that a body will not alter its present state unless acted upon by an external force immediately implies the second law of Newton that, “The change in direction or speed of an object, is proportional to the amount of force acting on that body. The change in motion is also in the direction in which the force is acting.”

It is when we understand information for what it is can we reappreciate the thoughts of Newton. This idea, this reality of information has its roots from those who pursue quantum physics, some times they call themselves quantum mechanics, sometimes particle physicists, what ever suites you, but a select few of these thinkers hit on the reality of information and have passed it on. Though this reality coming from quantum physics, it is a much bigger concept than quantum physics, everything includes every discipline known to mankind, it’s all dealing with information even when they are doing things like trying to control the rain through a dance.

Informationis everything, everything is information even nothing is information, nothing is part of everything. The most basic information is the elementary particle.” Immediately one can go into philosophy, if nothing informs us there is nothing how can the elementary particle be everything, be the most basic piece of information, maybe physics has not come to an end. But be warned before you go into mysticism the entire known material is matter, we are looking at the roots of matter, the basic particle. But this philosophical question is beneath the laws of everything. This answers the questions is traditional philosophy superior to science no, because the clearest definition of information comes from quantum physics.

By answering the idea of information and rightfully concluding that information is everything, though from a premise that had no idea or a concept of understanding what everything is. Quantum physics followed an ancient line of thought, the first traditional philosophical milestone. What is a human being? So there is absolutely no need to frown on another, the question of what is a human being quantum physics answered that right down to quantum entanglement. Quantum physics answered that human beings are just like everything else we can detect presently, a human being is an information package.

Why appreciate Newton again. It is because when we understand information when understand how close Newton was to the theory of everything, destroyed merely by pursuit of alchemy, the times, Newton was around a long time ago, to only have missed entanglement is not bad, his first law only misses entanglement, not a bad achievement, not a bad thought for the times, we are watching television today all remotely controlled of course, a very different time from Newton.

If we say information is everything, we need at least one fact confirming from it beyond the mere statement that information is everything. “The first law of information, the first law of everything is that every relationship has a loss of freedom. We can put it at it’s most crude as every relationship has a cost.” A meaningful way to understand the first law of everything is from Suzanne Ngatai on a comment she made on Google + “when information is identified it therefore categorizes itself by 'being' therefore the cost is also the 'not being' of something else that comes along with this categorization…” She managed to unite the concepts of cost and freedom from the definition, obviously, the author of the first law of everything had no idea that the two concepts could be united so perfectly. Her comments will come useful in helping to understand how Newton is ‘new’ again as he enhances information and opens other doors not possible to imagine if a few bright sparks in physics told us and convinced us that information is everything.

Before getting to Newton let us understand why the first law of everything is bigger than the question if nothing informs us there is nothing how can the elementary particle be the most basic piece of information? The question seems sticky, but if that nothing can achieve a relationship there will be a loss of freedom. What can be outside the law of everything, the question can not be answered, it is foolish to even try, how do you know there is nothing, because nothing has informed you of itself and categorized as nothing. Whatever will be discovered will have no choice but to fall under the first law of everything even if it must be categorized outside a particle. Even if this is a hologram and there is a God out there, creator of it all, he has a relationship with his hologram.

Newton’s first law can be translated into the thoughts of everything, into the logic behind information being everything understanding that its first law is unbreakable.

Recalling Newton’s first law, every mass, or body, be it at rest or moving, will not alter its present state unless acted upon by an external force, let’s attempt to understand this strictly in terms of information. If this is successfully achieved, Newton helps explain evolution, it is not difficult, an information package will remain in it’s present state unless a relationship is established. This could very well be considered the second law of information, the second law of everything. Even if this is a hologram and there is a God out there, before creation of the hologram there was no relationship with the entity.

Newton has inspired the second law of information, immediately stepping above any subject whose laws are limited to particles, if anything out there exists that is not a particle, it too will remain subject to both laws of information, both laws of everything.

By understanding both laws in unison we begin to understand complexity better, but more importantly a very important concept of complexity, the evolutionary process. That we have a thumb is a cost, that is why it is important to understand words for being words, to understand that a cost, a loss of freedom is not necessarily a bad word, we are the products of incredible amounts of different categories of information in relationships upon relationships, humans are very complex. A huge variety of information is locked in our composition.

Complexity is a process that involves many variables, many pieces of information all in a relationship, it thus becomes more unpredictable. Understanding of complexity is aided when one understands information, starting first with the reality that everything is information. Multiple relationships will involve multiple forces.

We can not conclude what information prefers to remain as is or to change but we do know change requires a relationship and a loss of freedom. This of course need not be a bad thing, it is a neutral thing, remembering Suzanne Ngatai’s statement “when information is identified it therefore categorizes itself by 'being' therefore the cost is also the 'not being' of something else that comes along with this categorization…” That is all the cost is, don’t think of it as a reward, sometimes information packages are completely destroyed but the same process has occurred, a relationship, it is a cost even if it is as beneficial as evolution.

We do know that information prefers to survive, we generally abhor suicide, why didn’t the victim march on with the struggles of existing as a human being. Matter seems to have abolished anti matter from its surroundings in order to survive and thrive.

Evolution occurs because an information package needs to change to survive its environment, so that it can survive as best as possible given that it would be sharing a lot of space with different information packages. Given the circumstances a cheetah developed speed to survive its environment, a polar bear developed power and thick fur to survive its surroundings.

At one time, all bears had a common ancestor. Having a common ancestor means at one time they where all very much similar. The common ancestor is like the basic design. Having a common ancestor meant at one time all bears where similar information packages without great differentiation genetically, less variety than exists today.

Moving towards a cold environment the polar bear subconsciously desired more fur and blubber, a way to keep warm in the new environment it has found itself in. The conscious is just a part of our mind, our mind functions as our control center, it’s us, it is nothing more than organized information, just a complex machine, a complex computer.

Every thought, every desire, every emotion is merely a result of how information is organized in the brain. Our actions are a result of the relationship we have with our minds, and the way our minds are organized depends on how information is organized, we call this being wired, one can think of being wired as a giant computer, organized in 1’s and 0’s, how our 1’s and 0’s are organized depends on our experiences, are we racist, tribalism, believer in science as best language science can easily be tarnished by man, you just don’t publish those you hate and envy, so it is not a universal language, because everything is affected by politics, by how humans are wired/ programmed.

Information wants to survive in the most stable manner as possible. If this necessitates entering a relationship it must accept these costs to continue existing. Iron is reactive, it must accept to being oxidized if it exists in an oxidized environment, this relationship must be for iron to exist, that is how iron has come to be, those are its properties.

Life too wants to survive, that is why it adapts. One can see clearly the second law of information, inspired by Newton in action at the most complex of levels. The second law of everything not forgetting that it should scientifically be called law of information, snobbery aside the two are identical, but we know what something is because it informs us what it is. An information package will remain in it’s present state unless a relationship is established is the second law of information. The bears would all have remained the same if it was not that they had a relationship to their new found environments, affecting their subconscious, having a relationship with the rest of the body the genes adapted to fulfill this relationship with the subconscious need for survival. Evolution and complexity in general will never defy the second law, it makes us understand.

Our relationship with the environment gave us a thumb and a larger brain, though the larger brain is far more important. The polar bear preferred more muscle to break the ice, and more blubber to survive the extreme cold. Some animals like the crocodile, the shark stopped evolving millions of years ago. Their subconscious did not see the need to change, no relationship established the shark and crocodile remained as are since the days of the crocodile. The sharks and crocodiles saw themselves as the best as they could be subconsciously hence the lack of evolvement, but humans continued to strive such that we are still evolving. Crocodiles and sharks not evolving for millions of years means there was no information in the mind desiring improvement, hence they remained as are thanks to the second law of information that an information package will remain in its present state unless a relationship is established.

That there are two laws of everything suggests that the theory of everything is a big concept, we can understand evolution from it, as well as why iron rusts, the laws of everything, the laws of information can be considered a discipline. But the laws must be consistent in every discipline, in every way, they must be unbreakable.

Bhekuzulu Khumalo

A Concern from Thermodynamics

As usual an after editorial is added if and only if there is a major concern, I mention names when it is to uplift, but will not mention a name because if the person is not mature enough to understand it is merely a discussion, there are problems, but obviously to make an edition ones opinion is respected. But this concern with thermodynamics is real.

Thermodynamics is an inspiration for this theory of everything, but it has many shortcomings, please note I already wrote an article information and the origins of entropy, yes entropy was an inspiration but not a complete theory. Let us look at entropy, not forgetting it was the initial inspiration for a theory of everything.

The first law of entropy is known as the law of conservation of energy. Really, what about anti matter. That is all to be said on the first law, does anti matter break it, if it does, it is not a law of everything, it is steam engine physics, an isolated system, not everything.

The second law of entropy says things cannot be reversed, but in smelters, ancient man 30 000 years ago had smelters, creating pure elements copper, iron, That is why it is important to read other works, the isolation of information is reversing the process, that is how we know things because information could be isolated, pure iron last existed after super novas, man has reversed the process, taking oxidized iron ore and purifying it in furnaces. Processes can be reversed, here is a good journal piece to read just to understand isolation of information, the piece is called why economics is a science, information the grand unifier

Think about it, when you switch of a television you can do the reverse, switch it on, thermodynamics is therefore not about information, but a segment of information, things are reversed everyday, information reverses everyday, thermodynamics has limited principles applicable to the theory of everything.You change your mind back after thinking a decision, thermodynamics is too limited.

The third and final law of thermodynamics suggests at absolute zero there is no activity, have these people tested dark matter, is there no activity at absolute zero?

Theory of everything is simple, and some straightforward scientists like Newton were close, thermodynamics is not close, but was first inspiration long before Newton and his inspiration for the second law of everything. Thanks, William Rice for the concerns you raised about Thermodynamics in LinkedIn, thanks, no show, this is just genuine response to concerns raised about merely generalization, that is true, but some things can not be sufficiently generalized.

Why a theory of everything, when we can get relationships that affect all things we are so much the better. If it seems so easy, it is because great thoughts have gone into it, subtracting this, adding that. A theory of everything is meant to be so easy that high school people can comprehend it, make it simple an we can see the entire picture.  As simple such that a high school art student understands everything is connected.

The two laws of information are complimentary, and simple, the first law information will remain in its present state unless a relationship is established, nothing changed, it was static. Then a relationship was established.

Once a relationship is established the second law comes into effect, there is a cost, matter annihilated and abolished anti matter, and we got our big bang, theoretically, but the laws remain true factually.

To get to the definition that information is everything costs billions, if not trillions of dollars, use it, it makes everything easier, even the existence of a God does not debunk the laws of everything, they are well vetted.You get pure iron from a smelter, process can be reversed, just taking more energy to reverse, a collider is just reversing the process, let knowledge flow forward, its information, forget that steam engine physics, Newton has been vetted correctly his inspiration can pass any test, step by step. 

1 comment:

israel sadovnik socratus said...

More correct
The Theory of Everything: QED, Information, Evolution and Simplicity



Blog Archive

Bhekuzulu Khumalo

I write about knowledge economics, information, liberty, and freedom