It from bit? Does John Wheeler was right?
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
"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)