Bit: from Breaking symmetry of it by WANG Xiong

Wang,

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

Wang,

As of 7-6-13, 2:24 am EST, the rating function for your essay is not available. Sorry I can't help you out right now by rating your essay.

Manuel

Wang,

I have sent an email requesting that FQXi extend to those of you who had their essay posted on July 5, 2013, be allowed additional days to compensate for the days of not being able to rate these essays.

My experience in conducting the online Tempt Destiny (TD) experiment from 2000 to 2012 gave me an understanding of the complexities involved in administrating an online competition which assures me that the competition will be back up and running soon. Ironically, the inability of not being able to rate the essays correlates with the TD experimental findings, as presented in my essay, which show how the acts of selection are fundamental to our physical existence.

Anyway, I hope that all entrants will be allocated the same opportunity to have their essay rated when they are posted, and if not possible due to technical difficulties, will have their opportunity adjusted accordingly. Best wishes to you with your entry.

Manuel

Sorry Wang,

I have received word that no extensions to the final deadline will be made. I will keep this in mind when I get a chance to review your essay later this week.

Best wishes,

Manuel

Dear WANG Xiong,

I think you raise a valid point that symmetry breaking ought to give rise to information, after all it gives rise to mass, which is information in itself.

Great approach - well done!

Please take a look at my essay if you have the time.

Best wishes,

Antony

Mr. Wang Xiong,

my name Giacomo Alessiani, congratulations. I really like Your essay.

Interesting, i produced mine, the same night of June 28.

Into it , i used an example based on a flexible straw, to explain my themes,

i think it is really similar to Your example, i mean SIM card (4.2).

But , You are first and I am last in the list :-) :-)

Well, i still working on 'classic shape' formula for quantum phenomena.

Question: it is possible that the symmetry of photons or particles, as source

of bit in nature?

And, can be the Higgs field behind this process ? As provider of both mass and energy ? ( mass= energy)

Thanks and my Best Regards.

Dear Wang,

If the bit emerges by breaking symmetry of the it will be correct then to assume that the universal "it" qualifies as the "Higgs field"?

My answer is "yes". And I actually make this assertion in my essay. Here is how it comes to be:

I think of the Noether current simply as a constant (of Peano's) and in a wave motion idiom as the "phase space" (i.e. "wave speed" of Huygens' principle) and in general as the "length scale". And then I think of Noether's continuous symmetry as the successor function (of Peano's) and in a wave idiom as the "inverse-length" (or "wavefronts"/"wavelets" of Huygen's principle).

Now the advantage these simple assumptions give me is that I can say simply (as a matter of demonstration) that any DE FACTO observer is the effective "universal constant" or "wave speed", this will mean indeed the non-locality per se and then like you imply: all observables break forth from this non-locality via interference to constitute the inverse-length or "wavelets" or "localities" (interference pattern).

You can call this process quantum decoherence or spontaneous symmetry breaking. The idea is that observables constitute then the position notion of Heisenberg's if the phase-points vis-à-vis any observer as the "momentum" notion or phase space. And by this I mean that any given observer is by definition the PURE QUANTUM STATE (wave function; equilibrium).

This assertion may look like anathema in QM but look closely it need not be. It means that any observer is a unique "uncertainty principle" or Heisenberg Cut. The "quantum" of action need not be a land mark, it should be dynamical. Matter of fact Planck thought of his constant as only ad hoc. And ad hoc (i.e. de facto) is my idea of the Higgs field ("observer"). Statistically one would say it is Markovian.

Find time to read through What a Wavefunction is. It developes your perspective without reservations. Then let me have your questions honestly.

Wishing you the best,

Chidi

Dear Wang,

Excellent essay.

Some questions, please :

What relationship is there between symmetry and duality. Which is the first to appear ?

What are the ultimate components between matter, energy and information?

Thank you for taking a look to my work.

Best regards

Xiong

You have given a short course on physics and information, bringing together different kinds of relevant strands from both, organizing clearly and logically. It's a big help, when one is confused about whether the aphorism is "It from Bit" as Wheeler puts it, or "It from Qubit" as one of the contestant puts it.

Now about the langrangian formulations of physics. In the thought-experiment I made in my essay "Analogical Engine", a simulacrum or a conceptual derivation of "Planck constant" was obtained. I think the arguments I made have fixed the meaning of the Planck constant as an arbiter of what is real and what is not.

Can you relate to any of those arguments?

My essay can be found at this link http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1865.

Best wishes

Than Tin

Wang,

I heard back regarding my request for allowing an extension for those of you who had the rating function delayed and was told, "The delay in ratings is unfortunate, but we will not change the final deadline at this stage."

I will keep this in mind by rating your essay more favorably when I review it this week.

Best wishes,

Manuel

Dear Wang,

Thank you for your essay. Yours is the most original suggestion in over 175 essays. It is compatible with the explanation I present in my essay, but is a higher level of abstraction. I think your idea has the potential to clarify the current confusion about information which is so completely revealed by the entries in this contest.

I will give you a score designed to keep you on top so that more people will see your essay.

Congratulations, and thank you for writing your essay!

Best regards,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

Hello Xiong,

I am glad to welcome you again in the contest! World Competition FQXi - this is a competition for new ideas in fundamental science. You have presented a lovely, clear and distinct, as the Rene Descartes, essays and profound ideas. It is extremely important conclusions: «Symmetry breaking give rise to information» and «We can conjecture that one day a more complete theory should unify all the three basic concepts Matter-Energy-Information. Then we can fully understand what is information, what's its relation with reality, and the ultimate relation of it and bit. "...

"Great Trinity" (Matter-Energy-Information) to open all its secrets for physicists and lyrics. It remains only to deal with the deep structure of matter, energy, and how to understand what is «in-forma». In the words of Nobel Laureate David Gross, we need to construction a «general framework structure». I'll add: with the ontological justification. That "general framework structure" will give the opportunity to see the fundamental "symmetry" and "asymmetry" of "the self-aware Universe" (Basil Nalimov), "grab" the nature of the information.

I invite you to comment on my essay and fairly priced. I believe that we are close to you in our search for theSpirit and walk in the same direction: you as a physicist, and I as a lyricist.

Good luck in the contest and best wishes,

Vladimir

Dear Wang,

You develop the far reaching idea that information is created by symmetry breaking.

I found at least one relevant paper for this issue "Information Originates in Symmetry Breaking"

by John Collier, Symmetry: Science and Culture 7 (1996): 247-256, available on line.

At first sight, this "bit from it" perspective seems to contradict Wheeler's observer participancy

when symmetry breaking ideas are implemented in the quantum domain. This aspect is developed

at length in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-consciousness/

Pierre Curie (the father of piezoelectricity and thus of modern quartz cristal clocks) explained to us

that "symmetry breaking has the following role: for the occurrence of a phenomenon in a medium, the original

symmetry group of the medium must be lowered (broken, in today's terminology) to the symmetry group of the

phenomenon (or to a subgroup of the phenomenon's symmetry group) by the action of some cause."

I still plagiarize the encyclopedia

"Goldstone theorem. In the case of a global continuous symmetry, massless bosons (known as "Goldstone bosons")

appear with the spontaneous breakdown of the symmetry according to a theorem first stated by J. Goldstone in 1960.

The presence of these massless bosons, first seen as a serious problem since no particles of the sort had been

observed in the context considered, was in fact the basis for the solution -- by means of the so-called Higgs mechanism"

Now I switch to my own essay which claims that contextuality has to do with Grothendieck's drawings: they correspond to

subgroups of the free group on two generators. Thus your approach does not contradict mine and the "it from bit"

perspective. I am happy of that.

Thank you and best wishes.

Michel