Documentary on Claude Shannon
Just noticed this via an article in Quanta magazine - Claude Shannon, the Prophet of Information. Haven't watched it yet but thought it might be of interest to others.
https://thebitplayer.com/

That's him there, riding a unicycle while juggling.
https://thebitplayer.com/

That's him there, riding a unicycle while juggling.
Comments (21)
The article refers to him as "the over-looked genius". Perhaps, the typical texting-while-driving cell-phone abuser "over-looks" the Prophet of the Information Age. But us acolytes of The Informer are still discovering more evidence of his genius after a century of world-changing effects. :smile:
What is it about these big-shot intellects that they are attracted to this sort of thing? :chin:
The link goes to a trailer for a full-length feature. I didn't see any way to watch it. Perhaps I missed it. From what little it showed, it seemed a bit Neil DeGrasse Tysony.
Quoting jgill
Richard Feynman playing bongos (although I have to say that juggling whilst unicycling is much more impressive.)
It's a game requiring "the" intellect. To be analyzed or even programmed. A friend of mine got off on it too. "Look, if the orange is up in the middle, your left hand starts moving away, and then your,,,", yeah yeah....
I agree that Wiener's notion of Cybernetics was a genius move. He's right up there with Bertalanffy, and his Systems Theory, for nudging the reductive focus of Science to include emergent Holistic functions, derived from feedback loops. Ironically, Holism still seems to be a four-letter word to some posters on this forum. :meh:
For me, Tyson represents what I call "Gee whiz!" science, which I dislike. Was my impression that the Shannon film was like that correct?
I'll be interested in hearing what you have to say.
UPDATE: I now learn Shannon's character is re-created by an actor, John Hutton. He does a great job. And then there's other archival footage and reconstructions from his earlier life. Worth watching.
I particularly like information ontology, "it from bit." It is one of the more coherent interpretations of quantum physics to my mind.
What makes it so appealing is that information ontology, when paired with the concepts of chaos/emergence, self-similarity/reoccurence, and feedback loops/self-replication/natural selection (all related to fractal geometry) is an ontology that seems like it may be able to explain conciousness.
Conciousness would be the fractal reoccurence of the universe encoding information about itself within itself. Rerepresentation essentially, accumulating local self knowledge. So, DNA is often thought of as storing information about the enviornment. Nervous systems are a higher level reoccurence of this representation and storage. Language and the information stored by organizations would again be another level. Each increases in complexity and is able to better represent more of the world outside its own physical system. The laws of the universe have tended to introduce greater and greater levels of complexity and new levels of this recursive self knowledge over time.
A world of information coming to know itself as its self. Very Hegelian.
Related to that thought, there is Conformal Cyclic Cosmology.
Under an information ontological approach, this, extreme heat or cold would be a zero entropy universe due to lack of differentiation. All ones or all zeros contains the same amount of entropy, zero. Or, to think about it in plain terms "without anything by which a thing can be defined, it cannot exist."
What's interesting to me is this is essentially Behemism, and Hegel's argument for for becoming.
What have zeroes and ones gotta do with QM? The zeroes and ones are nowhere to be seen in a wavefunction. You can represent the wavefunction by ones and zeroes, as information on a computer chip.
Total disorder (an ultra hot gas) is essentially the same as a totally ordered one. You need very little to know the whole state. In that sense is the beginning the same as the end. But the interesting things happen in between. Medium order.
That's John Wheeler, nothing to do with Shannon (other than Shannon coined the term 'bit' although he claims a colleague thought of it first).
But you might like this anecdote.
which in my opinion leads to an awful lot of pseudo-scientific blather about information and entropy.
Quoting Count Timothy von Icarus
That, I agree with. And I think it dovetails very nicely with the traditional understanding of 'nous'. But of course, such thinking is strongly rejected in the mainstream academy as it implies orthogenesis, teleology and so on, all of which are strictly taboo in neo-darwinian thinking.
It shows, again, the connection between zero (zero entropy at the start) and infinity (maximum entropy of the photon/neutrino gas at the end).
Wheeler coined the term, but it's deeply influenced by Shannon. Landauer bridged the gap between Shannon Entropy as solely a mathematical abstraction and information as an element of the physical world.
I see the connection of Shannon to physics come up more often in stuff on gas equilibrium, phase space, but information ontology is the more interesting connection to my mind.
The zeros and ones come in because there are a finite number of things you can measure about a particle. That is, there is only so much information you can gather about it.
This ties into decoherence since the amount of decoherence is dependant on the amount of information exchanged between systems. https://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=919863
Nothing impressive. I've seen jugglers on bike circling around a tight circular platform.