For The Sake Of Truth

[Right Divider]

What use is information without the material medium on which it exists?

That does NOT answer the question, now does it?

The point is that information can be transferred to numerous different physical medium, showing that IT (i.e., the information) is NOT an inherent part OF that physical medium.

.

I haven't seen any evidence for the existence of an invisible, disembodied mind that created the universe, but even if I thought there is one I would be wondering where it came from. I don't buy the always existed apologetic. I'm also sceptical of supernatural claims and ghost tales, the paranormal, astrology, magic, the occult, psychic ability..... I could go on and on. I don't buy a word of it, and I'm not alone by a long chalk. I'm a sceptic and make no apology for it and I don't see why that should bother you. Horses for courses, right?

Of course you don't see any evidence! You're rejected it before you start.

 

[gcthomas]

That does NOT answer the question, now does it?

The point is that information can be transferred to numerous different physical medium, showing that IT (i.e., the information) is NOT an inherent part OF that physical medium.



Of course you don't see any evidence! You're rejected it before you start.

Information is a property of material things. Another property very similar to information is entropy. Would you use the existence of entropy in the same way you try to use information? Or energy, perhaps?

 

[Right Divider]

Information is a property of material things. Another property very similar to information is entropy. Would you use the existence of entropy in the same way to try to fit information?

Pay close attention.....

Information can be MOVED to ANY kind of physical medium and STILL be the SAME information.

Computers provide a perfect example of this. Computer disks store INFORMATION. You can store the SAME information on many DIFFERENT kinds of storage medium.

• A magnetic disk
• A solid-state disk
• A CD-ROM
• A magnetic tape
• A paper tape
• Paper printouts

The information is EXACTLY the SAME regardless of which PHYSICAL medium you store it ON. This shows that the INFORMATION is NOT an inherent attribute of the physical medium.


Information exists outside of the actual physical medium that it is stored on.

 

[Hedshaker]

That does NOT answer the question, now does it?

Well the question was a little vague.

The point is that information can be transferred to numerous different physical medium, showing that IT (i.e., the information) is NOT an inherent part OF that physical medium.

Sounds to me like a slant on the Teleological argument which is ok if you find apologetics compelling. Never the less, without some physical medium to convey information to the brain (itself material) I would say it is of no relevance what so ever. Therefore, logically the two are intrinsically linked. At the very least I don't see it as evidence for the supernatural.

Of course you don't see any evidence! You're rejected it before you start.

You're guessing. You don't even know me or how much thought of the subject in had I have undertaken. Just because you have profound beliefs doesn't make them right by default. Such beliefs are not set in stone. People change their mind about them all the time.

I assure you I didn't arrive at my present convictions lightly.

 

[Right Divider]

Well the question was a little vague.

Sounds to me like a slant on the Teleological argument which is ok if you find apologetics compelling. Never the less, without some physical medium to convey information to the brain (itself material) I would say it is of no relevance what so ever. Therefore, logically the two are intrinsically linked. At the very least I don't see it as evidence for the supernatural.

You're guessing. You don't even know me or how much thought of the subject in had I have undertaken. Just because you have profound beliefs doesn't make them right by default. Such beliefs are not set in stone. People change their mind about them all the time.

I assure you I didn't arrive at my present convictions lightly.

Perhaps you should clearly state your belief system.

My understanding is that you think that everything just happens by random chance. So even the very thoughts you think are just some random accident and therefore not actually directed by any intelligence.

You still cannot get to the point that the INFORMATION ITSELF is immaterial. Since it can be moved from ANY kind of PHYSICAL medium to another. Put another way, information is NOT an attribute of the physical medium that carriers it.

It might also do you well to notice that in all of the computer examples, the information comes from an intelligent being. There is NO known source of information that does NOT come from an intelligent being.

 

[Hedshaker]

Perhaps you should clearly state your belief system.

I have told you I'm a sceptic. I do not accept the notion of entities and claims that require belief without evidence, such as pixies, fairies, gods, angels, ghosts, demons or anything else dreamed up by the wants and desires of some people. I do not much care for the label atheist since it assumes that theism is the default position and prefixes the letter A to those who do not subscribe. I suspect you feel the same about the many gods out there other than your own.

My understanding is that you think that everything just happens by random chance. So even the very thoughts you think are just some random accident and therefore not actually directed by any intelligence.

Yet you do not give a second thought from where or how this "super" intelligence arose. Always existed explains precisely nothing. It makes perfect sense that intelligence, as we perceive it, emerged and evolved over deep time via natural means. If you think that intelligence preceded matter then the onus is on you to explain how.

You still cannot get to the point that the INFORMATION ITSELF is immaterial. Since it can be moved from ANY kind of PHYSICAL medium to another. Put another way, information is NOT an attribute of the physical medium that carriers it.

We've been over this and over it. There is no method for which information can be recognised but through some physical medium, so the two are inseparable.

It might also do you well to notice that in all of the computer examples, the information comes from an intelligent being. There is NO known source of information that does NOT come from an intelligent being.

So the notion of information originates with people. Is that what you are saying? This would also explain how man created God in his own image.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Then what do you mean by "the evidence is all around you?"



My self made opinions are as good as yours. Better IMHO since they make no assumptions. I don't know what caused the formation of the universe and neither do you, though, of course, you are free to believe whatever you wish.





Don't know does not = philosophical materialism. But it's true I reject none falsifiable supernatural claims.

A claim is not supernatural because it is unfalsifiable. Science cannot explain away most things, fewer of which are in cohesive accordance with one another. What is cherished belief again? And while I've got you; is something has the possibility to be a unifying, defining, pertinent part of existence in an all encompassing way then why would science not need to attempt to examine that possibility?

 

[popsthebuilder]

It has been proven that chemical changes in the brain are caused by emotion, and effectual in leading to further thought. Basically the inner workings of the mind are in no way strictly a product of a chemical change or the physical, but they can be the cause and lead more complex cognitive function or developed thought, which isn't physical or the product of the physical, technically.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Information is a property of material things. Another property very similar to information is entropy. Would you use the existence of entropy in the same way you try to use information? Or energy, perhaps?

Entropy is a claim that things come from chaos right? Or is it the statement that all is in decline. Either way it's grand assumption. Things made by man fall apart, but most other things exhibit a cycle, orbit, and pattern of some sort. And in doing such throw out entropy. All existence but man,as far as we can observe follows a path with order and direction verifiable to an extent mathematically. If that is chaos then what word am I thinking of that means utter disarray and absence of any cohesiveness?

 

[patrick jane]

the video didn't work hedshaker

 

[gcthomas]

Entropy is a claim that things come from chaos right?

No, it isn't. You must be thinking of the Laws of Thermodynamics, but you have it backwards if that is the case.

Entropy is a state function that is a measure of the number of specific ways in which a thermodynamic system may be arranged, it is mathematically (if not physically) very similar to Shannon entropy as a measure of information.

Or is it the statement that all is in decline. Either way it's grand assumption. Things made by man fall apart, but most other things exhibit a cycle, orbit, and pattern of some sort. And in doing such throw out entropy. All existence but man,as far as we can observe follows a path with order and direction verifiable to an extent mathematically. If that is chaos then what word am I thinking of that means utter disarray and absence of any cohesiveness?

You are mixing up Thermodynamics Laws with thermodynamic properties, such as entropy.

 

[popsthebuilder]

No, it isn't. You must be thinking of the Laws of Thermodynamics, but you have it backwards if that is the case.

Entropy is a state function that is a measure of the number of specific ways in which a thermodynamic system may be arranged, it is mathematically (if not physically) very similar to Shannon entropy as a measure of information.


You are mixing up Thermodynamics Laws with thermodynamic properties, such as entropy.

No, I was speaking of the two definitions of entropy as reviewed through Google.

 

[gcthomas]

No, I was speaking of the two definitions of entropy as reviewed through Google.

Whatever you think you read, you have mixed up distinct ideas.

 

[popsthebuilder]

en·tro·py

ˈentrəpē/

noun

1.

PHYSICS

a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system.

2.

lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder.

"a marketplace where entropy reigns supreme"

synonyms:deterioration,degeneration,crumbling,*decline,degradation,decomposition,breaking down,collapse;*More

 

[popsthebuilder]

Please clarify

 

[gcthomas]

Please clarify

Entry 1 is the definition, entry 2 is a sloppy common usage. Your usage was the latter.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Entry 1 is the definition, entry 2 is a sloppy common usage. Your usage was the latter.

First I stated that it was chaos, which is more in line with the first. Then I went on to ask about the latter.

 

[gcthomas]

First I stated that it was chaos, which is more in line with the first. Then I went on to ask about the latter.

You said 'comes from chaos' which does not match either entry.
And my first comment answered the questions and clarifies the idea of entropy.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Sorry, I'm lost. What does this have to do with truth? Did someone say that existence as we know it came from entropy? Cuz that's not logical at all.

 

[gcthomas]

Sorry, I'm lost.

Yes, you are.

What does this have to do with truth? Did someone say that existence as we know it came from entropy? Cuz that's not logical at all.

I introduced entropy as something mathematically very similar to information that was also conceptually transferable that none would say was immaterial. That was when you butchered the idea of entropy, prompting corrections from me.

Happy to help the confused and bewildered.