Information – Entropy Theory of Physics by George Rajna

George, That's very interesting. How well did the chess program do?

Thanks Philip, you can read about here: http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Papa

and here: http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/WCCC+1974

"Papa,

an early computer chess program written by George Rajna and B. Almasi, in the 70s affiliated with the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Papa applies the concept of entropy based on own and opponent mobility. It participated at the First World Computer Chess Championship, 1974 in Stockholm, unfortunately loosing all its three games due to tactical blunders. Based on preliminary results or expectations, Papa was seeded third, ahead of later winner Kaissa seeded fifth."

This is a very interesting essay about abstraction. George's frank admission that he considers information and matter to be two sides of the same thing in physics is admirably honest. Of course reality does not have sides because it only constantly maintains one real unique state once. When will physicists learn that it is impossible to build a perpetual motion machine because reality is already in a constant state of perpetual motion once? When will the physicists learn that it is impossible to build a machine that can travel at the "speed" of light because one real Universe is already travelling at one real "speed" of light once? Above all, when will it dawn on the physicists that they cannot build a machine that can "think" about reality because reality is unique once?

Thanks Joe for reading my essay. When I say two sides of the same thing, I think about the electric charge and electric field as an example. The first is the matter; the second is the information about the matter. You are right, we never will travel with the speed of light, but I still cannot imagine the borders of the artificial intelligence.

I thought of your essay when I read this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22261742

Thanks for the link, I am very glad to see that my thoughts before 40 years finally part of the research plan of physicists and the joint research fields, understanding that information and entropy are both sides of the It and Bit. Funny also that the original article 'Causal Entropic Forces' (http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v110/i16/e168702) published on the same day as our essays of the contest.

The most exciting chess match of all time was the Bobby Fischer versus Boris Spassky 1972 World Championship. The most boring unwatchable chess match of all time was the Gary Kasparov versus IBM Deep Blue debacle of 1997.

Jeopardy was a very entertaining show to watch until an IMB computer program named Watson activated the timing buzzer for every answer selection posed by Alex Trebek and easily won pitted against the two most successful human Jeopardy contestants of all time.

According to a National Geographic televised episode, whereas it used to take one man one long day to pick one acre of corn, there is now a machine that can reap 40,000 acres of corn in one short day.

3D printers can now produce stuff 24/7.

Americans no longer have manners. Americans now have mannerisms. Americans no longer socialize. Americans now belong to social networks. Americans no longer do. Americans watch. Americans no longer think. They calmly await the day when the scientifically designed knowledge pill becomes available.

Anyway it is nice to watch now online the Alekhine memorial: http://www.alekhine-memorial.com/online_game

It is interesting the use of the entropy for the chess game, so that it is possible to include the complexity in the choice of the movement; but this can work for a player like Capablanca that play closed positions (I think that your program PAPA play like Capablanca), I don't think that can be appliable to an opponent like Aleckine (a master of the open positions).

The endgame is like the thermodynamical equilibrium, with a low number of particles (heat death of the universe: there is not much change in entropy), and the promotion is like a tunneling between stable particles.

There is an analogy between the annihilation of a particles with capture of a piece: can be true that the elementary rule of the Physics are like a complex chess game.

This remember me the Feynman idea of the elementary process like a chess game (It from bit?): but Feynman was Wheeler's student.

I repeat that your article is interesting.

Saluti

Domenico

You must be a very good chess player and understand deeply my model, although I played chess much like in the style of Alekhine than Capablanca and used the Entropy - Information model to select my strategy and moves: http://www.chessgames.com/player/george_rajna.html . By the way Feynman is my favorite physicist, his work helped me to build my 3 Dimensional String Theory: http://vixra.org/abs/1112.0064 .

I am not a chess practitioner like you.

I read quickly your theory, and I like the story of the chess, and some legendary characters: I liked, in the past, to read chess game, opening, wold Champioships; I was only an avid fan.

I like the application of entropy, in all the know forms, and applications; this new application is beautiful; it is not necessary a deep knowledge of the program (which I must deepen), to understand the ingenious idea that led to his programming.

I understand that the endgame is a limit for the entropy application, because of the limit in the entropy variations; the Alekhine games are, for me, pure poetry (can be the vodka effect).

Saluti

Domenico

Hi George,

Your essay is really interesting. I have never heard that chess programs have anything to do with entropy! So inspired by you I have started to read more and have found a lot of fascinating stuff.

Especially important from my point of view is a connection between entropy and self-organized criticality that in turn is connected with emergence and evolution in physics.

According to Lee Smolin (Loop Quantum Gravity) self-organized critical systems are statistical systems that naturally evolve without fine tuning to critical states in which correlation functions are scale invariant. My own view seems to support the view of Smolin in the meaning that the universe is a dissipative coupled system that exhibits self-organized criticality. http://vixra.org/abs/1102.0026

I am glad that you see the connection between statistical physics and evolutionary biology. In my letter (vixra) I have applied the theory of Darwinism far beyond its original sphere of organic evolution on Earth.

Your essay conclusion is ...that information and matter are two sides of the same thing in physics, because the matter is the diffraction pattern of the electromagnetic waves. I would say that the matter is the wave itself but I do not make the same mistake as Schroedinger... My essay explains it very shortly giving directions to references. Maybe you would try to read and comment?

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1609

I should not comment or rate your essay yet because this area is too fresh for me. I have to study the subject.

But thank once more for the inspiration.

Philip gave you a link and I have found very fresh one (rather popular science)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2013/04/21/from-atoms-to-bits-physics-shows-entropy-as-the-root-of-intelligence/

"If I have seen further it is by standing on the sholders of Giants."

George,

Very interesting. Enjoyed the Chess analysis. Do you see the same principles embodied in other games of skill (Poker for example)?

George,

Fascinating essay (even as a decidedly average chess player). I've always struggled a little with the logic of entropy but you certainly gave me a new more fundamental vision of entropy in practice. Very nicely written, and a nice easy 'density' to read and understand.

It made me think a bit more clearly about the entropic angle of the infinite hierarchical subset evolution I discuss in my own essay. I also draw a dividing line between two sides, but am rather more radical! I hope you'll read and comment on it.

Best of luck in the scoring.

Peter

Hello George,

Interesting essay. I like the chess approach. I find your conclusion that "information and matter are two sides of the same thing in physics" to be consistent with my essay conclusion, leading to both It from Bit and Bit from It. I hope you have the chance to take a look at mine - any feedback would be appreciated.

Best wishes

Antony

I'd like to add that Beta Decay resulting in the arrow of time via less/lower quality information sits extremely well with my Baryon Asymmetry solution (part of my unification/cosmogony theory), which is similarly based around Beta Decay.

Dear George Rajna

The measure your very real and unique.

You conclude that: "It From Bit and Bit from it! " Is the right answer for "It From Bit or Bit from it?" - Meaning you that is : the bit was self-generated the information ?

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

George,

If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, "It's good to be the king," is serious about our subject.

Jim