Note to viewers: The John Templeton Foundation is a religious / spiritual organization. Do with that info what you will.

@BiljanaPetrova

14 күн бұрын

that doesn't change anything, if the data is correct

@seanoneill9130

14 күн бұрын

@@BiljanaPetrova LOL

@Mustachioed_Mollusk

14 күн бұрын

@@BiljanaPetrova no but it does put into question how the data collected is being used along with what methods were used to reach those points.

@Mustachioed_Mollusk

14 күн бұрын

@@seanoneill9130 don't laugh, speak. If you can't correct the wrong with your own words you're just as laughable.

@deadwalking100

14 күн бұрын

That does put a different perspective on this video; appreciate the heads up. I did feel at the end that was what he was going for, but did not say outright.

I think this is mainly a demonstration of how difficult it is for humans to comprehend how long the universe has and will exist. Local increases in order due to a star pumping a large amount of energy into its planets is not evidence for a new law of physics.

@UntappedAnalysis

9 күн бұрын

Do you think that the formation of the star itself is an increase or decrease of order? Do you think the formation of molecular clouds that form starts are an example of increase or decrease of entropy?

@davidharrison8975

5 күн бұрын

@@UntappedAnalysis Perhaps the entire lifetime of a star represents both increase and decrease of order. Think bell curve - beginning with an increase in order, at the apex it changes to a decrease in order. I subscribe to the thought of a "static" universe - it has always been in existence and will always be in existence - it doesn't increase in size and it does not decrease in size. With that in mind, there would be a balance of an increase AND decrease in order.

@UntappedAnalysis

2 күн бұрын

It is Def increasing in size tho ​@@davidharrison8975

The second law of thermodynamics doesn't need a second arrow to explain entropy. Earth is not a closed system, thus a highly ordered system like our star provides energy which is borrowed by life on earth to increase in complexity temporarily. This order is created by borrowing more ordered forms of energy and releasing it as less complex and more disordered form of energy. This video is an overreach to connect some sort of religious beliefs to science, as someone pointed out below, the John Templeton Foundation is often tried to bridge the gap between science and religion.

@deezynar

14 күн бұрын

Life is just energy at higher orders? Sure. I have heard some people say that faith is the belief in something that has no evidence. The belief that life could come out of no life without any design or guidance has no evidence.

@TheQahan

13 күн бұрын

@@deezynar belief creates kind of focus & attention. just like LLMs

@TheQahan

13 күн бұрын

which highly related to Purpose

@BiljanaPetrova

13 күн бұрын

the second arrow doesn't explain entropy, it explains the second arrow of time. we as 3 dimensional beings, only can sense linear time going forward. this is about quantum fields

@melon9680

12 күн бұрын

​@@deezynarTryna understand what your getting at but to no avail.

Today I learnt: - Things that last over time, are the things that happen to be in the right configuration to survive their circumstance - As such, there is an increasing amount of surviving configurations that were best suited to their circumstance - Coffee cups make for terrible screwdrivers

@matthewmiller3745

14 күн бұрын

To me, it sounds like natural selection on a universal scale. Maybe i’m missing the point but i don’t really see where time gets involved

@armartin0003

14 күн бұрын

@@matthewmiller3745 Because it changes over time, becomes a force which increases order over time as opposed to entropy.

@tessarnold7597

14 күн бұрын

​@armartin0003 Except, who defines what "order" is? (The very fact anyone can ask that question tells us that the whole concept is completely arbitrary.)

@neo2264

14 күн бұрын

@@tessarnold7597 That's one of those tough philosophical questions. I won't pretend I know much about philosophy, but my first thought is that perhaps that path of questioning doesn't actually lead to greater understanding of the natural world. That's not to say that I think it isn't worth pondering.

@armartin0003

14 күн бұрын

@@tessarnold7597 I defined order in this case as opposed to entropy. Words have meanings that are commonly defined within a dictionary. Who decides what goes in the dictionary? I suppose that's a good question. Whether or not you trust it is up to you. However, the value ascribed to the funny mouth sounds contained therein are generally agreed upon.

I learned nothing about science in this video, but I sure learned a lot about how to reframe Intelligent Design to make it look like science without mentioning the mysterious Designer.

@valentinmalinov8424

12 күн бұрын

Bravo, very intelligent reply. If you want to learn a bit more, probably I can suggest the book - "Theory of Everything in Physics and The Universe"

@motormania5250

2 күн бұрын

Well, the designer did a horrible job, at it took us millions of years to arrive to modern humans

Life is a Higher Order Entropy Pump, the goal is still to increase entropy globally, but it does it via lowering entropy locally. This is compatible with the Second Law of Thermodynamics, just like a Heat Pump is.

@Beef1188

14 күн бұрын

I will accept your theory if you can adequately explain to me as to what makes you qualified to postulate one.

@brothermine2292

14 күн бұрын

>Beef1188 : A theory should be judged on its own merits, not on the characteristics of people who promote it. You committed the "ad hominem" fallacy.

@brothermine2292

14 күн бұрын

Why do you call increasing entropy a goal? Doesn't a goal require a mind that desires it?

@julianhirst1886

14 күн бұрын

​@@brothermine2292no. The language someone uses does not alter the universe.

@brothermine2292

14 күн бұрын

>julianhirst1886 : I agree that language doesn't alter the universe, but how does your reply relate to the comment or earlier replies? If you're referring to my question about the comment's use of the word "goal," your point is irrelevant, because the comment is trying to accurately describe the universe, not alter the universe.

(Have downloaded the paper on this. So, my criticism is just based on this short video.) One problem with associating time, a physical characteristic of our universe, with functionality is that one is not reversible and the other is. Stars do implode. Civilizations fall. Time, however, never reverses. If functionality is reversible, then, why doesn't time? (Skimmed the paper.) On page 6, the maximum likelihood estimation for any configuration is: -log(sub)2(1/N) = log(sub)2(N), where N is the number of configurations. If, however, you have a density function where the supremum is infinite, then you can't find the MLE. This isn't just a technical problem with the math. This means that, because there is no discernible way to determine what is functional, then time would not move forward. This obviously doesn't exist in our universe.

@BiljanaPetrova

14 күн бұрын

that's why we have singularity in black holes

@LowenKM

14 күн бұрын

@@BiljanaPetrova Yep... black holes as nature's ultimate 'Trash Compactor', spitting the most basic components of matter and energy back out into the universe as Hawking Radiation, to start the cycle of 'Evolution' all over again.

@tessarnold7597

14 күн бұрын

Except, in pretty much all workable theories of Time, time does not move. We move through it. That's why the laws of physics work the same "forwards or backwards in time." The 3 main theories (philosophical) of Time are: Presentism (only Now exists.) Growing Block (we create time like a boat creates a wake.) And Eternalism (time is a coordinate plane, like Length, Width, and Depth.) Look into it when you get a chance. It's a great mindbender.

@posthocprior

14 күн бұрын

@@tessarnold7597 Yes, thanks. Am aware of the theory of general relativity. Was addressing the hypothesis presented in the video of why time moves forward and its forward movement is correlated with increasing functional information.

@tessarnold7597

13 күн бұрын

@@posthocprior And I didn't say anything about the theory of relativity. Did you want to reply to someone else? Also, your comment's construction makes it unclear as to which statements are yours and which statements are being reproduced from the paper. So, maybe we can give each other a little grace about potential misunderstandings?

Coffee cup as a screwdriver would work a treat if the screw heads were also coffee cup shaped. It's usless as a paperweight if there is no paper to put it on. The cup can also hold screws. So it is also a screw holder. A very effective screw holder at that.

@Q-Limited

3 күн бұрын

Perspective 😉

I didn't hear any science in this. Thermodynamics has already explained evolution, there is no gap that needs to be filled by a second arrow of time.

@wingit7335

14 күн бұрын

He's been reading that part in the bible which described quantum theory.

@karoshi2

14 күн бұрын

Sounds like a different way to describe it, only. Like different ways to calculate: you can multiply this way or that way, whatever you are more comfortable with. Mathematically it's the same, so it doesn't matter. On the other hand: maybe it actually does add understanding, I'm not sure yet. Like chemistry and biology at their core are only applied physics, they do have their value, though. And from biology follows intelligence and consciousness, social interaction, diplomacy, etc. By abstracting to higher and higher levels we do add some knowledge.

@Misandry101

13 күн бұрын

The science I heard from this was tenure and the dreams of an older gentleman. Hoping there's an afterlife

@leonmitas

13 күн бұрын

Huh, it seemed like a phylosophy right? Like all the science before it was measured and calculated? Everything that is science has started as an idea. Look at gravity, or atoms, or even Evolution itself - which is not a science as we can not measure or observe it, it is a phylosophy

@rochemediaservices

13 күн бұрын

String-pusher the original commenter right here :p

The whole premise this is based on is false.. the second law of thermodynamics does NOT state that chaos rules over order. It states that energy gets more spread out over time. It also doesn’t mean that locally entropy can not decrease (your car does it all the time), with energy exchanging the system it’s not a violation (only isolated systems increase entropy over time). So the quest starts on the wrong foot.

@MARKZ137

13 күн бұрын

Rather than just spread out, I would say it's reaching equilibrium. Should the universe stop expanding (or at least the expansion sufficiently slow down), the equilibrium could be reached and then we would end in a fluctuating state around equilibrium (perhaps full of Boltzmann brains).

@frusie91

10 күн бұрын

@@MARKZ137 I think we say the same thing, English just isn’t my native language, so I use simpler words to describe the concept. But fair enough, your phrasing of equilibrium is indeed more accurate.

@mrgoodman6620

12 сағат бұрын

@@MARKZ137 Equilibrium is a perceived construct that can not and will not exist simultaneously with anything still decaying of entropy. Equilibrium= balance, still, motionless no exchange of energy. This can occur but it's only true in isolation of the observed, in reality there is a huge force still at play upon the apex centre of equilibrium. The thing is that I'm not sure exactly what you mean, as it's so complex it's easy to misscomunnicate what we mean. If your suggesting a point of an optimized universal condition of perfection, perpetuating it's own longevity, that's not at all the reality of the course. You will find more, further in my comments.

@MARKZ137

11 сағат бұрын

@@mrgoodman6620 I simply see equilibrium as a point of convergence. You argue that equlibrium is but a construct that cannot be reached, yet my original explanation axionomically expect the "final state". The convergence. The Heat Death of the Universe. It is inconsequential whether we will ever reach such state. What is important is that entropy (in a figurative sense, aka as a process) is not just decay. It is a process of change from less stable to more balanced. At least, this is understanding based on the most accepted version of entropy; The Second Law of Thermodynamics. Shannon's version is more about information than about energy, yet effectively describes the same phenomen; the most stable/final state is the most common (i.e. highest thermodynamic entropy can be encoded with zero bits of entropy. This is a detail which confuses people a lot as both entropies describe a little different thing.). The important distintion I'm trying to make here is that this "equilibrium" is not always state of total decay as you most likely are trying to suggest. It is always above absolute zero.

@mrgoodman6620

11 сағат бұрын

Exactly! If we want to throw the entire meaning of life in too it is simpler to understand. (I think) From the moment the energy burst out, into the post existing space that has expanded into the "universe", the whole event is an information gathering exercise. It will run it's course and conclude. (collapse) I'm not convinced of the multiverse theory, I'm more drawn to the idea that at the end of this "run" a recurrence of "the big bang" will follow. The unstructured energy expands a space initially the first interaction of two bits, streams, parts???? Of energy a structure forms, and instantly all energy follows, in crystalising replication creating the base building blocks of the coming universe. This time around the carbon based scenario came about! Energy exhaustion and dispersion is end point. This means a massive space with all atomic particles separated and floating independently so as no exchange of energy occurs as it's just a mass of atomic planetary systems representing the exhaustion of the energetic carbon universe! The whole time energy is finding and creating ways to use the energy through greatest potential to destruction and dispersion. We humans are great examples of potential..... we waist energy amazingly well gotta give huge credit for our manifestation! LOL Nothing lasts forever every star will burn out every planet will die every start will end. One day the last remaining black hole will collapse retracting all that was the universe, priming to go again; Where exactly consciousness, soul, spirit and the designer and information generated, reside is the only mystery!

this is not science

@Pseudothink

14 күн бұрын

The woo woo is strong with this one. What he's talking about seems perfectly explainable by existing concepts, like possible states/configurations vs unreachable states. Functional selection? Purpose? Utter woo.

@raymond9642

14 күн бұрын

​@@Pseudothinkwhat the fk does that even mean

@kolomun

13 күн бұрын

It's entertainment

@k702_

13 күн бұрын

Dude noticed that entropy sometimes decreases locally and thinks he discovered a new law or something

@subhuman3408

13 күн бұрын

What if it was science?

College dorm room bong hit level word salad. Good grief... There is no purpose, there is no design. It's just laws of physics naturally unfolding.

@user-hy9nh4yk3p

14 күн бұрын

I will call thee black sparrow - nice explanation. For me - the Real Being - reality is best and most interesting. Fare thee well - in life's journey

@glenliesegang233

14 күн бұрын

How does base 64 digitally encoded information in kilobyte quantities "appear" out of random processes? One byte of information is 128 bits. Two amino acids in sequence are specified by 1 byte of (thanks, Dawkins!) digital code. A 50 a.a protein is specified by 25 bytes.

@user-hy9nh4yk3p

14 күн бұрын

@@glenliesegang233 This window - is where Raja yoga meditation - is researched - in infinite depth. Method - meditation on the heart. Sorry. Fare thee well - on life's journey

@antonjoubert6980

14 күн бұрын

To much for you to contemplate? Do you not being specially created by jebus scares you?

@user-hy9nh4yk3p

13 күн бұрын

@@antonjoubert6980 You may have a SA name? Real Being has no name - or form. One may feel - Real Being - as the Absolute is - absolute infinite subtlety and purity. This is reserved - entirely for the heart -as experience. This is the work of my Guru and our Masters - Ram Chandra (India) Q: Who is jebus ? Unknown saint of yours ? Fare thee well - on life's journey.

"We" think that anywhere where there is a high influx of extra energy there is a likelihood of "higher order". The second law of thermodynamics (entropy) only applies to closed systems. The Earth is NOT a closed system.

@0FAS1

14 күн бұрын

What if the concept of closed system is itself a fallacy? What if everything is truly infinite?

@karoshi2

14 күн бұрын

​@@0FAS1that doesn't make a difference. The law applies only to closed systems. Open and closed are not just true or false, but on a spectrum. A system can be closed enough to be well approximated. And of course physicists are aware of the error introduced by the inspected system not being _actually_ closed. Physics describes idealised components of interactions. In reality they combine, obviously. So saying the law applies only to closed systems is in that sense not correct. It applies to the closed _component_ of a system. And then different effects add their own contribution to the outcome. The second law of thermodynamics also has a special role, as it doesn't describe a force or something. It's actually a consequence of statistics and even applies to the order within a card deck (famous analogy): take a set of cards. It's ordered by colour and value when it's new - or just sort it, doesn't matter. Now shuffle it, throw it in the air, or just put it loosely in your backpack. It has a new, random order now. The likelihood of bringing it into the original order is tiny. Now imagine particles being the cards. We have way more possible orders with them, and they move around on their own, just because they have energy. Hence it tends towards chaos. Just probability and statistics.

@chaimgoldstein4585

13 күн бұрын

​@@karoshi2You explained that really well! We are all just beings in this entropic universe. Everything is relative, and everything is dependant on whether there are positive actions, or negative actions.

The universe isn’t selecting for function, your subjectiveness does. You select to pay attention to things that serves a function to you. There’s a vast amount of meaningless that you don’t subjectively choose to pay attention to.

@wingit7335

14 күн бұрын

You got it my friend.

@user-hy9nh4yk3p

14 күн бұрын

spot on Raja Yoga says - this is the first state of thinking - discrimination (Viveka) A man who cannot discriminate - is lost. Fare thee well - on life's journey

@jigilub

13 күн бұрын

I don't think it can be understood or spoken with words, our language itself being a prison to the creativity required and divergence needed to both experience and translate the experience to others in an intelligible way. Everything IS everything, we merely form a bi-junction and internalize the laws we see to work with our surroundings. I don't see us having gotten very far past the mathematical identity property yet.

@user-hy9nh4yk3p

13 күн бұрын

@@jigilub You make sense - if you think like this. Densely argued. Detailed. Logical. Have formally meditated - 50 of me 60 yrs. Think very differently about - everything - waiting/receiving - thoughts become feelings - and heart is obeyed - always. I hope someone - takes you up communic Fare thee well - on life's journey.

@jigilub

13 күн бұрын

@@user-hy9nh4yk3p Congratulations on your mental focus and fortitude. Im Honored, I See You, appreciate your wisdom! To you a good life as well ~ Our game, blindly jumping into Everything and surrendering our beloved selves for more understanding and better tools to make ourselves.

This is what I love about science. Observe, study, hypothesise, but also admit ‘We could be spectacularly wrong’. However the core driver will persist: We want to understand.

@Carloshache

13 күн бұрын

The driver is too strong here, as he is simply misunderstanding what entropy really is.

@anonymes2884

13 күн бұрын

That _is_ a great thing about science. But what's being presented in the video is not science.

@CaritasGothKaraoke

13 күн бұрын

Yeah that happens in science, and yet it also happens in this video too. Maybe that’s why people have conflated the two.

@audiodead7302

13 күн бұрын

The core driver of this YT video is to get clicks. That is it's 'purpose'. Mission accomplished.

Scientism meets teleology. Not only is this hypothesis unfalsifiable (thereby making it unscientific), it relies on confirmation bias as well as the belief in absolute motion (moments in time coming into existence from previous non existence). Unfortunately the Theory of Relativity demonstrates how the passage of time is an illusion, which means the arrow of time is an illusion from our Time Dependent perspective of The Universe. The passage of time is perceptual, not actual. No need for a second arrow of time.

@keernhaslem1845

14 күн бұрын

Studies of dark matter will demonstrate otherwise.

@BeatMasterPhil

14 күн бұрын

The problem is that saying that "something is unscientific if is it unfalsifiable" is itself unfalsifiable. And therefore unscientific.

@clwho4652

14 күн бұрын

This is falsifiable, for something to be falsifiable it has to create testable predictions, testable predictions can be made from this. His flaw is he is adding meaning to this, something that is not inherent to the universe or life but is created by creatures capable of inventing the concept.

@BeatMasterPhil

14 күн бұрын

@@clwho4652 And what is the testable prediction to prove that anything unfalsifiable is unscientific? If we can't test this statement, then it is also unscientific. Which means the unfalsifiability view is self-contradictory and incoherent.

@clwho4652

14 күн бұрын

@@BeatMasterPhil Use the hypothesis to predict organization where there wouldn't organization if the y hypothesis was false. Look for that.

Big think could re brand as over think. I think. In the present time this theory is as useful as tits on a bull. To use the vernacular of my childhood....time.😂

@wingit7335

14 күн бұрын

Overthinking is fine, this is not that. This is belief doing its thing. He's in the throes of forming a belief system (which is control) by projecting humaness onto the universe.

@BlueTarp

14 күн бұрын

Well put.

he only needs to talk to a philosopher to make his next step

@Mustachioed_Mollusk

14 күн бұрын

We are all philosophers but people often mistake philosophy with modern academics. Think, understand why you come to your conclusions and allow your beliefs of today to evolve as evidence reveals its self.

@andriyandriychuk

14 күн бұрын

Modern science as a whole should listen to philosophy more to start making sense 😅

@just42tube

13 күн бұрын

​@@andriyandriychuk The purpose of science is not to please the audience and make sense based on their instincts or prejudices. It is intended to help to reveal what we can learn about the universe. If you can't make sense of the results, it's not really relevant.

@blackwind743

13 күн бұрын

@@just42tube This also is not the purpose of philosophy. I'm not saying science isn't useful because obviously it is. It is after all an offshoot of philosophy. But let me turn the tables on you and say that scientists are simply philosophers who don't understand, choose to ignore or often downplay their limitations. I think most scientists actually realize they can't actually know anything due to the limitations of humans even if they won't admit it. It's even built into the consensus nature of science, but all too often I think they choose to completely ignore this. It's something that should always be in the back of a good scientist's mind. Basically my point is that science limits itself in ways that philosophy has no obligation to. This is both good and bad but you can't say one is better or more relevant than the other.

@just42tube

13 күн бұрын

@@blackwind743 Using labels like that is fairly stereotypical. Selecting some attributes and using those to describe human activities and even groups are just social games you play. Science is a set of principles or a method. That is the core principle it can offer. Philosophy seems to be more like what ever people find useful for their own purpose, but logical reasoning seems to be the most significant contribution it has. Logical reasoning alone however can easily become misleading, an intellectual exercise without foundation in reality. Calling people scientists or philosophers is a less relevant or true division.

; who is his dealer?

@nishantcopperun

14 күн бұрын

💀😂

@1kTroopKoopas

14 күн бұрын

All of them

Everywhere we look from Galaxies to birds in trees - we don't seem to see the universe decaying into chaos. It's so nice to see scientists finally realizing this.

I was cautiously into this until the last 45 seconds. The purpose/contextual argument is laughably under developed (or poorly defined) and, 'can I say' , anthropocentric. A ceramic material merely "is". We ascribe utility/purpose to it when it's shaped into a cup, but importantly, the material properties of the ceramic are nominally identical whether its shaped like a cup, a pile of shards, or a planar slate. The intrinsic qualities of hardness, low conductivity, thermal capacity, and moderate densitity are all the same, regardless of form. By all metrics, the apparent arrow of time remains unidirectional, but the conflation of 'is' with 'ought' is recursive in human history.

3:30 This looks more like a probability take on a outcome of a "goal" or ideal outcome, discarding all other paths that do not lead to it. If you considered the many-worlds interpretation or the wave function collapse with this missing law, then the outcome includes the information of the discarded outcomes in a information only reality in that outcome, where only the most probable "useful" or "optimal" is the goal, there by limiting Entropy with a unknown "contextual" desired outcome where all the information is concentrated. Take 2 paths in a maze, 1 takes the shortest path to the exist, that one holds very little information about the maze system, the 2nd one takes all the wrong turns, that one does hold the most information and can paint a very detailed picture about the actual maze and all its limits of that system. If the purpose is information, the one with all the wrong turns is more valuable, even if the Time is not most optimal.

@glenliesegang233

14 күн бұрын

Now, encoded your findings digitally. No digital information, no life as found on Earth.

@glenliesegang233

14 күн бұрын

Here is why every curious child instinctively knows there was and is a Creative Superintelligence behind reality: Randomness cannot generate cooperative pieces of matter with precise tolerances which work to acheive a narrow goal, which is also of greater purpose and utility to the larger systems at human scale. Translation: lumps of clay don't create beautiful castles. Reality begins with precisely defined interactions of quarks and forces, whose interactions have precision to 8 decimal places. Look at aluminum and heavier elements and how their s,p,d,f orbitals fill. Examine the quantum properties of water molecules as they make possible living systems. Look at the digital encoding in base 64 of proteins. Every layer of reality from smallest to 10 meter scale alternates between order on one level and chaos the next. Actors and stage, and then their dancing. Random processes do not produce pieces which cooperate unless the parts of which the pieces are made are not random.

@WillPerry-b7r

11 күн бұрын

The first step to successful investment is figuring your goals and risk tolerance either on your own or with the help of a financial professional but it's very advisable you make use of professional.

@MuchParrill

11 күн бұрын

I know Laura, she has really set the standard for others to follow, we love her here in the UK as she has been really helpful and changed lots of lives.

@MuchParrill

11 күн бұрын

You're right! The very first time I tried, I invested $2000 and after a week, I received $8,400. That really helped us a lot to pay up our bills.

@Sylvia-f3h

11 күн бұрын

Interesting! But I'm new here. How can I get to this person's guidelines??

@WillPerry-b7r

11 күн бұрын

SHE IS ON TELEGRAMs

As time progresses, entropy in the universe increases, starting with the most unstable elements. If you squint you could call this selection for the function of stability, but you don't need a second arrow of time for this - it's still a function of entropy, not something separate. Life is unusual and unique in that it, too, changes with time - it "competes" against entropy. But I really don't see a need for a new law to explain why this happens - again, this seems like a natural result of the progression of time and therefore entropy. In other words: if you consider what the second arrow of time would have to look like, it's just the inverse, or maybe parallel to the arrow of entropy. It is just a direct consequence of entropy, not an entirely new fundamental law.

But isn't that increase in information also a manifestation of the 2nd law of thermodynamics? To the best of my understanding, entropy has "three currencies", energy at rest (mass), energy in the form of radiation and the former two in a specific configuration (information). So in a simple way we have mass, radiation and information. If we look at for example, the case of a black-hole, where all three currencies are very much in continuous exchange, we have the following scenario: mass falls into a black hole, the entropy associated with this mass now becomes part of the event horizon, increasing its area. Because of quantum mechanics, all the information regarding the object couldn't have been lost, so it must be encoded in the black hole. Losing information should also mean decreasing entropy too. So mass, turned into information in this 2D region (event horizon). But we also know black holes irradiate, which means information about the stuff contained by said black hole is leaking out (the details of this information are still unknown). So radiation is still being produced as another form of entropy increase. So, to me at least, entropy is a measure of what energy at rest, radiation and their specific configurations (information is measured through bits, which require electrons or photons in a specific configuration/order) can "achieve". That is to say, there is a more likely configuration waiting ahead and that is why "mass" and radiation keep evolving. So, a maximization of information is also aligned with a maximization of entropy.

“Can I use the word purpose?” That’s where this blithering exposes itself!

@UWU-xv7dl

12 күн бұрын

Well, we are not robots; we have our own biases; even science has a positivistic bias. The last thing a scientist should do (I think) is to police whose views should be heard and not heard.

@oneeinbenoni

11 күн бұрын

Yes, I agree..

To be fair… he did say near the beginning, “One possibility is that we are very wrong.” That said, all I really heard here… was a very wordy way of asking the question, “Is there a purpose?” It’s more a philosophical question than a science question.

@valentinmalinov8424

12 күн бұрын

Yes, the video started with this promising sentence, but after we see again the speculations of well trained academic. If you are interested to find the answer to these questions probably I can suggest the book - "Theory of Everything in Physics and The Universe"

@bobinthewest8559

9 күн бұрын

@@valentinmalinov8424 … Thanks for the recommendation

Heh, I feel validated! Oh, my "theory" was just a writer's kludge to support the neat multiverse idea, but besides usual Arrow of Change was the Arrow of Chance. Just a wordplay thing, basically chaos bounded by existing odds, links & limits, the results of randomness in existing complexity. Stopped-clock guess on my part.

@BiljanaPetrova

14 күн бұрын

+1 everything is connected

@seanoneill9130

14 күн бұрын

The arrow of simpleminded derp.

@gretchenchristophel1169

13 күн бұрын

Interesting....🤔

This is reminding me a lot of Rupert Sheldrake's theory on morphic resonance

@tessarnold7597

14 күн бұрын

Sheldrake's theory is more entertaining.

Do we have a purpose? Yes, to flow forward with time. Reality simply is. The price of freedom is the freedom to be lost and the freedom to belive.

@wingit7335

14 күн бұрын

I'm not sure if belief is a freedom. It may be an expression or a symptom of emotional immaturity.

I didn't grasp the idea what the functionality of objects, selection bias and hidden arrow of time has to do with each other? I used to think about time not as a line, but as a tree, where we tend to get to the branches which we are more likely to observe.

This mirrors my line of thinking about reality ... up to a point. We need to ask ourselves about definition of existence. Isn't it also contextual? Doesn't it require an arbiter - us to say "I recognize that this notion exists" and yet stays silent looking at randomness. So, "a purpose" is something back-attached to parts of reality which we observe, and then, indirectly, we reconstruct in our imagination some previous moment of sampling for which we can with ample certainty claim that if our brain with senses had been existing back then, it would surely observe the same object notion as existing - hence we conclude that it is "stable", it "exists", it is not in transition, not ephemeral.

Aristotle is not impressed as this is already contained in his theory of hylomorphism. Over 2,000 years ago, Aristotle said that all entities in the universe are a compound of matter (hyle) and form (morphe). Matter is *in*formed and that’s the only way it is real. Reality is hylomorphic. And don’t even get me started on Aristotle’s teleology (or “purpose”).

@andriyandriychuk

14 күн бұрын

What is Aristotle's teleology?

@JuanD92

13 күн бұрын

@@andriyandriychuk Aristotle conceived of four physical causes: material, formal, efficient (this is the only one that is usually meant today when speaking of cause and effect) and final (telos, “purpose”) cause. The final cause refers to that for the sake of which action occurs. However, when we think of purpose, we usually think of transcendent purpose (e.g. God and the universe). When speaking of Nature, Aristotle did not mean teleology in a transcendent but in an immanent sense. If the first means “outside” or “beyond,” the second means “within” or “inside.” The classic Aristotelian example is the seed which, within itself, already contains the adult tree as an end. Whether it achieves this goal-directed action is different, as conditions must be appropriate (natural selection, we could say). Additionally, whether we want to use concepts such as consciousness, deliberation or intelligence to describe the final cause is really a terminological concern. For instance, haven’t we created such terms in the context of human beings? If so, then the applicability will proceed as long as we do not necessarily say that if something is intelligent that it is human-like. This perspective actually brings about an inversion: if we are going to consider the teleological nature of entities as immanent intelligence, an organizational developmental design within being that is under the other physical causes, then it is not that Nature is human-like, but that humans are Nature-like.

I was with him until he introduced the concept of 'PURPOSE'. It works fine without that, at least in the basic concept. Purpose comes from looking BACK not looking FORWARD! In concept the idea that entropy and 'functionality or information' might counteract this is attractive, but I am put off by the use of the catchall term of modern science 'Information'. I wish him well, but I fear that under his current structural hypothesis he is chasing a chimera.

@BiljanaPetrova

14 күн бұрын

what other would would you use that describes that concept?

@yeroca

14 күн бұрын

It reminds me of creationists who start with an idea - Christianity - and work backwards to find some dubious scrap of science supporting their religious dogma, then insist that it is proof positive of the "truth" of the Bible.

The real reason why there is an arrow of time is because in each possible time-evolving system there is an a-priori side and a-posteriori side of time (in the most simple scenario. We could also have universes that mandates two a-priori sides, but then this kind of universe is much more unlikely due to the complexity involved in fitting the whole history of the universe together (both sides could lead to contradictions when we try to create a middle algorithmically). The a-priori side corresponds to the past, whereas the a-posteriori side corresponds to the future.

This guy speaks in a manner that makes you want to listen.

Entropy has always made me laugh.

@user-rj9is1ez9t

14 күн бұрын

Shit escaping? Weird guess

@IslandofObscurity_40

14 күн бұрын

​@@user-rj9is1ez9t Daffodils

There is no purpose. It just happens, we don't know why. We don't even need to know why. It just happens and it is okay not knowing the exact 'why' it happens.

@user-hy9nh4yk3p

14 күн бұрын

This may be - your 'why' - explained. We - others - may be researching differently. A great yogi - told me - we cannot answer all - 'whys' On and on Fare thee well - in life's journey

Literally listened to a Terence Mckenna interview last night where he explains that novelty increases over time. And the universe is essentially a novelty machine. Essentially, stuff was super basic early on, and the object at the end of time pulls everything towards it. Almost like shells. Some shells go back to rome, egypt, others shells reach out to the evolution of apes, other shells dragges our most ancient ancestors out of the water, and further back another shell of the machine at the end of time allowed the mitochondrea to be swallowed by the cell. My own words butchering his ideas, dude was a genius.

This really has nothing to do with "arrows of time," it has to do with energy configurations and "forces." Things which are attracted to one another, or which tend to stick together when they meet by chance, are obviously going to become more ordered over time. Entropy is radically misunderstood. It applies to a narrow class of closed systems, essentially those in which things aren't attracted to one another and don't stick together. There are thousands of phenomena we observe all over the universe in which systems become more ordered over time. This isn't caused by laws or arrows, it is caused by the nature of interactions.

@KristelViljoen

14 күн бұрын

I think everything in the universe has order. It is only seen as chaos because we don't see the complete picture or the outcome. What we see looks random and confusing and we interpret it as chaos because it is non sensible. Just because it looks random doesn't mean it is.

@crawkn

13 күн бұрын

@@KristelViljoen The only reason we even care about order is that it is useful to us. Matter and energy don't care about order, they just are what they are, which determines what they will do wherever they find themselves. We classify order vs. disorder according to their relative features, but without sentient creatures to classify things, there are no classifications. Many of the errors in interpretation we make involve forgetting that we are part of the system of knowledge, or forgetting how little influence we have.

@KristelViljoen

13 күн бұрын

@@crawkn thanks for the information.

Please stop spreading this pseudoscience.

Well, randomness and order are human constructs. They are the byproduct of a brain that wants to represent its environment, but its capacity is limited. We say that something is ordered when we can represent the underlying process, and we say that something has randomness if we cannot represent the process. If we had bigger brains then we would find more order. If we had smaller ones then we would find more randomness. Laws of physics are not flexible like this, they are always 100% true and well-defined.

@BiljanaPetrova

14 күн бұрын

I don't think the theory is flexible at all. it's we who are flexible and that creates the confusion

@wingit7335

14 күн бұрын

Bingo! The only thing evolving here is another closed minded belief system.

@abukaiserzaid2413

14 күн бұрын

In this case the universe has the biggest brain...as it processes vast amount of information to make a order of energy..thats why universe still survive today...there is another concept of singularity.. Like u said a limited brain can not process the high order thing..there comes in singularity...when too much information for a limited brain in process..it collapses..this does not mean things can not be in high order any more..it is the limitation to process the high order...so i think universe itself is the biggest brain to process the high order energy with all the informations in it...the universe is created from an instruction of information

This seems related to the ideas of Ilya Prigogine and negentropy. My understanding is that entropy always increases in systems that are close to equilibrium, but systems that are far from equilibrium can increase in entropy. Physics tends to study systems that are close to equilibrium and therefore almost always misses negentropy.

One challenge can be how you define Entropy. Also, the 2nd law does not disallow in increase in local entropy. Could it be that life is localized decreased entropy but by consuming things, etc. the life decreases entropy in its environment (like when humans burn fuel). Could this result in an overall decreases in entropy?

We're back to the foundational question: what is the meaning of life?

@timorean320

14 күн бұрын

Love. That simple.

@Vanalos

14 күн бұрын

Ｗｈａｔ　ｄｏｔｈ　ｌｉｆｅ？

@BiljanaPetrova

14 күн бұрын

only you can find your own meaning, your function.

@twomorestars

14 күн бұрын

To adapt to the current context

@andriyandriychuk

14 күн бұрын

To thrive and reproduce.

So in the future, a coffee cup will have value as a screw driver

To be fair to the screwdriver, it also makes a good paperweight, but a terrible coffee cup

I think this kind of thinking suffers from inductive bias. Just because we have observed, in our tiny window of history, some organized structure of reality, does not warrant generalization of such structures into the future. I mean how many minerals throughout time have been unstable, the stable ones could be outliers for all we know. I understand that he is saying that some structures will always be stable, but I don't see how that becomes a law apart from being an emergent phenomenon. How can there be a law that says that things get chaotic over time and another that says that they don't, or is he saying that before they get chaotic, they enjoy some stability for a short while?

He's just describing a "simple" version of complexity theory which came about because of the second law of thermodynamics, as did information theory which I think he referenced I'm not too sure because what he called "information theory" is not what I'm familiar with; also, with complexity theory think fractals, they are very chaotic in nature but neatly arranged due to the concept of emergence.

OK! I agree with you! But now I have a problem: In order for this "second arrow of time" to exist, the information has to be stored somewhere. Where is this memory?

@valentinmalinov8424

12 күн бұрын

The Information is stored in the Universal Consciousness. (The existence of Consciousness is recognized bu modern Quantum Mechanics). In our Universe is only one arrow of Time, because physical phenomena with opposite momentum is annihilating!

It's a very interesting concept. One part a can go along with from my own thought experiments is that there appears to be multiple representations of what we loosely call "Time". I have been saying for a while, we need to re-investigate the concept of time, and we need to ditch the old ways of thinking about time and look at it more seriously and what functional roles it plays in the universe. I conceptually see at a minimum 2 very different representations of time, there may well be more. > I am glad to see someone brave enough to delve into the time question.

I'm not a physicist, but I think entropy & evolution are two sides of the same coin. Hazen said it himself: So many combinations of minerals don't work out together, & that's entropy. But a few do work, & that's evolution. What we see as entropy is nothing more than the discards of evolution - at least in the definition of evolution that Hazen is discussing here. So I think the question isn't "what's the missing law that accounts for evolution", but is instead "is the second law of thermodynamics complete"?

@tessarnold7597

14 күн бұрын

There are unexamined assumptions baked into those statements, and they could be faulty. I encourage you to see if you can find them.

"Functional Information" just sounds like another way of describing the increase in entropy over time. Yes, there are lots of possible configurations for a given set of atoms, and only a few which are actually likely to be expressed. The likely ones are the high entropy configurations. The unlikely ones are low entropy. If the atoms are forced into a low entropy state, it's because energy has been added to the system from outside the system. Expressing the states as a fraction just seems to be a different way of describing the same thing. Functional information will still only ever increase when energy is added from the outside, just as entropy will only decrease when energy is added from the outside.

It makes sense that there is a natural selection for stability. It also makes sense that any system won't evolve without variation. I'm intrigued by how chaos theory and concepts such as Lorenz Attractors could explain stable yet mutating systems. I don't think there is anything Creational in this, just the logical behaviour of chaotic yet stable systems.

The idea that "information" appears contextual feels like how "energy" was perceived in the past. A fire, a falling object, a battery, light, sound, an earthquake, the wind... it was not obvious that these could all be described in absolute terms as exchanges of energy. If there is something to this information arrow, I suspect we're at a similar level of understanding. It all looks subjective, but there is a yet hidden objective way to describe it.

Not exactly what I thought it was going to be, but interesting. It's just meta-physics at this point though. I was expecting an opposite arrow of time going backwards (from the end to the beginning) through time, where things still go from an organized state to a less organized state (entropy), but coming from the future, and where they meet is the present.

I’m pretty sure this is all covered and allowed under the second law of thermodynamics and entropy. The fact that our brains aren’t designed to intuit the implications of entropy doesn’t mean that we need another law.

I am getting flash backs to my first Heroic does of shroom (7 maybe 8 grams) I was looking at a plants and thinking of knowledge and information and listing to Animals as Leaders Parrhesia. And I had this thought about information condensing and making matter. or something... idk shrooms are weird I ended up laying down in my bed and just became a stream of consciousness with out a physical form.

@anonymes2884

13 күн бұрын

I had a similar thing looking at a fire on shrooms (I "realised" the _edge_ of the flames wasn't physically real so that the fire blended into the rest of the universe, including me, so we were all one - the speech marks aren't to dismiss the _experience_ BTW, which was profound, at the time I genuinely did _realise_ these things. And then a few hours later I _realised_ that yep, shrooms are weird :).

This sounds like a different way of restating emergence the way people like Cilliers, Bateson, Gell-Man, and Fuller have talked about it for decades. The difference is that this framing states emergence is a law along side Newton's 2nd rather than a (another) phenomenon that disproves Newton.

Years ago I did mushrooms, and I asked them what's the difference between something organic and something that is not... And the answer was amazingly similar to this. Beautiful

the selection of function goes hand in hand with the section of disfunction. it’s like a fractal of possibilities, for every cup of coffee you brew it increases the likelihood that you spill it. the chance itself may vary, but every action has an equal & opposite reaction. so why would entropy be unbalanced? iron can’t rust if it has yet to form. as our universe expands, so too does the flowchart of options that lay before you. decay & growth are not the only options out there of course, stagnation & difference are always there as well, tho growth & decay are common results of many things

There have been many attempts, with varying formulations, to postulate a 'law' of increasing information / complexity / order / efficiency, often with reference to entropy, life on earth, and universal evolution. Ludwig Boltzmann, Vladimir Vernadsky, Alfred Lotka, Ilya Prigogine, Howard T. Odum, Rod Swenson, Adrian Bejan etc. Would such a formulation be a law or a description? If it's a description of a phenomenon, is that phenomenon explainable with existing laws and principles? I don't know.

Was always uncomfortable with the law of entropy exactly because of the ordering/information you pointed out.

I don't need sleep, I need answers!

the matrix 1,2 makes a great analogy of your last question

All I can say is bravo!

Great concept. I am design engineer, we have 3 classes of tools that optimised designs. When you design things you know what you want but you dont know if you can achieve this. The most basic was my understanding of theory and the goals i envisioned. The second was following gradients to find peaks or valleys. The third most powerful but time consuning is random searches. This is how we manage design. I felt like an explorer in a non material dimension like Platos world of forms. I think of this as the dimension of possibilities. It consists of all things possible. I also feel the universe is infinite and contains all things possible. As humans it is possible to explore this universe with our minds, computers and tools. This is science, for me it is also very spiritual and that is another discussion as to why, but in short because we are intelligent and in the universe it means the universe must also be intelligent. If you look for it you start seeing it everywhere, atoms are little machines talking communicating with each other, everything can be described in the language of life.

The Circle of Life. The Tree, of Life.

That's a fascinating concept! The idea of a second arrow of time focused on increasing functional information really challenges the traditional view of entropy. If Dr. Hazen's theory holds, it could indeed revolutionize our understanding of the universe. It's intriguing to think that as the universe expands and ages, it's not just moving towards disorder but also becoming more organized and purposeful. This duality of entropy and organized information running parallel is truly mind-blowing and could reshape our perception of reality and evolution.

If time existed in the first place, then the arrow of time might be meaningful. As it is, there are processes that happen in the universe, and those processes proceed according to the parameters of those processes. We imagine time on top of the system in order to comprehend the order of things happening, but that's on us.

@Rimmsolin

13 күн бұрын

Are you saying those systems would continue and change state regardless of having time being in effect?

@Cogitovision

13 күн бұрын

@@Rimmsolin What I'm saying is that what we call "time" is just those changes taking effect. We invented a timeline so we could track them, but what we are really tracking is the order in which things occur. Runner gets to the finish line in 5 seconds. Those seconds are just hands on a watch. We compare the order of one set of events with another. It's just easier to compare things when we have an arbitrary standard that we use to compare everything else to.

Very Thought Provoking, thank you! This had me ask of a bunch of thoughts: My Yeast packet, which I use as a tool but is alive itself, doesn't know it makes Red Wine so what kind of tool packet are humans if as above so below? Does information contain mass/volume? Are we becoming heavier as we become more complex? Is gravity a metric of higher order information?

My thoughts: Physical systems tend to oscillate. Frequency = 1 / Period. An increase in frequency is a decrease in the time between the repeating event. Systems that oscillate are more useful. Systems that tend to repeat more often are more useful. Information leads to a useful pattern of oscillation. There's a limit on usefulness. Systems that try to oscillate too much become chaotic or saturate or rupture. A system that does not oscillate is lacking useful information.

SELECTION for function?... Wrong concept, in my opinion

@andriyandriychuk

14 күн бұрын

How about survival

For goodness sake! We’ve had the idea of free energy coupling in open systems to explain order out of chaos for decades. From Iyia Prigogene (Nobel laureate) to Terrence Hill.

The prior results you want to look at can be found under "metasystem transition", generally, Turchin's work. Though in the case of minerals physicists would certainly argue that the metasystem (crystal chemistry or whatever it's called) always existed and always controlled the subsystems (atoms), as such that's control behaviour at the base layer.

What is defined as "functional information" seems to be the well-known "physical laws of nature," as it determines how everything gets shaped out of many possibilities. Information needs to be carried on something. The information stored in something and the environment follow physical laws, evolving things and information. There are processes in nature, like what is happening in a healthy brain, increasing the order and reducing the entropy. And no comment for "time."

So, what you're saying is that digital intelligence is a fundamental process of time and evolution that comes along with increasing information. Resisting it is as futile as resisting the flow of time. The only way to stop it - is to submit to stupidity. Got it. Fully understood.

I think he has not yet seen the paper on First Law of Complexodynamics by Sean Carroll and Scott Aaronson

We may already have that second arrow... When I was a student of Statistical Physics we learned that the entropy can't increase every which way it wants. Existing and known physical laws mandate that if system transitions from state A to state B it must not only increase entropy but, it must do it in a way to maximize number of so-called microstates. There is the second arrow! Already known but misunderstood. More microstates, more complexity. Arrow that mandates chemical evolution, emergence of biology, biological evolution, emergence of technology and technological evolution... And there is the end purpose - make Universe at the end as complex as it can be, just before it disintegrates (renews in BigCrunch?)

remember that entropy applied globally, not locally. So local order on earth is compensated by disorder in the sun. An increase in disorder relates to the information needed to describe it, so I'm not sure you have anything new here.

Does time go in a straight line or can it wiggle?

@wingit7335

14 күн бұрын

Depends how much space there is.

@valentinmalinov8424

12 күн бұрын

No, Time is a strait arrow. Time is unaffected by the Physical elements of the Universe, because our Space is inserted into Time. The "Relativity" of Time is because every different object is situated in different position on the Time Arrow. If you are interested to learn more, probably I can suggest my book - "Theory of Everything in Physics and The Universe"

His functional information idea is probably related to fractal geometry. I got that idea from the Jurassic Park novel by Michael Crichton.

LOVE this idea! It's still random outcome of infinite reputations that is likely to come across a good purpose for an element or being.

I would add Sir Penrose Rieman Sphere calculations and twistor calculations

Systems move from low to high complexity then low again, as entropy increases. This “high complexity” depends on the context, so one could say that you (life) is no different than the random configuration of atoms. No purposes needed. Check the 2 min video “ minutephysics arrow of time Sean Carrol. “

Purpose of life is to time travel and to do that you have to counter decay. Selecting who you traver with is the most important selection.

I think the real problem is with "the law of" Entropy itself, and the science community is already aware of that. My dumb brain thinks that there might be something like a "time particle" at work.

A reframe can be powerful, especially if the truth has always been there. If you believe you have purpose, you will create purpose. If you’re good at achieving what you set out to do, people buy into it and your legacy will be perpetuated. It’s that simple.

Organization only happens if there is sufficient energy to organize. Energy consumed in organization still increases entropy. Some interesting structure gets left behind, but that still costs more energy than it can store.

A lot of these comments seem to be missing the point. At the beginning of time, entropy doesn't just immediately create disorder. There seems to be some organizing principle that 1st creates order. Entropy then picks up and "undoes" this order. It has always seemed to me that we define entropy from the relative perspective of our place in space / time, which isnt an absolute truth. He is just asking the question - are we missing something? Its physics, yes. But also philosophy. Can we prove it mathematically and scientifically? Maybe not yet. But this is how all science starts.

Has this guy not noticed The Sun? Life and human culture defy the 2nd law because we are bathed in free energy. He said it himself, he could be wrong. Spot on, our kid.

@anonymes2884

13 күн бұрын

Well, we don't _defy_ it because the 2nd law describes _isolated_ systems (which, as you point out, we're not) so our existence is in perfect accord with the 2nd law. But yep, the Sun is where _almost_ all the "free energy" lowering our entropy comes from (with an extra smidge from elements undergoing radioactive decay inside the Earth).

@TheInselaffen

13 күн бұрын

@@anonymes2884 exactly. DNA and by extension human culture as a form of complexity are low entropy structures, but require energy to maintain. My stack of old photographs may well save information in a low entropy state but requires me to heat my house, dust and remove cobwebs or they will degrade. Humans have just learned how to bypass the available solar energy and dig it out of the ground to fuel our complexity, the energy ultimately comes from the Sun, but will be our undoing eventually.

@Q-Limited

3 күн бұрын

The entire observable universe is bathed in free energy from one source or another. Where are the goal posts for the isolated system ? I've seen them moved 1000 times in different discussions 😂

The second law of thermodynamics dictates that the entropy of an isolated system increases over time. Earth, however, is not an isolated system; it receives low-entropy energy from the Sun and emits higher-entropy energy into the interstellar medium. The evolution of life on Earth is thus consistent with, rather than contradictory to, the second law of thermodynamics.

Interresting question but a very limited answer. Maybe the time arrow just gows both ways: Entropy Stability

I don't think we will ever be able to understand all the basic laws, which shouldn't discourage us from trying. The concept of information as another quantity is exciting. But I don't think everything has a purpose and perhaps a reason.

Ok, I started being skeptical about it but then if functional information is a sort of a mirror of entropy then maybe it makes sense. But then this functronal information is not going to be compatible with scientific materialism because you have to define what information is in terms of mater. But information is not material. Information is a concept that rather relates to interaction and relations between observed phenomena. And observations are done by human minds. Maybe an interracting particle can be defined as "an observer". Not a chonscious observer but a pre-conscious one. How do we quantify that? Maybe if the universe is smooth then information is one unit, and as different configurations exist then the units of information increase? This may be the start on exciting new scientific field...or not.

@wingit7335

14 күн бұрын

Wow you talked yourself into am hallucination. Amazing. By the end of that i was tripping myself. Thank you.

like his thinking

Time itself is the bug. It's an arbitrary abstract measure of change. We arbitrarily deem some change as "chaos" and other change as "order" but looking at the whole picture, it's just change. "Order" is preferred because it sustains organisms, particularly ours.

This works if you start with a fundamental misunderstanding of entropy.

Is there a clear way to measure the Shannon information of a given physical configuration? Or is it a matter of viewpoint?

For information to increase energy must be used to do the work. For energy to do work entropy must increase. The more information we process the more energy we use and the more we speed up entropy. So as a system gains in complexity it also hastens its own demise, but what a ride it's been and will be! 😎🤖