Sign in to follow this  
Yuri Danoyan

It from bit? Does John Wheeler was right?

Recommended Posts

John Wheeler-brilliant scientist died 3 months ago.

I would like talking about contradictory part his legacy written in the J. A. Wheeler, It from bit, At Home in the Universe, American Institute of Physics, New York, 1994, pp. 295–311.

But first of all i want reminding some quotation from other book,"Geons,black holes & quantum foam" John Archibald Wheeler's autobiography with Kenneth Ford Norton, 1998

Wheeler summarizes his work as follows:

"I think of my lifetime in physics as divided

into three periods. In the first period,

extending from the beginning of my career until

the early 1950's, I was in the grip of the idea

that Everything Is Particles. I was looking for

ways to build all basic entities - neutrons,

protons, mesons, and so on - out of the lightest,

most fundamental particles, electrons, and

photons. This same vision of a world of simple

particles dominated my work with Feynman.

We were able to formulate electrodynamics in

terms of particles acting at a distance on one

another without the need for intermediate

electric or magnetic fields. ...It did ... make a

most remarkable prediction about a

hypothetical world containing only a few

particles ... In such a simpler world, the

future would affect the past.

"I call my second period Everything Is Fields.

From the time I fell in love with general

relativity and gravitation in 1952 until late in

my career, I pursued the vision of a world made

of fields, one in which the apparent particles

are really manifestations of electric and

magnetic fields, gravitational fields, and

space-time itself.

"Now I am in the grip of a new vision, that

Everything Is Information. The more I have

pondered the mystery of the quantum and our

strange ability to comprehend this world

in which we live, the more I see possible

fundamental roles for logic and information

as the bedrock of physical theory. ...

I continue to search."

Geons, Black Holes & Quantum Foam - pp 63-64

 

I would like drew attention of Forum participants to last part of John Wheeler research.Does we get some confirmation about it?

 

I presented my simple interpretation John Wheeler's idea "It from Bit.If we rewriting some numbers(for examples: symmetries, dimensionless constants,different dimensions D=3,D=11,D=12, etc) from decimal code to the binary code and vice versa, we get more information."More is different".Quote from mentioned book P.341.

 

My confirmative posts:

1)Discrete and continue symmetries

2)What Wolfgang Pauli does mean?

3)Wonderful number 12 on the spectrum of elementary particles

 

We vill show that next decimal numbers in binary code:

3 to binary 11 as a sign of symmetry

11 to binary 1011 as a sign of metasymmetry

12 to binary 1100 as a sign of antysymmetry

 

John Wheeler book

At Home in the Universe (Masters of Modern Physics) (Paperback)

http://www.amazon.com/Home-Universe-Masters-Modern-Physics/dp/1563965003/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216585362&sr=1-4

Edited by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand. What do you want to talk about? Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I corrected my poor english,sorry...tri again

 

This is the address autobiographical book by John Wheeler

http://www.amazon.com/Geons-Black-Holes-Quantum-Foam/dp/0393319911/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216810738&sr=1-2 http://www.amazon.com/Geons-Black-Holes-Quantum-Foam/dp/0393319911/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216810738&sr=1-2

Especially advise you to pay attention to chapter 15. It from Bit, p.323 и 16.The End of Time,p344. Here it's very interesting discourse on the nature of Time.

Edited by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand. What do you want to talk about? Thank you.

 

He mostly talks to himself...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know. I was trying to give him a chance to fix that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Yuri,

 

We can talk much about John Wheeler if you like. His quote from the book "Gravitation" (by Misner, Thorne and Wheeler, page 1215) is quite interesting: "What else can a (subatomic) particle be but a fossil from the most violent event of all, gravitational collapse?" and later "That an electron here has the same mass as an electron there is also a triviality or a miracle. It is a triviality in quantum electrodynamics because it is assumed rather than derived. -- No acceptable explanation for the miraculous identity of particles of the same type has ever been put forward. That identity must be regarded, not as a triviality, but as a central mystery of physics."

 

An answer to this mystery seems to require quantized space-time and quantized energy: these may be the bits that make all that we observe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Yuri,

 

Do you think the Planck length and Planck time relate to non reducible space-time bits? Do these quantities of space or time relate to any quantity that is physical?

 

An argument can be made that they do relate. What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An argument can be made that they do relate. What do you think?

 

I am afraid of difficulties to use notion "Time". John Wheeler's biographical book last chapter name "The End of Time,p.344".As David Gross say,because it doomed.I used only symmetry idea and some numerological trick in good sense.

 

To my mind all surprises waiting us from revision common view to Time.

Edited by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As example for realization John Wheeler's idea "It from Bit" is Metasymmetry presented in thread "Discrete and Continue Symmetries"

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34145

 

One more interesting example "It from Bit" 240 minimal vectors

of the E8 root lattice.240 to binary 11110000.High rate antysmmetry

 

John Wheeler was right.His "It from Bit" - fruiful ful idea .He deserved name Great Visionary of 20-century,which he get inter vivos.

Edited by Yuri Danoyan
multiple post merged

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently nobody else is going to ask this so I will: what does "it from bit" mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently nobody else is going to ask this so I will: what does "it from bit" mean?

 

I guess you are not read John Wheeler's book "At Home in the Universe", nor the other "Geons, Black Holes & Quantum Foam."

Edited by Yuri Danoyan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pauli's idea about "Division and reduction the symmetry" see thread http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34142

and Wheeler's idea "It from Bit" http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34160

have common base.

Wheeler:"Tryihg to wrap my brain around idea of information theory as the basis of existence,i came ap with the phrase "it from bit".The universe and all that it contains("it") may arise from the myriad yes-no choices of mearusement(the"bits")".

"Information may not be just what we learn about the world.It may be what makes the world".

Quote as favourite saying "Less is more" Wheeler continued:"it is good principle of physics research.In thinking about the world in the large.As Philip Anderson told"More is different".When you put enough elementary units together,you can get something that is more than the sum of these units."More is different" may have something to do with "it from bit"

 

What mean Pauli?Pauli first of all thinking about division,about binary splitting of symmetry until end,for understanding nature of embryonic symmetry.But embryonic symmetry lead as the same binary relations "yes or no","0 or 1".That's i would like to say about common between Pauli an Wheeler ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventually we must do choice between discrete approximation of continue,or vice versa,continue approximation of discrete.Computer- Internet discrete epoch dictates to as first version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nobody is responding that means nobody is interested.

 

ouch. well, i cant support that, because i am interested. i just found this post.

 

first of all. i think that the whole digital physics veiw is pretty interesting, and pretty viable too. but, in a universe like ours, anything is possible. the concept of reality is very interesting indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this