Can an information (particularly a physical law itself) be some special kind of matter and transform into energy and mass?

Information isn't a special kind of matter-it's a property of any kind of matter, that describes the state matter is found in.

Consider the familiar law of energy terms S and k.

S = k Ln Ω

Here Ω is information that defines the character of the law, in this case a counting of energy states. One energy term S is related to another energy term k. Energy is not set equal to an information package.

Physical laws are everywhere the same and always present when needed, even in the vacuum of space. It suggests the laws physically reside in nature as information packages describing the energies that are contained there. Counting of energy states is one of the easiest to understand concepts, and can be thought of as a way laws are instantiated.

This question occurs fairly often, suggesting a deficiency in the way physical science is taught.

Consider the less familiar law of energy terms G and R.

G = - RT Ln K

K is information that defines the character of the law, another type of counting, while one energy term G is related to another energy term R.

If laws could turn into energy, a law would be lost and missing somewhere when needed.

Information does not turn into energy, but is always present telling how to count and what the counting means when relating one energy term to another energy term.

Yes. For example electrons are information carriers and have mass and energy

Dear Sirs,

What is physical law? Let us consider for example Coulomb's law for two macroscopic positive charges. The Coulomb's law says that in experiment the measured acceleration value of each charge will satisfy precise mathematical dependence expressed in Coulomb's law.

What is this mathematical equation of the Coulomb's law ( ma=q1*q2/(r*r) ) itself? The mathematically same equation we get in experiment when we study gravitational force. One can design some mechanical devices which can also be described by the same mathematical equation as the Coulomb's law. The same situation exists for a notion of number in mathematics. Here we come to the very old questions. What are a number or mathematical equation? Do a number or mathematical equation exist in nature if a matter is absent? Can Cheshire cat smile exist if the cat is absent? Can mathematical equations of physical laws exist in some form in fully empty hypothetical universe in which there are not any quantum fields and quantum fluctuations of vacuum?

Today experiments answer: No, information is a property of matter and it can not exist without matter.Ok. Below I would like to discuss an information contained in physical law. This information is a property of matter. I would like to ask a strange question. Can this information quantity decrease or increase when some parameter of object changes, e.g. mass?

My above question is related to the following situation in physics. I think that it is well known that an information contained in physical law is lost when one goes from macroscopic to atomic scale. In the below I give you one example. Let us talk about Larmor precession theorem for magnetic moments of particles in external uniform magnetic field. This theorem particularly explains a compass arrow oscillations in the Earth magnetic field when friction forces are negligible. Let us consider the following two cases. In classical case for a system of proton magnetic moments in macroscopic water sample in external uniform magnetic field the Larmor equation is equivalent to a system of three equations describing a motion of 3 projections of macroscopic magnetization (sum of proton magnetic moments per unit volume). But at atomic scale for a oneproton magnetic moment, simultaneously there is only an equation for z-projection of proton magnetic moment and moreover the z-projection of the proton magnetic moment becomes discrete. There are only two allowed values of this projection (along and opposite to the external magnetic field). It is clearly seen that an information contained in the Larmor precession theorem is lost sufficiently when one goes from macroscopic to atomic scale. Similar consideration can be made for many physical laws.

The question arises. Does it makes any sense to suppose that an information (in physical law) may be equivalent to some very small energy and small mass? And therefore a microparticle having very low mass (proton, electron, etc.) looses some physical information about itself. This process may be hypothetically a reason of an existance of Heisenberg's uncertainty relations.

Under relativistic gravitation, and/or a "purist" general theory of relativity, (supporting the general principle of relativity and the principle of equivalence), information storage has an energy cost.

In that context, all masses have associated curvatures, and additional gravitomagnetic curvatures when there is physical relative motion.

This means that all the data regarding inertial physics ... the number of bodies, their locations, the amount of mass per individual body, and how fast each body moves wrt the other, and in what direction ... is all encoded into the metric in the form of curvature. And curvature has an energy cost. With matter interacting with other matter via curvature interactions (similar to the description given by William Kingdon Clifford ) the metric is both the data-storage medium and the calculation medium.

Under "pure" GR, there is also a interesting convergence with QM, in that a pure GR observer must have their own inertial and gravitational mass in order to be considered legitimate. This means that the act of trying to measure something results in a geometry-change ... more specifically, if we try to measure a signal as having a frequency that is different to what existing observer-masses measure, we have to insert a new physical observer with a suitable state of motion (or change the behaviour of an existing observer-mass), which changes the geometry.

So we have a principle that one cannot mine or extract new information from a region without altering the region's geometry.

Under QM, it's a common statement that the act of observation can change a sensitive experiment's outcome. Under "purist" GR, even the act of preparing to make the observation (in the sense of placing an observer in the right location, with the right state of motion) can alter the outcome.

Also, any time a system changes state in an "interesting" way that alters its massenergy distribution, we can expect that system to communicate the change to the outside universe in the form of a microgravitational wave, which costs energy. So there would appear to be an "information tax" on events, payable in the form of radiated distortional energy.

Any physical law is a manifestation, in the material world, of some regularities that take place in the energy world. Our perception of the laws of Nature is a consequence of fine processes in the world of energies. For example, the law of gravitation is the materialization of the effect of time onto material particles.

To answer to the question

“Can an information (particularly a physical law itself) be some special kind of matter and transform into energy and mass?...”

- it is necessary before to answer to the questions – what is “information”? what is “physical law”?, where, for what reasons and how these laws exist and act? What is “matter”? , what is “energy”? what is “mass”?, and – why and how these “physical laws” exist as “physical laws”, i.e. some informational patterns that are formulated by some two-legs compound of mostly H,C,N,O atoms, which for some non-understand reasons and by some non-understanding ways, “study” “matter” and “discover” the laws?

Any of the questions above fundamentally cannot be answered in framework of the mainstream philosophy and sciences, including physics, since in the mainstream all really fundamental phenomena/notions, first of all in this case “Information”, “Matter”– and so everything in Matter, i.e. “particles”, “fields”, etc., .”Consciousness”, “Space”, “Time”, “Energy”, are fundamentally completely transcendent/uncertain/irrational and so, say, that

“…Information isn't a special kind of matter-it's a property of any kind of matter, that describes the state matter is found in.….”

- is really transcendent, moreover fundamentally incorrect, claim.

All really fundamental questions can be really scientifically answered only in framework of the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260930711_the_Information_as_Absolute, and, more concretely in this case, in the SS&VT informational physical model

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418793_The_Informational_Conception_and_the_Base_of_Physics, which is based on the conception.

In the conception it is rigorously proven that there exist nothing else than some informational patterns/systems of the patterns that are elements of the absolutely fundamental and absolutely infinite “Information” Set; which - the Set - exists absolutely objectively, because of it fundamentally – logically - cannot be non-existent, and so exists absolutely eternally, having no Beginning and no End; and the scientific utmost general definition of “Information” is

Correspondingly “information” isn’t, first of all, some “a property of something” – that is the unique stuff, from everything is made; though, of course, at that informational patterns/systems in accordance with the definition of “Information” have the “property” to have some “information”, which, if is “read” by some pattern/system, “describes” some elements in/of informational/logical construction of other pattern/system.

Just so the fundamentally practically non-material informational system “human’s consciousness”, which is able to obtain some informational patterns/systems about environment, is able also, in completely non-material “mind mode of operation”, to analyze, by using the Logos’s element “Logical Rules”, which so fundamentally acts in the consciousness, and the consciousness uses the Rules “instinctively”, some information.

Including humans’ consciousnesses “physicists” read experimentally some specific information in the fundamentally different informational system “Matter”, and, when find some logical links in the information, call that “physical laws”.

At that “Space”, “Time”, “Energy”, “Inertia”, are also absolutely fundamental phenomena/notions – the Logos’s elements, and action of these Logos’s elements are described, sometimes adequately, sometimes fundamentally erroneously, in mainstream physics.

More see at least the second link above, believing that what is written in this paper has rigorous base in first link; more about what is consciousness, and how she operate see first 10 pages, including section “what is Life” in https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358801098_Title_page_Article_type_Review_Title_The_informational_physical_model_some_selected_fundamental_problems_in_physics, though to read the whole paper is useful as well, of course.

Cheers

Can general relativity or gravitation be explained by that a spacetime information in physical laws for an object is changed due to the the presence of other mass or energy? In this case we need not to invent new object in nature - curved spacetime continuum. So GR theory may be viewed as a theory about information change in physical laws due to mass-energy.

“…Can general relativity or gravitation be explained by that a spacetime information in physical laws for an object is changed due to the presence of other mass or energy?...”

- again - see the links in the SS post above, “Logos” set’s elements aren’t some “information”, the elements, absolutely fundamentally always acting together in every concrete case, “make something to be some concrete information, i.e. concrete informational patterns/systems”. Including the elements “Space” acts because of logically nothing can exist in some “nowhere”, so everything exists is somewhere, and this somewhere in every concrete case is the concrete actualization of “Space” action – concrete “space”. At that in different cases there can be arbitrary number of “space dimensions”, the dimensions and number of the dimensions is determined by concrete independent degreases of freedom of basic “elementary” structures, from which concrete patterns/systems in concrete cases are composed.

Matter is a simple logical system, which is based on binary reversible logics, and so the ultimate base of Matter are the binary reversible fundamental logical elements [FLE], and so Matter’s space has 4 space dimensions: 3 ones, which are necessary to implement completely binary changes “flips” i.e. X-,Y-,Z – dimensions in standard notations ; and one dimension that is necessary for actualizations of reverse “flips”, which is introduced, correspondingly in the SS&VT informational physical model as “cτ -dimension”.

The “Information” Set’s space has at least “simply infinite” “number” of space dimensions, which is composed from space dimensions of all/every of the absolutely infinite “number” of the Set’s elements; including the elements “Matter”, and, say, human’s, consciousness; and the last ones exist in fundamentally different partially spaces.

Besides this absolutely universal necessity to have some “space”, there exist another absolutely universal phenomenon/Logos’s element “Change”, which also cannot happen in “nowhere”, and corresponding “somewhere”, where all/every changes in the Set’s elements, including in Matter and consciousnesses, is the actualization of the Logos element “Time” - as the universal/common for all the Set’s elements unique “time dimension”. In Matter’s spacetime this dimension is “ct-dimension”, so Matter’s spacetime is the fundamentally absolute, fundamentally flat, and fundamentally “Cartesian”, [5]4D spacetime with metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z,ct),

- where the actualizations of “Space” and “Time”, i.e. “space” and “time”, since these Logos elements are fundamentally independent on the other Logos element “Energy”, fundamentally cannot have some “energy”, be “contracted”, “dilated”, “curved”, etc., by any/everything in Matter.

The FLEs compose the ultimate base of Matter – the [5]4D dense FLE-lattice, which is placed in the spacetime above,

- and everything in Matter are some specific disturbances in the lattice, which are created in the lattice at some impacts with transmissions to some the lattice’s FLE some portion of actualization Logos elements “Energy” and “Momentum” – of “energy/momentum”; this specificity is determined by concrete logical structure of FLE, which, besides the utmost fundamental 5 “kinematical” degreases of freedom above, contains also at least 4 specific logical sub-structures – “marks” of 4 “fundamental Nature forces”, which act in concrete FLE-lattice disturbances – particles, fields, etc.

The specific action of the logical structure and links above is observable by humans and instruments, and is interpreted/described as “physical laws” in physical theories. At that, again, everything in Matter exist and changes states, including interacts, absolutely fundamentally only in the spacetime, and so everything in Matter has, and so can be characterized by, the “kinematical” parameters of material objects, i.e. coordinates in the space and time dimensions, corresponding velocities, momentums, etc.,

- and so everything in Matter can be explained by including some spacetime information in physical laws, which act because of some objects are changed “due to the presence of other mass or energy”, however that happens always and everywhere in Matter, and the gravitational events/interactions in this case/sense fundamentally don’t differ from events/processes, when some other fundamental Nature forces act.

And, again, everything in Matter fundamentally cannot impact on the Matter’s spacetime; and so any “inventing” of a “new object in nature - curved spacetime continuum” in some physical theory can result only fundamentally non-adequate to the reality applications of such theory. As that happens at the GR application now, when the GR is to certain extent adequate to the reality in weak Gravity fields, and really is fundamentally non-applicable if Gravity field is strong.

Cheers

Dear colleagues,

Fundamental physics laws are not changed at any space and time scale. In my previous messages I meant the change of physical information (momentum, position, etc.) about a microparticle (electron, proton, neutron, etc.) and the change of phenomenological (not fundamental !) physical laws when you go from macroscopic to atomic scales.

I would be grateful if you could note on the following questions. All physical information about a microparticle (electron, proton, etc.) is given by fundamental physical laws. But fundamental physics laws (quantum field theory) have probabilistic nature . Therefore for example in double slit experiment small number of photon hits at the screen gives almost random picture. In this case we do not get any physical information about the process. Only for big number of photon hits at the screen we obtain a certain physical information, namely interference pattern. Therefore the question arises. Can we invent any universal parameter describing a quantity of obtained physical information about a particle, natural process? Can we calculate this parameter for a micropartice at atomic and macroscopic scales? I clarify these questions below.

Consider the following case. We make N measurements of an electron position in Wilson cloud chamber at atomic scale (space range of 1-10 Angstroms, time range of 1-100 attoseconds). We make the same number of measurements N of an electron position at macroscopic scale (space range of 1-10 millimeters, time range of 1-1000 milliseconds). Let us suppose that there are not random or systematic errors caused by the experimental apparatus which measure the electron position at both scales. Do the following questions make any sense?

At what scale do we get more physical information about the electron? Is there any universal measure of this information? Is informational Shannon entropy suitable as a measure of an information for this case?

Below I give a possible answer to the above questions with the use of Shannon entropy. Consider a solution of Shrodinger equation - movng gaussian wave packet. If we have the non dispersing wave packet then the Shannon informational entropy for the packet position measurements does not depend on time. If there is a dispersion of this gaussian wave packet then this entropy increases with time. It is shown here (page 19)

Let us suppose that the electron motion can be modeled by this wave packet. Therefore one may conclude that in case of dispersion the physical information about electron position in Wilson cloud chamber decreases (Shannon entropy increases) when an experimenter goes from atomic to macroscopic scale. The bigger value of Shannon entropy means we measure less precisely the physical information about an electron, e.g. a new physical law. Of course here I do not account my other properties of information, e.g. its importance, its content.

So the above consideration shows that while fundamental physical laws are not changed but the quantity of physical information about a microparticle can be changed in many cases particularly when you study the microparticle at different scales of space and time. This situation is caused by the probabilistic nature of fundamental physics laws.

I would be pleased if you propose other universal parameters which describe general properties of an information about quantum systems.

I would like to add some other note. If we account a content of information then it is clear that a quantity of information decreases when one goes from macroscopic to atomic scale. For example a particle trajectory disappears. A particle magnetic moment does not rotate around magnetic field direction with Larmor frequency (Larmor precession is absent). The following questions arises.

How many bits of information disappears when the particle trajectory disappears and when the Larmor precession of magnetic moment disappears? What is the case for which the information loss is bigger? Can we introduce a new parameter which describes a change of some general properties of information for the above cases?

Dear Anatoly A Khripov

- from that

“…Dear colleagues,

Fundamental physics laws are not changed at any space and time scale. In my previous messages I meant the change of physical information (momentum, position, etc.) about a microparticle (electron, proton, neutron, etc.) and the change of phenomenological (not fundamental !) physical laws when you go from macroscopic to atomic scales.…..” , etc.,

- it looks as that you till now didn’t read SS posts above attentively enough, and so don’t understand what is the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/human’s notion “Information”, and how this phenomenon is actualized in the, absolutely for sure nothing else than some informational, system of informational patterns/subsystems “Matter”,

- which, as any other [always informational] system exists and evolves as a concrete system of concrete informational patterns/systems “this system’s elements” that exist and interact, exchanging by some informational patterns/systems “messages”, and behaving in accordance with the messages; all this is in accordance with this system’s basic set of basic laws/links/constants. So roughly, but rather correctly, speaking, any system is some “computer+program shell” system, where the elements is “hardware”, and the basic set is “program shell.”

That’s in certain sense all. Matter is a simple informational system, which is based on a simple binary reversible logics, which is actualized on the ultimately fundamental for humans level in that the ultimate base of Matter’s “hardware” are the correspondingly [5]4D binary reversible fundamental logical elements [FLE], and in this case Matter is even rather some direct analogue of humans’ computers, with, though, fundamentally important in this case difference – the “hardware’s” elementary logical gates in computers are binary, but non-reversible logical constructions.

So, as to understand how a computer work it isn’t necessary to know, say, how every atom in a gates exist and interact, etc., to understand how Matter works there is no necessity to know what is the – again some informational – structure of Matter’s FLE, it is enough to know the functions that FLEs actualize when compose elements of the system “Matter” , i.e. close-loop algorithms “particles”, flows of messages “fundamental Nature forces’ fields”, etc.

And so, say, at studying of Matter in practically all cases there is no necessity to apply the “Shannon information theory” or “Shannon entropy” – just as that is really practically unnecessary at studying of how some computer works – besides the main point, that information as number of possible events is stored in logarithmic form; in binary representation in sequences of “bits”, and minimal change of informational content is a bit.

In Matter that is actualized as that everything changes its informational state eventually bit-by-bit, what is actualized as elementary changes of the main parameter of material objects – “physical action” on the ultimately fundamental and universal elementary action – Planck constant ћ.

The other fundamental difference of Matter and a computer is in that in computer the elementary gates exist and exchange by messages using at that rather large energy, and so the exchange is rigorously determined, whereas on the QM scale, where “on the 2-nd level eventually”, since “ultimately eventually” everything exists and changes on the Planck scale, the energies and momentums are so small, that in this case the fundamental self-inconsistence of the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion “Change” becomes be fundamentally essential,

- and so states of QM objects become to be fundamentally uncertain; what is quantitatively estimated in human’s interpretation of observations “quantum mechanics” as the Heisenberg uncertainty equation, say, ΔPΔx≥ћ/2, where ΔP and Δx are independent and arbitrary random; though it looks as rather more probable that really every elementary change, in this case of P and x, happens really provided ΔPΔx=ћ, and that is postulated in the SS&VT informational physical model, the links see the SS post 4Days ago now.

Etc., more see the SS posts above and links in the posts, here again point, though: the rigorously proven in the SS&VT “The Information as Absolute” conception fact that everything, including Matter and humans, is/are absolutely for sure only some informational patterns/systems is fundamentally important at considering some scientific problems practically only on the fundamental level,

- and in physics that is, first of all, in that this fact makes the one of really utmost fundamental findings in physics – the fundamentally transcendent outside the conception von Weizsäcker “Ur-hypothesis” and Fredkin-Toffoli principle being completely rigorously founded.

What allowed to develop the informational physical model above, where more 30 really fundamental physical problems, which are fundamentally transcendent, and so principally non-solvable, in mainstream physics, are either solved or essentially clarified. However at studying of concrete physical tasks, the fact above in most cases isn’t essential, and such tasks are well solvable using mainstream physics.

Say, QM is well applicable despite that the mainstream doesn’t know what it is, and so, say, in QM a number of different wave function interpretations are quite equally legitimate; or, say, when in last few dozen of years in the thermodynamics “quite fundamentally” the “Shannon entropy” was introduced, that really had/has no some physical sense, thermodynamics remains being as practically it was 200 years ago; etc.

Cheers

I adhere to Stam Nicolis short but to-the-point explanation. I'd like to add that information can be defined in probability theory without any reference to the physical world. However, the transmission of information requires the physical world. We have to recall Landauer's principle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landauer%27s_principle).

“…I adhere to Stam Nicolis short but to-the-point explanation…”

- really that looks as rather strange claim. The mentioned “explanation”

“…Information isn't a special kind of matter-it's a property of any kind of matter, that describes the state matter is found in...”

- for any rationally thinking human explains practically nothing about what is the phenomenon “Information”?, for what reason it relates to the phenomenon “Matter” – and what is “Matter”, and so what is “matter”, though? including for what reason, and by what way “any kind of matter” has the “property” “information”? [and other “properties”, though], for what reason, by what way, and for whom that “describes” just “the state matter is found in”? etc.

Though yeah, if somebody “knows” what is “information”, not suspecting at that that the questions above exist at all, since – what becomes be clear after the questions above are really answered – though really only instinctively, however fundamentally sometimes adequately, obtains and analyses information about environment,

- including about two main fundamentally different kinds of the environment – material objects, and, in many cases fundamentally non-material, social, mental, etc., objects and relations, again non-suspecting that here a next problem exists – for what reason and by what way some “matter’s states” and, say, evidently “non-matter states”, say, human’s thoughts, have the same "property that are described” by the same “information”?,

- for this somebody the explanation in the quote is completely clear and sufficient.

Really, again, that isn’t so; and, again, the answers on the questions above are possible, and mostly are given, only in framework of the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception, etc.; more see the SS post above 5days ago now, and the papers that are linked in the post. Briefly, but clearly enough, the answers are given on first 10 pages, including section “What is Life” in https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358801098_Title_page_Article_type_Review_Title_The_informational_physical_model_some_selected_fundamental_problems_in_physics

Correspondingly that

“….. I'd like to add that information can be defined in probability theory without any reference to the physical world. However, the transmission of information requires the physical world. We have to recall Landauer's principle …..”

- is a next really transcendent – and really fundamentally incorrect claim. The scientific definition of the absolutely fundamental phemomenon “Information” see in the SS post, above, while the probability theory principally relates only to some concrete informational patterns/systems, which exist and interact with concrete “probabilities”,

- whereas Information in most its actualizations as some informational patterns/systems is in many cases extremely complex and bifurcative phenomenon, and it is determined by first of all the semantics – what senses some patterns have in some system. Matter is rather simple informational system, which is based on some simple binary reversible logics; and on a rather small set of rigorously defined and universal logical laws/links/constants; and so in some cases application of probability theory as the corresponding “Shannon theory of information” can be at least non-senseless.

Including the “Landauer's principle” has a sense in rather wide set of situations in matter, however really everything in Matter exists and happens practically only as bit-by-bit processes, and all these processes happen fundamentally paying no any attention to the “Landauer's principle” and the principle’s equation; just so in Matter the energy conservation law fundamentally universally acts, and so Matter soon 14 billions of years has the same energy portion, which obtained at its creation.

Again, more see the SS posts above and links in the posts. Though yeah, those who quite frankly think that know what is “information”, when frankly don’t suspect that really that isn’t so, are the vast majority in mainstream philosophy and sciences, including physics, and so, say, really regrettably the post with “explanation” in the 2-nd quote above has so many recommendations, that is selected in the thread.

Cheers

Dear Messrs. Stam Nicolis, Jose Gaite, colleagues,

I would be grateful if you clarify the following strange fact. In our previous messages it was supposed that wave function contains a physical information about microparticle. If it is true then this information can move at superluminal velocity! Experiments confirmed Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox about that wave function can move in space with infinite velocity. For example let two free particles collide and fly apart. If after this collision we measure a momentum p1 of the one particle (so we know its wave function Fp1(x 1)) then simultaneously we know the momentum p2 of the second particle and its wave function Fp2(x2). We also simultaneously know the wave function of both particles after the collision F(x1,x2)=Fp1(x1)*Fp2(x2).

“…I would be grateful if you clarify the following strange fact. In our previous messages it was supposed that wave function contains a physical information about microparticle. If it is true then this information can move at superluminal velocity! Experiments confirmed Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox about that wave function can move in space with infinite velocity…”

- that really looks as isn’t correct; till now experiments, where the Bell inequalities were tested, have shown that the results are consistent with that there is no statistically statistically significant correlations between states of even entangled pairs of particles that are placed on some space distances. If pairs aren’t entangled, including at collisions, here is no problems at all; so in

“….For example let two free particles collide and fly apart. If after this collision we measure a momentum p1 of the one particle (so we know its wave function Fp1(x 1)) then simultaneously we know the momentum p2 of the second particle and its wave function Fp2(x2). We also simultaneously know the wave function of both particles after the collision F(x1,x2)=Fp1(x1)*Fp2(x2). ….”

- even if wave functions of particles after a collisions would be known, that would not be principally by definition of the wave function some knowledge about concrete states of the particles in concrete time moments; wave function determines only probabilities of the states.

Cheers

Dear Sirs,

In my previous message I talked that a decrease of wave packet width causes a decrease of Shannon entropy or an increase of a quantity of deterministic information about a microparticle. It causes that the microparticle motion is explained better by classical trajectory and a contribution of quantum noise becomes smaller.

The non-relativistic Heisenberg uncertainty relation tells that the width of wave packet dx depends on rest mass m of microparticle as follows

dp*dx=m*dv*dx=h/(4*pi)

dx=h/(m*dv*4*pi)

So all other things being equal an increase of rest mass m causes a decrease of the wave packet width dx and an increase of a quantity of deterministic information about the microparticle.

The following questions arise. What are reasons of the influence of rest mass on a quantity of deterministic information about microparticle?

Is a rest mass equivalent to a quantity of deterministic information about a microparticle?

Is general relativity of macroscopic objects (I mean the fact that the bigger mass causes the bigger change of rectilinear uniform motion of the other body via spacetime curvature) similar in somewhat to the above atomic phenomena?

“…So all other things being equal an increase of rest mass m causes a decrease of the wave packet width dx and an increase of a quantity of deterministic information about the microparticle… The following questions arise. What are reasons of the influence of rest mass on a quantity of deterministic information about microparticle?

Is a rest mass equivalent to a quantity of deterministic information about a microparticle?.”

- really, again in this thread, as that is explained in the of the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception, the fundamental randomness of QM objects/events/effects/processes is absolutely inevitable because of the logical self-inconsistence of the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion “Change”,

- however, as that quite rationally suggested in the SS&VT informational physical model

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418793_The_Informational_Conception_and_the_Base_of_Physics, which is based on the conception, in the rigorously logically organized informational system “Matter” this randomness isn’t arbitrary, as that is postulated in mainstream QM as Heisenberg uncertainty principle ΔPΔx≥ћ/2, where ΔP and Δx are independent and arbitrary random;

- really it looks as well more probable that really every elementary change, in this case of P and x, happens really provided ΔPΔx=ћ.

At that any particle isn’t some “wave packet”, that is a cyclic disturbance in the [5]4D dense lattice of [5]4D binary reversible fundamental logical elements [FLE], which is placed in corresponding the Matter’s fundamentally absolute, fundamentally flat, and fundamentally “Cartesian”, [5]4D spacetime with metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z,ct),

- and every particle is some close-loop algorithm, which runs basing on the “FLE hardware”, essentially as the of precessed FLE sequential flipping along corresponding 4D “helix” line, the radius of the “helix” is equal to the particle’s Compton length λ=ћ/mc, m is inertial mass, c is standard speed of light.

Correspondingly the “size” – and region in the 3D space, where article with some probability can interact with other particle, of moving particle is essentially determined by its Compton length, i.e. eventually by inertial mass, however at that the couple of other uncertainties take part – the because of the self-inconsistence of Change above, and of the “mathematical uncertainty” – since in 4D space the vector cross-product isn’t defined, and so the axis of this “helix” in 3D space, where all interactions, besides that create new particles, happen, is additionally uncertain.

The 4D particle’s motion in 3D space is observed mostly as 3D projection of the 4D “helix” as the De Brogile wave with length λ_B=ћ/mV, V is the 3D spatial particle’s speed, and yeah, the more inertial mass the lesser λ_B for the same V.

However this uncertainty really isn’t essential, because of really 4D momentums of T-particles, i.e. that have rest masses, if the 3D speed <<c are changed non-essentially, and the uncertainty of motion in space is, in certain sense, negligible. So, say, when in the mainstream QM it is stated that if a particle is at rest in space, its position in space is completely non-determined, and the particle with equal probability is everywhere in the space, really that isn’t of course, so; more see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355361749_The_informational_physical_model_and_fundamental_problems_in_physicssection “What is the “Feynman–Stueckelberg interpretation” in QED [35], [36], where it is postulated that antiparticles move backward in time”

Cheers

Dear Sirs,

I think that a loss of physical information (existance of probability distribution for experimental outcomes, uncertainty relations, wave function collapse, Bohr's complementarity principle, etc.) may be related to a Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics.

It seems to me that Everett's many world interpretation of quantum mechanics does not contain the above loss of physical information. For example in the Everett's interpretation absolute square of wave function is not a probability distribution. It is similar to classical physical field, like electric field. For example in the double slit experiment an electron is simultaneously observed in all points of screen by a single observer who is in different quantum states.

In the multi world interpretation it is supposed that human can "sense" only the one quantum state. It is similar in somewhat to our vision. Our eyes sense very limited range of electromagnetic waves.

“…I think that a loss of physical information (existance of probability distribution for experimental outcomes, uncertainty relations, wave function collapse, Bohr's complementarity principle, etc.) may be related to a Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics….”

- really in Matter fundamentally can be some “losses of physical information” only in sense that, since yeah, because of the fundamental logical self-inconsistence of the absolutely fundamental phenomenon “Change”, on the QM scale states of QM objects/events/processes are uncertain – “illogical”,

- however that really – though principally ad hoc, since for the QM fathers, and in the mainstream physics till now, Matter – and so everything in Matter – was/is something fundamentally transcendent - but phenomenologically rather adequately to the reality, is postulated, aimed at to fit QM with experiments, in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics;

- whereas that

“….It seems to me that Everett's many world interpretation of quantum mechanics does not contain the above loss of physical information.…”

- really is a typical irrational claim about an other mainstream, and so also fundamentally ad hoc transcendent, interpretation of what experimentally is observed on QM scale. Which really doesn’t differ from the Copenhagen interpretation at practical application in the QM theories, however really it looks as rather evidently unphysical mental construction even in the mainstream – even in the mainstream it is evident that to create Matter it was necessary to spend some unbelievable energy portion, while to create “many worlds”- really infinite “number” of “worlds” – it would be necessary to spend infinitely unbelievable energy portion.

More about what really the informational system “Matter” is, and what the real fundamental problems in existent QM and QFTs are, including by what ways these problems should be solved/clarified, see the SS posts above and links in the posts.

SS posts in https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_actually_vacuum_spaceare relevant to this thread question.

Cheers

What is the scientifically rigorous definition of the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion “Information”, and how it is actualized in concrete informational systems, including “Matter” and “Consciousness”, and not only, is given/described in the SS posts and links in the posts; first of all in the paper with the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception; the conception recent version is now issued, see

In Matter “Information” is actualized in that Matter is very nicely and smartly designed informational system, which is based on a simple binary reversible logics, i.e. Matter is something like a computer, where the ultimately fundamental primary utmost elementary “logic chips” are the [5]4D binary reversible fundamental logical elements [FLE] that form the [5]4D dense lattice, which is placed in the Matter’s fundamentally absolute, fundamentally flat, and fundamentally “Cartesian”, [5]4D spacetime with metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z,ct),

- and practically everything in Matter is determined by the logical construction and properties of FLEs ,

More about how that works in Matter see informational physical model, which is based on the conception

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418793_The_Informational_Conception_and_the_Base_of_Physics and

To read the SS posts on pages 1 and 2 it is useful as well.

Cheers

Sandia National Laboratory spends $200 million a year studying the heat generated when information is erased. You can go to their website. A joke I like to tell is, "Have Facebook send the information to my car, and I'll erase it for them."

The statement about the equivalence is wrong, because temperature isn’t invariant under Lorentz transformations, it defines a particular frame. It’s another version of misunderstanding the ``equivalence between mass and energy". No such equivalence exists. Mass is invariant under Lorentz transformations, energy isn’t.

That definition doesn’t mean anything, since ``modification" isn’t defined.

Of course it’s possible to define anything, what matters are the consequences. I’m simply referring to Vopson’s article, where he claims a relation between mass and information and point out that that relation has problems.

Information has a standard definition, given by the probability of observing a system. It isn’t a form of matter, anymore than mass or charge is a form of matter-they’re properties of matter.

Once more: Energy depends on the reference frame, mass doesn’t. That’s why the statement of their equivalence is misleading. And temperature defines a frame, that’s why it’s wrong to claim that kT/ ^2 defines any sort of mass. The fact that such a quantity has the dimensions of a mass doesn’t imply that there’s a physical object with that mass. The reason is that the quantity in question doesn’t enter into the equations that describe the motion of objects the way a mass does. That’s the difference between dimensional analysis and physics.

Information theory is about entropy, that’s why `` entropic information theory" doesn’t mean anything-there isn’t any ``non-entropic" information theory, there’s, just, information theory. Which, in a precise sense, is the same thing as statistical mechanics. The difference between the two is more ``anthropic" than ``intrinsic".

However, once more, No, information is a property of matter, not a form of matter. It makes sense to talk about the information that can be stored using the magnetic moments of a block of matter-a hard disk, for instance-that information is separate from the hard disk itself.

Yes, of cource!... In the Absolute.

Landauer’s principle doesn’t have anything to do with any relation between information and mass; it has to do with the fact that classical gates aren’t revrsible and, therefore, a classical computer has non-trivial thermodynamical properties. So the question is, what about the thermodynamics of quantum gates.

“…What is the scientifically rigorous definition of the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion “Information”,..? …..”

Recently in Kiev rather serious problems with electricity appeared, and so time in the Net is essentially limited, so briefly:

- the rigorous scientific definition of the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion “Information”, and of a number of any other absolutely and “simply”, say, “Matter” and “Consciousness”, fundamental phenomena/notions, can be, and of a number of the phenomena/notions are, given only in framework of the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception, recent edition see

- of “Information” that is

In the conception is rigorously proven that there exist nothing else than some informational patterns/systems of the patterns that are elements of the absolutely fundamental and absolutely infinite “Information” Set; which - the Set - exists absolutely objectively, because of it fundamentally – logically - cannot be non-existent and so exists absolutely eternally, having no Beginning and no End.

Including the, though “simply”, but now utmost fundamental in mainstream, “Matter” and “Consciousness”, are scientifically defined – they both are nothing else than some informational systems, more see the link above and concrete SS&VT models of these phenomena https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355361749_The_informational_physical_model_and_fundamental_problems_in_physics;

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418793_The_Informational_Conception_and_the_Base_of_Physics;

Correspondingly some “Entropic information theory” , “….Information has a standard definition, given by the probability of observing a system. It isn’t a form of matter, anymore than mass or charge is a form of matter-they’re properties of matter….”,etc., have to the Information only one relation – that are some informational patterns/systems, about some concrete properties of other informational patterns/systems, and really nothing more,

- which are possible just because of everything is informational patterns/systems.

Information is extremely complex and bifurcated phenomenon, which principally is terminated first of all by semantics, and so cannot be formalized besides some simple patterns/systems.

An example – attempt to describe in some existent “theory of the information” the informational pattern “e^iπ=-1”, or, say, “Washington is US capital”, etc..

More see the SS posts above, where the thread question is already answered, and links in the posts, last vivid series of rather strange posts looks as strange one…

Cheers

Stam Nicolis says, "So the question is, what about the thermodynamics of quantum gates." The following paper by Michael Frank at Sandia describes quantum progress using reversible quantum-dot cellular automaton, reversible adiabatic CMOS technology, and others.

(1) (PDF) Quantum Foundations of Classical Reversible Computing (researchgate.net).

With respect to human societies and production methods, dear Anatoly A Khripov , we are witnessing the informatization of the economy. In this sense, this informatization changes the material conditions of the production process itself.

However, it is difficult to assess, if information is a new production factor or if the traditional production factors become more information-intense.

Consequently, my viewpoint from the physics of social systems (natural science of human society and mind) discerns that information converts (reorganizes) matter, energy and mass, in terms of economic production.

———-

Thermodynamic entropy involves matter and energy, Shannon entropy is entirely mathematical, on one level purely immaterial information, though information cannot exist without "negative" thermodynamic entropy.

It is true that information is neither matter nor energy, which are conserved constants of nature (the first law of thermodynamics). But information needs matter to be embodied in an "information structure." And it needs ("free") energy to be communicated over Shannon's information channels.

Boltzmann entropy is intrinsically related to "negative entropy." Without pockets of negative entropy in the universe (and out-of-equilibrium free-energy flows), there would no "information structures" anywhere.

Pockets of negative entropy are involved in the creation of everything interesting in the universe. It is a cosmic creation process without a creator.

(Citation from: https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/thims/

—————

Without the physical world, Ideas will not exist. ― Joey Lawsin

Even when money seemed to be material treasure, heavy in pockets and ships' holds and bank vaults, it always was information. Coins and notes, shekels and cowries were all just short-lived technologies for tokenizing information about who owns what. ― James Gleick, The Information: A History, a Theory, a Flood

Entropy-and information-does count the number of degrees of freedom of a system; it doesn't describe a system that's distinct from the one referred to. That's why it's a property of a system and not a special kind of matter itself.

Quantum information is an emergent property of quantum systems in the same way as classical information is for classical systems. But there doesn't exist a form of matter, that carries the information of any given material system.

The degrees of freedom, whose number is counted by the entropy, are those of the material system under study.

Stam Nicolis What about information entropy? Does information increase with entropy? The information content is quantified by the information entropy, if we know the entropy, we know the information content ? Information=degree of freedom to check entropy, but depends on the material system under study.

Information gain can be thought of as the purity in and of a (material) system under study: the amount of clean knowledge available in a system. However, there seem to exist many contradictory scientific views about this systems interplay.

A possible conclusion: : A high entropy means low information gain, and a low entropy means high information gain.

Once more, entropy (or information) describes the degrees of freedom of matter, it isn't a form of matter, that's distinct. That's why it doesn't make sense to claim that information about matter is matter. It isn't. The number of states matter can be found is distinct from matter.

A photon has energy and polarization; but these attributes aren't distinct from the photon-they describe a photon. They provide information about the photon, so what would be needed to produce it and to detect it.

No, the photon is massless. The reason is gauge invariance of electromagnetism. A massive spin-1 particle has three polarization states, whereas a photon has only two polarization states

Olivier Denis

But we can assume that photons have mass something so-called relativistic mass due to it's motion. but it is true that rest mass of photon is always zero.

Olivier Denis

The article you provided , they have just used normal form mathematical equations and showed such particles with zero rest mass does not exists,

First of all, photons travels at a constant speed , it has a universal value only because it rest mass is zero...

relativity equations are only applicable with non-zero rest mass particles in order to find the amount of energy needed to move particle in a particular speed. photons itself are energies.. they are only energy.

energy and mass are not same but interchangeable. how can we say that energy have infinity mass.. really not at all logical. this is enough to prove them wrong.

Last series of the sometimes rather strange posts has no relation to this thread question, and, since it is so too long already, it looks to remind here that in the SS post Oct. 22, page 4, it was already scientifically rigorously explained – what is [absolutely] fundamental phenomenon/notion “Information”, and that the existent “theories of information” in batter case describe only some traits of this phenomenon; and, say, pointed an evident example where these theories are senseless,

- and so the scientific answer to the thread question “Can an information (particularly a physical law itself) be some special kind of matter and transform into energy and mass?”

- is as: (i) - Information has relation to fundamental phenomenon/notion “Matter”, and so to everything in Matter, including “matter”, fundamentally first of all in that that – as that completely rigorously proven in the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception, recent edition see

,

- there exist absolutely for sure nothing else than some informational patterns/systems of the patterns that are elements of the absolutely fundamental and absolutely infinite “Information” Set; including Matter, and everything in Matter, is/are absolutely for sure some informational systems, [more concretely about how Information is actualized in Matter see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355361749_The_informational_physical_model_and_fundamental_problems_in_physics , and

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354418793_The_Informational_Conception_and_the_Base_of_Physics]; and

- (ii) – in the conception a number of other fundamental phenomena/notions, all of which are fundamentally transcendent/uncertain/irrational in mainstream sciences, including physics, first of all, besides “Matter”– “Consciousness”, “Space”, “Time”, “Energy”, “Inertia”, are scientifically defined; including the absolutely fundamental phenomenon/notion “Energy” [and “Momentum”] is some absolutely necessary trait/parameter of every informational pattern/ system, including of every material object, but “Energy” isn’t some information.

As well as “Inertia” is some absolutely necessary trait/parameter of every informational pattern/ system, in Matter – since Matter is rather simple system that bases on a simple binary reversible logics, both parameters – “energy” and “inertia” can be quantitatively defined in any concrete case [material object]; the measure of inertia is “inertial mass”. Though Energy and Inertia are fundamentally different phenomena/notions/parameters, they are fundamentally linked, and both change/re-distribute at informational patterns/systems interactions.

The basic and fundamentally universal physical laws/links/constants, though are informational patterns/systems, relate to everything in Matter only in that everything in Matter exists and interacts in complete accordance with these laws/links/constants, since that is completely correctly written on all/every material objects – every object- a particle, body, galaxy, etc., knows physics absolutely correctly and behaves only as that these laws, etc. prescribe, but the laws, etc., don’t take by any other means part at anything what exists and happens in Matter.

More see the SS posts and the links in the posts.

Cheers

The forms of chord languages are: chords (quantum spectrum*), chord space (open, closed, membrane strings), chord mathematical models (temperament, harmony), commonly used for chord expression such as time (music), space (painting), life (meridians, chakras) and so on; Chord semantics come from the chord spectrum and are manifestations of the spiritual and physical laws of nature.