Maximilian Lock: Obtaining Information via Entropy Maximisation

Forum Moderator

In quantum physics, measurements don't just reveal properties - they can actually fuel processes. Dr. Maximilian Lock explains how extracting information from quantum systems is linked to increasing entropy and driving them towards equilibrium.

Keywords: Broughton Hall, IAF Information Fuel TWCF

Lorraine Ford

As expected, nothing new.

Maximilian Lock says that, it is usually supposed that a measurement, which he equates to a choice, must break all 3 laws of thermodynamics (4:15). But he says, which is no surprise to anybody, that physicists don’t really believe that this temporary breaking of the laws of thermodynamics is true or possible. I.e., as we all know, physicists don’t believe that genuine choice, is possible. Instead, physicists believe that “measurement” and “choice” are mere superficial appearances that can be explained by yet another set of equations. Nothing new.

In layman’s terms, Maximilian Lock is in effect saying that physicists have certain beliefs about the world, and one core belief is that a ballsy choice, where the choices of living things are acts that intervene and disrupt and change the otherwise smooth logical unfolding of the inevitable fate of the world, so that it is no longer an “inevitable” fate, he is saying that a ballsy choice is not possible.

What is new? This just old, old physics with new equations.

Lorraine Ford

Lorraine Ford
So, you’ve got your looney fundamentalist religious, who’ll tell you: if you do that (e.g. rape, murder), you’ll burn in hell.

Then you’ve got your looney fundamentalist physicists (seemingly, most physicists) who’ll tell you: if you do that (e.g. rape, murder), it’s not you doing it, it’s the automatic laws of nature doing it, because the laws of nature are the only moving parts in the entire the universe.

At least the fundamentalist religious take people seriously.

The problem is that, despite claims of being research-based and scientific, physics does not actually know why the numbers that apply to the categories (like position, e.g. the positioning of one’s fingers or one’s vocal cords) would ever move or change. The law-of-nature equations of physics represent number change, due to mathematical relationship, but only IF other numbers change.

Despite not knowing why the numbers would change or jump, the core religious beliefs of physicists prevent them from ever taking people seriously, and saying that we live in a type of world where people can jump some of their own numbers, i.e. we live in a type of world where people can choose their own bodily outcomes.

The only “tools”, that can be used to represent people and other living things evaluating their surroundings, and jumping some of their own numbers in response to this evaluation, are logical connective symbols like IF, AND, OR, IS TRUE, THEN. As mathematicians know, these logical connective symbols represent a more fundamental aspect of the world than mathematical equations represent.

Lorraine Ford

Lorraine Ford
As mathematicians know, statements using logical connective symbols, like IF, AND, OR, IS TRUE, and THEN, represent a more fundamental aspect of the world than mathematical equations represent.

But physicists, like Maximilian Lock and Emily Adlam and others, are on a quixotic quest to show that something, which in fact can only be represented by logical connective symbols, could emerge from equations. It is a quixotic battle that these physicists can’t win.

We live in a different type of world to the type of world that physicists seem to believe that we live in. We actually live in a world ruled just as much by the freedom and consciousness represented by logical connective symbols, as it is ruled by the laws represented by mathematical equations.