FreeWill

Space is information (split from What is Space made of?)

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
On 5/31/2015 at 4:11 AM, Mordred said:

How is space time created?

Hello Mordred, interesting question.

To the op: space is information.

Fundamentally 4D

3 spatial and 1 time. 

I perceive It as a constantly developing and evolving physical entity i.e. moment by moment it is bigger and older.

I think that is an objective information (for us yet not perceivable).  

How space created?

From the lawest possible physical state evolved the smallest possible physical information= space(time). I would quess. 

Information about the rates and limits of space(time) evolution. 

I dare to use evolution because time seems to be an ever forward pointing function. 

Edited by FreeWill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FreeWill said:

To the op: space is information.

Do you have any evidence to support this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Strange said:

Do you have any evidence to support this?

Space is distance, which could be seen as information since it is not a thing unto itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FreeWill said:

Hello Mordred, interesting question.

To the op: space is information.

Fundamentally 4D

3 spatial and 1 time. 

I perceive It as a constantly developing and evolving physical entity i.e. moment by moment it is bigger and older.

I think that is an objective information (for us yet not perceivable).  

How space created?

From the lawest possible physical state evolved the smallest possible physical information= space(time). I would quess. 

Information about the rates and limits of space(time) evolution. 

I dare to use evolution because time seems to be an ever forward pointing function. 

 

This idea could be consistent with the Mathematical idea of a space, which was not exactly what Mordred was talking about.

How about you re-present it more coherently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, studiot said:

 

This idea could be consistent with the Mathematical idea of a space, which was not exactly what Mordred was talking about.

How about you re-present it more coherently?

Hello Studiot, could you elaborate where you sence incoherence in my response to the op.

Could you express what else can space(time) be, than information?

Can we say that volume is a physical entity? Can we say that volume is more than information? 

Edited by FreeWill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, FreeWill said:

Hello Studiot, could you elaborate where you sence incoherence in my response to the op.

Could you express what else can space(time) be, than information?

Can we say that volume is a physical entity? Can we say that volume is more than information? 

You say you are in Europe.

Presumably English is not your first language, although it is quite good.

There are already 12 pages in this thread, have you read them.

Or do you find that too much?

 

Space is one of those words in English that has many meanings.

You choose the appropriate one from the context.

I could reasonably ask you how much space (a unit of) information takes up or requires.

 

The question was

" what is Space made of?"

not

"What is spacetime made of?"

 

One interpretation is that Space is like a theatre stage which provides all that is necessary for some event to happen.

Mordred was referring to events of importance in Physics.

So perhaps this might be best served by an example.

Take three physical object (balls, planets, whatever) Let us call them A, B and C

Space allows us to distinguish when B is between A and C and (if they are planets) thus understand eclipses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, FreeWill said:

Hello Studiot, could you elaborate where you sence incoherence in my response to the op.

Could you express what else can space(time) be, than information?

Can we say that volume is a physical entity? Can we say that volume is more than information? 

What does “more than information” even mean?

You need to establish what you mean by “space is information” and by that, I mean show where mainstream physics says that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Space is distance, which could be seen as information since it is not a thing unto itself.

Clever. But couldn't any property we measure (mass, energy, temperature, frequency, etc) be considered information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Strange said:

Clever. But couldn't any property we measure (mass, energy, temperature, frequency, etc) be considered information?

Yes, because they are properties or descriptors that tell us something about an object but do not have a distinct existence themselves. I won't labour the point because this is in a science section but in short they are measurements, which is information....

Edited by StringJunky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, swansont said:

What does “more than information” even mean?

You need to establish what you mean by “space is information” and by that, I mean show where mainstream physics says that.

Vacuum is the closest to empty spacetime. Here we are not able to perceive or detect anything else physical, than the spatial coordinates in the moment of observation.

If we observe a photon in this vacuum, beyond the previously recognised coordinates, we can recognize the energy of the photon. That is physically more properties than the 4D coordinates. 

Space is physically measurable distance i.e information, but not a thing you can give a bucket of. As I learned space itself does not have mass or energy (thats why we can recognize anything in it), so I dare to assume that it is not more than the presentation of basic information: Time.

 

Edited by FreeWill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FreeWill said:

Vacuum is the closest to empty spacetime. Here we are not able to perceive or detect anything else physical, than the spatial coordinates in the moment of observation.

If we observe a photon in this vacuum, beyond the previously recognised coordinates, we can recognize the energy of the photon. That is physically more properties than the 4D coordinates. 

Space is physically measurable distance i.e information, but not a thing you can give a bucket of. As I learned space itself does not have mass or energy (thats why we can recognize anything in it), so I dare to assume that it is not more than the presentation of basic information: Time.

 

 

Have you given up replying to me?

 

"Here we are not able to perceive or detect anything else physical, than the spatial coordinates in the moment of observation."

11 hours ago, FreeWill said:

Can we say that volume is a physical entity? Can we say that volume is more than information? 

So you have answered your own earlier question.
You consider space (as volume) something physical.

I think volume (a la Mordred) is a better term than length.

However it is not true to say that vacuum or volume (or whatever you want to call it) has no other physical properties we can measure.

At the very least it has permittivity, permeability and impedance.

10 hours ago, Strange said:

But couldn't any property we measure (mass, energy, temperature, frequency, etc) be considered information?

How do you incorporate the fact that some bits of the space in my example contain more or different information than others?

This extra information cannot be directly measured but must be deduced.

This is of course the property of arrangement that allows B to lie between A and C , but neith A nor C to lie between any things at all.
Further some bits of space have no connection to A, B or C at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, studiot said:

How do you incorporate the fact that some bits of the space in my example contain more or different information than others?

Exactly. 

"Information" doesn't seem a very useful definition.

2 hours ago, FreeWill said:

Space is physically measurable distance i.e information, but not a thing you can give a bucket of. As I learned space itself does not have mass or energy (thats why we can recognize anything in it), so I dare to assume that it is not more than the presentation of basic information: Time.

Can you provide an example of a scientific theory that treats space as information?

Does the bolded section mean that you are now saying that space is time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FreeWill said:

Vacuum is the closest to empty spacetime. Here we are not able to perceive or detect anything else physical, than the spatial coordinates in the moment of observation.

If we observe a photon in this vacuum, beyond the previously recognised coordinates, we can recognize the energy of the photon. That is physically more properties than the 4D coordinates. 

Space is physically measurable distance i.e information, but not a thing you can give a bucket of. As I learned space itself does not have mass or energy (thats why we can recognize anything in it), so I dare to assume that it is not more than the presentation of basic information: Time.

 

I don’t see how this explains “volume is more than information”. You are reiterating that volume is information, and once again not supporting that assertion

A photon is not space, it is something in addition. I don’t see how this is relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
 
 
5
6 hours ago, FreeWill said:

Vacuum is the closest to empty spacetime. Here we are not able to perceive or detect anything else physical, than the spatial coordinates in the moment of observation.

If we observe a photon in this vacuum, beyond the previously recognised coordinates, we can recognize the energy of the photon. That is physically more properties than the 4D coordinates. 

Space is physically measurable distance i.e information, but not a thing you can give a bucket of. As I learned space itself does not have mass or energy (thats why we can recognize anything in it), so I dare to assume that it is not more than presentation of basic information: Time.  the place for stuff to happen (photons, planets...).

FTFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Space is distance, which could be seen as information since it is not a thing unto itself.

Catchy thought but when you think deeper about this you surely need to differeniate between the types of „information” Is space the same kind of information as the bits in my phone which carry the contents of my next weeks callendar? Everything that the universe experiences happens within a construct which we call spacetime, we do not fully understand the fullness of how reality is built, BH singularity and how spacetime ticks on the quantum level or if the multiverse or holographic universe ideas are right and to what extent. One thing we can be sure of, nothing that we know in science so far excludes space from anything that occurs. We can easilly manipulate information whether it is an excell file on your PC or a  bad life memmory which can be treated by a psychologist or some other means of altering like pharmacology. I can’t think of any piece of information which cannot be manipulated in some way, it doesn’t seem right to treat space as information in that context. If you do that, you might as well call time itself information as well, in fact anything around could be reffered to as information whether its an adress a memory, the amount of money in your bank account, a feeling you have when lying on a beach in the sun or the fact that time dillates and length contracts when you change reference frames in GR. You might as well downscale every part of what we experience around to just information but that doesn’t seem accurate to me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, koti said:

Catchy thought but when you think deeper about this you surely need to differeniate between the types of „information” Is space the same kind of information as the bits in my phone which carry the contents of my next weeks callendar? Everything that the universe experiences happens within a construct which we call spacetime, we do not fully understand the fullness of how reality is built, BH singularity and how spacetime ticks on the quantum level or if the multiverse or holographic universe ideas are right and to what extent. One thing we can be sure of, nothing that we know in science so far excludes space from anything that occurs. We can easilly manipulate information whether it is an excell file on your PC or a  bad life memmory which can be treated by a psychologist or some other means of altering like pharmacology. I can’t think of any piece of information which cannot be manipulated in some way, it doesn’t seem right to treat space as information in that context. If you do that, you might as well call time itself information as well, in fact anything around could be reffered to as information whether its an adress a memory, the amount of money in your bank account, a feeling you have when lying on a beach in the sun or the fact that time dillates and length contracts when you change reference frames in GR. You might as well downscale every part of what we experience around to just information but that doesn’t seem accurate to me. 

I think stringy was getting all philosophical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I think stringy was getting all philosophical. 

Yeah, I was going that way fast with a dash of neuroscience, as in perception. I realise now it is necessary to learn what it is in the field of physics and the professional consensus in that context.

Edited by StringJunky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

You might as well downscale every part of what we experience around to just information but that doesn’t seem accurate to me.

It's entropy, so yes it's accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

It's entropy, so yes it's accurate.

So space is information -> is entropy? That  doesn’t seem remotely right, entropy is a feature of physical systems which we observe, space is just a name for the features of the everythingness that we measure and experience. I don’t think theres evidence that one stems from one another or encompasses one another. I don’t think that space makes much sense philosophically outside of geometry. A triangle is a triangle drawn on a piece of paper and Lorentz transforms show us how spacetime changes according to GR rules. I don’t think it makes sense to ask whether what makes measuring what a triangle or a cube is, is in itself a form of information.

Edited by koti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, studiot said:

 

This idea could be consistent with the Mathematical idea of a space, which was not exactly what Mordred was talking about.

How about you re-present it more coherently?

How else can we express space if not as a mathematical model?

It always should be consistent. The Universe is pretty rigid on the atomic, etc...level.

 

 

Edited by FreeWill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FreeWill said:

How else can we express space if not as a mathematical model?

But you haven't done that. Can you provide a reference to a mathematical model that treats space as "information"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Strange said:

But you haven't done that. Can you provide a reference to a mathematical model that treats space as "information"?

I have one but that is too speculative.

On the other hand, we will never be able to observe t0 physically so we can just assume, speculate it's how about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, FreeWill said:

I have one but that is too speculative.

 On the other hand, we will never be able to observe t0 physically so we can just assume, speculate it's how about.

So you say that space must be modelled mathematically. But you don't have such a model.

Meanwhile, we do have mathematical models of space. So maybe we should just use those and ignore your vague and baseless claims?

(I don't know how "t0" is relevant to any of this.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Shortly expressed:

I would handle spacetime as information about 0 (4D). Evolving with a rate determined by the Laws of Nature. Started at t0 with the physical state of nothing. I think space still represent this original information.

 

12 minutes ago, Strange said:

Meanwhile, we do have mathematical models of space. 

Please share those!

12 minutes ago, Strange said:

I don't know how "t0" is relevant to any of this.)

It is part of reality I speculate.

 

Edited by FreeWill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, FreeWill said:

I have one but that is too speculative.

On the other hand, we will never be able to observe t0 physically so we can just assume, speculate it's how about.

Isn’t that the point of this discussion? Your speculation about space as information?

If not, what are we doing here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.