Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Entropy Is Fatal

kerkour.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 119 posts

Re: Entropy Is Fatal

#51

Post by contravariant »

tingletech wrote: post #44
bob1029 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> entropy is necessary for complexity to emerge. Something about this particular line does not sit well with me. How would we define the relationship between entropy, complexity and information ?

thermodynamic entropy is to heat as Shannon entropy is to information?

Hmm, not entirely sure if those terms fit exactly. It's easier to point out you can go from one to the other by setting to hamiltonian to the negative logarithm of the probability density (or use the Boltzmann distribution to go the other way).

Re: Entropy Is Fatal

#53

Post by contravariant »

molbioguy wrote: post #42
xkcd-sucks wrote: post #19

Counterpoint, "Entropy is Life": Diffusion is an entropy driven process, and is fundamental to most biological processes. Plus other more specific entropy driven reactions [0 + google it]. Lazy metaphors... [0] https://www.nature.com/articles/srep04142

Counterpoint to your counterpoint :) I think local entropy has to decrease first to create the concentration gradients that are harvested by diffusion. So life must also rely on decreasing the local entropy. All depends on how you define the system.

You can't decrease local entropy without increasing it overall. We can only live by moving towards higher entropy, it's how we tell the past from the future.

Re: Entropy Is Fatal

#54

Post by jussivee »

This got me thinking. Minimalism or minimalist systems are often seen as systems with less energy. Or, we seem to think it takes less energy to remove objects than to add objects (complex systems). More stuff, more energy. But, minimalism needs a lot of useful work. Less stuff is not the same as a minimalist system. Using a music analogy, I argue, it's much easier (takes less energy) to fill an empty space with hundreds of notes than with a few carefully selected notes :)

Re: Entropy Is Fatal

#55

Post by lazide »

agumonkey wrote: post #47
Lyapunov_Lover wrote: post #39

The author makes a mistake here. It's fine to think of entropy as messiness; that's the Boltzmann picture of statistical mechanics. The mistake is thinking that lowering entropy, or getting rid of the mess, is a satisfactory strategy. Think of it as a negative feedback system, like a thermostat. Keeping entropy low means continually correcting errors. This is a successful strategy only if the world always stays the s…

noise is the way out of local optimums ?

Pretty much the only one, near as anyone can tell, though an easy way to encourage or help someone or something get stuck in a local optimum is also a stable habitat/environment, as it avoids weeding out problematic noise from helpful noise until it is too late for all but the best luck to save it.

Re: Entropy Is Fatal

#56

Post by lazide »

nightski wrote: post #41
superb-owl wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess my point (wrt corporations) is that companies should turn from Growth into Value a lot sooner. E.g. I would have preferred Google to become a Value company once it became the dominant search provider, instead of constantly looking for new revenue streams.

I agree with that wholeheartedly. I'd go further and say that I think companies are getting too big to the point where different divisions have no relation to each other at all. Any major tech stock has this problem. The problem is I have no idea how it could be discouraged. It feels like whenever something is regulated it just results in something completely different than intended.

Part of the problem is the tax code.

Dividends (what a value company typically produces) are taxed at a much higher rate than long term capital gains (which a ‘growth’ company produces).

Dividends usually at the same rate as income, from 10-37% at the federal level, and often the same if the state has an income tax.

Long term capital gains are 0-20%, and many states don’t tax them at all even if they tax income.

Everyone has a significant incentive to go ‘growth’ in that environment.

Re: Entropy Is Fatal

#57

Post by orthecreedence »

agumonkey wrote: post #47
Lyapunov_Lover wrote: post #39

The author makes a mistake here. It's fine to think of entropy as messiness; that's the Boltzmann picture of statistical mechanics. The mistake is thinking that lowering entropy, or getting rid of the mess, is a satisfactory strategy. Think of it as a negative feedback system, like a thermostat. Keeping entropy low means continually correcting errors. This is a successful strategy only if the world always stays the s…

noise is the way out of local optimums ?

I've observed this personally! After finding a solution to a problem and repeating it numerous times, I'll often randomly change one parameter of the solution (I'm talking about things like opening jars, not building complex systems, but it could apply there as well) to see if it works better. This often happens randomly because I ask my self "what if I did this?" as I'm performing the action.

The result is that almost invariably, I found a new way of doing something that's better than before. It often takes multiple tries, but it's something that takes little energy because it can be done throughout the day and the stakes are small.

Applied to a larger scale, random adjustments to larger systems can be exactly what's needed.

Re: Entropy Is Fatal

#58

Post by lazide »

Terry_Roll wrote: post #46
sumy23 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is limited by physics. But I think the limit is not close to where we are right now. Consider a smart phone. Physically, what is it? Some silicon, glass, a lithium-ion battery, and some other trace metals. If you were to have the raw inputs in front of you, it would be a small pile of dust. Yet, with just that small amount of material, a person can get access to a near infinite amount of information and en…

> Everything is limited by physics. Everything is controlled by the maths of physics and chemistry.

Some would argue everything fundamentally is physics, including mathematical models of chemistry. I can’t say they are wrong.

Physics being math doesn’t quite make sense to me yet, if for no other reason than a large body of physics laws are ‘because that is what happens in real life’ when you get down to it.

It’s clear the math is a tool to try to reason about the reality, not the other way around.

Re: Entropy Is Fatal

#60

Post by lazide »

toss1 wrote: post #36
sumy23 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is limited by physics. But I think the limit is not close to where we are right now. Consider a smart phone. Physically, what is it? Some silicon, glass, a lithium-ion battery, and some other trace metals. If you were to have the raw inputs in front of you, it would be a small pile of dust. Yet, with just that small amount of material, a person can get access to a near infinite amount of information and en…

I don't think at all that we're near the limit of human ingenuity. The quibble I had was with the "sustainable", which in that context, I read as indefinitely/infinitely sustainable (and it seems other responders have similar issues). I agree that there should be a lot more human ingenuity ahead of us than behind us (assuming that those seeking power over others, e.g., megalomaniacs and autocrats, don't first destroy…

That’s a bit like saying ‘we can only make horses so efficient’, which is true, but that’s why we end up coming up with automobiles, airplanes, etc.

As long as we have free brain cycles focused on solving problems or understanding something we do not yet understand, we’ll continue to do better.

Post reply on HN