Bit: from Breaking symmetry of it by WANG Xiong

Dear Xiong,

Thanks - I'm still trying to get through them all - there are so many to read, but encouragingly, so many good ones! I think yours is very logical and an excellent approach.

Best wishes,

Antony

Dear Wang,

On a second thought, your response above to my question of 10th July underrates the power of your postulate.

Going strictly by your thesis information (the bit) emerges from the it via symmetry breaking. Now by definition information is not merely about mass. Or is it? Consider that to qualify as the essential "it" that gives rise to ALL PHYSICAL INFORMATION your "it" should be more appropriately a wavefunction by any other name be it "Higgs field", phase space, uncertainty, big bang etc.

You say that to understand wave function we should understand dirac spinor. The little i do understand is that Dirac's equation basically renders Schrodinger's equation relativistic. Now if you can please look again at my equation (1) it presumes Dirac's electron-positron pair and then at equation (3) we are able to get easily the Hartree approximation of the n-body wavefunction of the electron. Seems to me that if you read between the lines you can actually see hints of your dirac spinor.

My essay may not be elegant but the data it presents should convince you to face up to the power of your postulate. And, Wang, don't be afraid to push the boundaries,it is what we are here for.

And please remember to actually log in as community and rate me. Why not!

Sincerely,

Chidi

Hello Wang,

I like your essay. I also like the way you describe information as: general, technical and physic. On the general way of describing information, will you say "existence" is information, so that existence/non-existence becomes a binary choice (Bit) that can be represented technically as 0 and 1?

Also, can a line with length and zero breadth carry information?

If you agree that existence/non-existence can be a Bit, check my essay here and give me your comments.

Good luck in the contest.

Akinbo

Dear Wang,

I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

Regards and good luck in the contest,

Sreenath BN.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

Hello Xiong,

I am pleased to read your essay. Great, deep new ideas, important conclusions: ﾂｫWe argue that the essential of information is also related to symmetry, actually its antithesis symmetry breaking.ﾂｻ .. ﾂｫ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. ﾂｻ

Indeed, it is an in-depth understanding of the new, a new interpretation and representation of the concept "matter", "energy", "information", "symmetry", "asymmetry". Need a new understanding of "the great trinity" in the foundation of the Universe. Assistant there can be no traditional knowledge, in particular, a modern interpretation of the "magic matrix Lo Shu" (Chinese Simplified. 洛 书, pinyin: luﾃｲ shū) ﾂｫmagic square is a 3 ﾃ-- 3". Physics and philosophy have go together, hand in hand, helping each other, as taught by A.Einstein: "At the present time, a physicist has to deal with philosophic problems to a much greater extent than physicists of the previous generations had to deal with" and J. Wheeler "Philosophy is too important to be left to the philosophers". Please see also my essay.

Luck in the contest and best wishes,

Vladimir

Hello, Xiong,

I also liked your very condensation of physics with the problem of information. However, I feel your analysis is weak at one critical point, where you say "If the physical system is invariant. What if the physical system is not invariant? And where did the system comes from in the first place? Please look at my essay on this, if your would. I am sending you an E-mail on a related matter.

Best regards,

Joseph

Dear Wang,

Excellent job! I rated your essay accordingly. The issue now how the symmetry was broken? By what action? How? If I may posit that KQID theory can illuminate this symmetry breaking event. If I may quote a full version of my essay Child of Qbit in time:

Wang Yaming's one bit

Fu Xi heaven triagram ☰ as the element that are creative, innovative and proactive forces that gives A bits first, whereas the earth trigram ☷ as the element that are receptive, flowing and reactive forces that takes and converts A into S bits later to complete a cycle. The heaven ☰ is doing the first Giving and the earth ☷ is doing the first Taking: Existence emerges. The act of Giving is the beginning of the Taking and the act of Taking is completing the Giving. The Giving first and Taking later principle is the unity of Wang Yangming's one bit. The Giving and Taking collapse the bits-wave function of Giving and Taking. This collapse of the bits-waves function ψI(CTE) means the breaking of symmetry of the state of equilibrium before the Giving and the state of equilibrium before the Taking. This ψI(CTE) is bits-waves function of consciousness (C), time (T) and energy (E). The breaking of symmetry yield at least one or more bit/s as its manifestation of the creation and distribution of new bit/s. if the Giving and Taking do not yield any bit/s, then the act of Giving was is not consummated by the act of Taking, thus, there is no collapse of the bits-waves function and no information gain. See excellent article on information gain hypothesis by Pfister and Wehner, arXiv:1210.0194v3. A bit means information gain. Information gain means the breaking of the symmetry from the act of Giving and Taking consummated in the meeting of the mind as well as actual Exchange of equal value from the respective giver and taker. (jurisprudence of contract law). The act of Giving andTaking are aborted and not consummated without breaking the symmetry and hereby no information gains. This is the KQID simple mechanism of Creation and Distribution.

Excellent!

Please rate and make comment to my essay.

Best wishes,

Leo KoGuan

Dear Wang,

Very nice! I think you will find that your essay and mine precisely agree on the important issue of symmetry breaking (although I use the topological term "orientability" for this phenomenon).

Indeed, there is no life without it. I like your concise statement: "Symmetry means you can not tell the different, under some change, according to a particular observation. This means information is lost." Or it means that no information is instantiated -- or differentiated -- until, as Brouwer put it, one performs the act of a "move of time." In a 2007 conference paper I conjectured that time, energy and information are identical phenomena.

May your tribe increase. Best wishes in the competition.

Tom

Hello Xiong,

As the contest in Wheeler's honor draws to a close, leaving for the moment considerations of rating and prize money, and knowing we cannot all agree on whether 'it' comes from 'bit' or otherwise or even what 'it' and 'bit' mean, and as we may not be able to read all essays, though we should try, I pose the following 4 simple questions and will rate you accordingly before July 31 when I will be revisiting your blog.

"If you wake up one morning and dip your hand in your pocket and 'detect' a million dollars, then on your way back from work, you dip your hand again and find that there is nothing there...

1) Have you 'elicited' an information in the latter case?

2) If you did not 'participate' by putting your 'detector' hand in your pocket, can you 'elicit' information?

3) If the information is provided by the presence of the crisp notes ('its') you found in your pocket, can the absence of the notes, being an 'immaterial source' convey information?

Finally, leaving for the moment what the terms mean and whether or not they can be discretely expressed in the way spin information is discretely expressed, e.g. by electrons

4) Can the existence/non-existence of an 'it' be a binary choice, representable by 0 and 1?"

Answers can be in binary form for brevity, i.e. YES = 1, NO = 0, e.g. 0-1-0-1.

Best regards,

Akinbo

Xiong,

Thank you for your explanation of how information arises from symmetry breaking. Your exposition was very clear.

The emergence of information can also be explained as the loss of quantum entanglement, which is time-symmetric in Lagrangian mechanics. Whereas you see a Matter-Energy-Information trinity, I formulate a duality between momentum/energy and position/time symmetry. (See my essay "A Complex Conjugate Bit and It".)

You have given me food for thought. My theory is also a trinity if the observer is included as a third subsystem in the creation of information.

Best wishes,

Richard

Dear Wang

You are right.

Symmetry as a silence.

Breaking of symmetry mean birth of information

Regards

Yuri

Wang,

I commend your excellent essay, with a well considered proposition well argued and in a nice writing style.

I also thank you for your very kind comments on mine.

I agree with you that "the fundamental concepts of physics are matter, space-time, and motion" but firmly disagree with using 'partial time derivatives' as I've found they are the root of all nonsense in physics. If they are replaced with a real physical mechanism for transforms we can then recover linearity and full coherence. Do see my previous essays (both 7th in the Community rating lists). A simple change of speed by inertial system v from propagation speed c in one frame to c in the other implements the Doppler shift (contraction/ dilation) and recovers all laws of physics. A similar observer acceleration ensures REAL findings are then also co-variant.

I'd be delighted to answer any queries on the above which will not be at first intuitive. I confirm your good work has earned a high mark from me, and wish you luck in the final 'roller coaster' ride home.

Peter

Dear Wang,

Your idea about "symmetry breaking gives rise to information" it is very interesting.I give you a good rate. However, you know better than me that conservation of quantities is a key element to calculate and predict the evolution of a physical system. So, at the same time, symmetries give us a lot of information because conservation comes from symmetry. Have you thought about it?

Best regards,

Sergio

Interesting idea that symmetry breaking is related to increase or coming into existence of information. Certainly symmetry breaking in modern field-theoretic accounts of the early universe is intimately related with the coming into existence of most of the structured content of the universe.

Hello Wang

Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html)

said: "It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show the relationship. And example of this is the Schrodinger equation and the Heisenberg formulation of quantum mechanics. I don't know why that is - it remains a mystery, but it was something I learned from experience. There is always another way to say the same thing that doesn't look at all like the way you said it before. I don't know what the reason for this is. I think it is somehow a representation of the simplicity of nature."

I too believe in the simplicity of nature, and I am glad that Richard Feynman, a Nobel-winning famous physicist, also believe in the same thing I do, but I had come to my belief long before I knew about that particular statement.

The belief that "Nature is simple" is however being expressed differently in my essay "Analogical Engine" linked to http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1865 .

Specifically though, I said "Planck constant is the Mother of All Dualities" and I put it schematically as: wave-particle ~ quantum-classical ~ gene-protein ~ analogy- reasoning ~ linear-nonlinear ~ connected-notconnected ~ computable-notcomputable ~ mind-body ~ Bit-It ~ variation-selection ~ freedom-determinism ... and so on.

Taken two at a time, it can be read as "what quantum is to classical" is similar to (~) "what wave is to particle." You can choose any two from among the multitudes that can be found in our discourses.

I could have put Schrodinger wave ontology-Heisenberg particle ontology duality in the list had it comes to my mind!

Since "Nature is Analogical", we are free to probe nature in so many different ways. And you have touched some corners of it.

Good Luck,

Than Tin

Dear WANG Xiong,

I have read your pretty Essay as I promised in my Essay page. The idea that breaking of symmetry gives rise to information is very intriguing and the example of the SIM card of iPhone is both simple and enlightening. Do you think that your conclusion "Bit is from breaking symmetry of it" could be conciliated with my statement "Information tells physics how to work. Physics tells information how to flow"? In any case, I strongly appreciate your Essay and, in turn, I will give you an high score.

Cheers,

Ch.

Dear Wang,

Very good presentation. Clearly links symmetry and information and brings it to the forefront. If I may add it links directly to complexity via your Sim Card example. I am a visual thinker and I appreciate your making information visual.

Worthwhile essay to which I give a good mark.

Don Limuti

Dear Wang Xiong,

We humans are like children, we always keep asking WHY and HOW.

The origin of creation of information by symmetry breaking may also pose us the question What was the origin of the FIRST symmetry breaking ? Accepting the idea means that the ORIGIN was symmetrical, and something had to happen to CAUSE this event.

This kind of thinking is indeed causal and deterministic, if we agree that the origin of our causal universe has a non-causal base and accept the possibility that causal universes cannot be infinite, then the problem is partly solved.

Infinities exist in our consciousness but not in the materialistic universe, singularities have no dimensions, no CAUSAL dimensions, so they are not existing in the causal universes. But they exist in our minds .

In my essay : "THE QUEST FOR THE PRIMAL SEQUENCE" I try to explain these perceptions, which might also be the origin of the symmetry breaking.

I hope that you can find some time to read/comment and also rate my contribution. I am not a professional scientist, it is more the philosophical side of the latest results of physics that I try to interpret.

I respect your essay and give it a good rating.

best regards

Wilhelmus