Black Holes and The Internet

[nebulus]

Guys,

I have been reading a couple of papers about black holes recently. One of the articles I read was dealing with what happens to information when it enters a black hole. What the authors said was that information inside a black hole gets converted into gravitons - basically gravity. Now, take internet for example, internet as an interacting system of things is rather the opposite process. Internet is an information explosion phenomena (for the sake of relevance I will downgrade term mind to term internet). This is blowing my mind, please re-read the sentence above last if it does not work for you until you get it.

The other side of this picture is the fact that we are figuring out how to store much more information into smaller bits of matter (mass). It seems like the mass is decreasing and when mass decreases gravity follows. On this end of things, gravity is converted into information. 


I know this forum is made up of smart people. I am trying to generate some discussion around this observation that can further develop the idea and maybe develop a theory. Maybe there are people who are also thinking about this in their spare time and are better than me at math. Maybe you can suggest some good reading relevant to this topic. In any case thank you and please post something!

[1715518038]

1715518038

[1715518038]

1715518038

[1715518038]

1715518038

[MysteryMiner]

internet as an interacting system of things is rather the opposite process. Internet is an information explosion phenomena

Do You say that in some time in future the hard drives (sorry SSD) can turn into a "white hole" that converts mass into information? The problem might be that in some time in future we get to some physical problem that no more information can be stored. Like transistors becoming too small to make them.

The black holes evaporate over time. This is not experimentally proven but might be true. So the information might be destroyed, but the mass/energy is not. Like information on LTO tape is destroyed when thrown into bonfire but the atoms of elements that tape is made continue the journey in nature. The same with black holes. They can damage all devices in proximity that hold data and even information as more general concept, but that is it. The information probably still exists inside black hole but it is unavailable outside the event horizon. The evaporation of black hole destroys the information similar like melting of LTO tape in fire. The building blocks of LTO tape in form of carbon, iron and cobalt atoms are released but there is no more Pierre Woodman porno on it.

OP probably received the package from SR and it was good! The Friday evening rullz!

[SgtSpike]

I don't understand how information could be considered to have mass.

When looking at information on a hard disk, the hard disk has the same amount of mass whether information has been recorded or not.  How would a black hole be able to tell between micro-organization of bits on a hard drive platter?  It wouldn't.

I'm sorry, but I can't even begin to believe a theory such as this.

[MysteryMiner]

The mass and information as a concept is not related. Take for example a rock. Caveman carves a signs on the rock and rock have lost a mass but gained additional information.

And there is opposite example. The electrons have a mass. This means that flash drive with various information written have it's mass changed. This is not applicable to hard drives as they are magnetic not electron trapping.

We only have more information stored per less mass on our devices in past years. The addition of additional space to store information adds more mass to device itself. Like adding additional platter to hard drive.

[nebulus]

Okay, well... Let's go sub atomic on this. You guys are considering information is stored in something that already has mass. You don't need something that has mass to store information. You can store information in photons or something subatomic for example.
I do not buy the argument that we are going to reach a limit. Transistors will go away something based on something else might come up or a new way massive amounts of information is handled.
Like for example quantum computer deal with way more information that classical and that deal with way more info that abacus. (Let's assume the roughly are of the same mass). So mass/size of information here is relative.
The way I understood the series of theses articles was.
If you destroy any kind of information a particle is created usually graviton.

I mean I do not know how to quantify information in terms of gravitons that's what the authors were trying to do.
I just find it peculiar that while small amounts of information are destroyed in black holes some amounts of information are created else where (mind, the internet). So, the balance here is - a black hole increases mass but reduces information and mind increases information but decreases mass (relatively speaking). Can't you see the symmetry?

Awesome Friday indeed...

[MysteryMiner]

You don't need something that has mass to store information. You can store information in photons or something subatomic for example.

Most subatomic particles have mass. Photons can be used for transmitting information, not storing it. You cannot have a bottle with light. (well I have few bottles of light beer still unopened but this is not the case, they contain a loss of information if I pass out) You still need some structure that have mass to support the storage and retrieval of information.

I do not buy the argument that we are going reach a limit. Transistors will go away something based on something else might come up or the way we handle information.

Yes we probably do. In year 2070 Intel and Samsung will start to make SSD chips that store multiple bits per quark. If it is possible, lol. But there is some fundamental laws of physics that prevent anyone to accumulate infinite amount of information and some scientists are perfectly clear about this.

Like for example quantum computer deal with way more information.

Quantum computers are not here and none knows when they will be available on newegg.com

If you destroy any kind of information a particle is created usually graviton.

Do gravitons exist? It is some time I have not updated my knowledge on quantum physics but I'm certain that this is not true at all.

So while small amount of information is destroyed in black holes some amount of information is created else where (the internet).

The black holes can destroy the information if they like. I don't care. For example tiny part of mass of nuclear material in atomic bomb is converted to pure energy when the nuke explodes. This does not mean that part of that "destroyed" mass miraculously shows up in someones arsehole. The black holes in far reaches of galaxy really are not connected to the internet!

[nebulus]

Most subatomic particles have mass. Photons can be used for transmitting information, not storing it. You cannot have a bottle with light. (well I have few bottles of light beer still unopened but this is not the case, they contain a loss of information if I pass out) You still need some structure that have mass to support the storage and retrieval of information.

Good one!

But there is some fundamental laws of physics that prevent anyone to accumulate infinite amount of information and some scientists are perfectly clear about this.

The universe contains infinite amount of info. Otherwise infinite loops would be impossible and you could not make a fact out of a fact.

Quantum computers are not here and none knows when they will be available on newegg.com

Oh, yes, they are look up D-Wave.

Do gravitons exist? It is some time I have not updated my knowledge on quantum physics but I'm certain that this is not true at all.

Let me remind you we've just discovered Higgs... Not sure how far back your modern physics knowledge goes.

The black holes can destroy the information if they like. I don't care. For example tiny part of mass of nuclear material in atomic bomb is converted to pure energy when the nuke explodes. This does not mean that part of that "destroyed" mass miraculously shows up in someones arsehole. The black holes in far reaches of galaxy really are not connected to the internet!

Well it does not end up in someone's asshole but it does end up in headlines and on the internet. And let me tell you it can generates a hell of a buzz... lol... There is probably more info on WW2 because of Hiroshima than on any other war.

[thebaron]

Eyes are black holes that turn light into information.

[MysteryMiner]

What if we consider universe as a whole?

The information still needs something to hold it. There is finite amount of atoms and stuff in observable universe. The information still need something to retrieve and process it.

Oh, yes, they are look up D-Wave.

Are they real quantum computers or some sort of analog computers with some of properties of quantum computers? I try to keep up with latest chips from Intel and AMD but not exotic quantum stuff.

Let me remind you we've just discovered Higgs... Not sure how far back your modern physics knowledge goes.

I try to watch and read all available information from reputable scientific sources. I know about Higgs but they are different from gravitons that soviets proposed. I think the idea if gravitons was discarded long time ago.

Well it does not end up in someone's asshole but it does end up in headlines and on the internet. And let me tell you it generates a hell of a buzz... Lol

This blown me away. Yes it generates a lot of information but also things that does not cause a mass to energy conversion create a lot of information. The presidential elections in USA for example. Both candidates have insignificant mass like all sockpuppets have but the process of choosing between two halves of same cookie creates a lot of information from thin air.

[nebulus]

Here is on of the the articles that got me thinking...

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/418192/gravity-emerges-from-quantum-information-say-physicists/

As far as the D-Wave PC goes, they do claim the machine they made is capable of quantum calculations.
I looked at the SDK they offer for practicing quantum programing. The included documents  contain an example that has some similarities with Shor's algorithm (Consider it a test to identify if a machine can do quantum calculations ). The people behind D-Wave are pretty deep in this and I am pretty sure are knowledgeable. It is not another perpetum mobile scam.

The claim that D-Wave does not have a quantum computer usually comes from someone who does not know anything about QM.
I do not claim to know a lot about QM but from what I know D-Wave seems legit.

Usually my thoughts about QM Computer denial are on the lines of 'we also had a difficult time accepting classical computers and once we understood how they work they all of a sudden became 'real''.

[ElectricMucus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5UMkCQjgqw

Some creative work on what's to think of Black Holes. Oh and that work you mentioned deserves some special attention.

[nebulus]

Nice, thanks for sharing!

[FirstAscent]

There is a major fallacy within this whole argument.

The Universe is information itself. When you store information somewhere, you haven't created new information. Instead, all you've done is change the information which already existed, plus change the existing information within your brain to interpret it as being meaningful to you.

No new quantity of information is created.

[nebulus]

What do you mean? The change itself is new information of sort "Hey, this is what changed!"

[FirstAscent]

What do you mean? The change itself is new information of sort "Hey, this is what changed!"

And the storage used to record that something changed is now not available to store what it was storing before. Just because you attribute no significance to the prior stored information does not mean there was necessarily a net gain in information.

[FirstAscent]

Maybe I'm wrong. I suggest you read The Library of Babel, which is a short story by Jorge Luis Borges.

[MysteryMiner]

We probably need experts in this thread because such questions are what frontline scientists are working on now. Can someone bring attention of some real physics scientist here? Otherwise we will be forever in history as total retards talking about things that we don't understand properly. Yes, the information of our blundering will be kept in Universe!

[ElectricMucus]

There is a major fallacy within this whole argument.

The Universe is information itself. When you store information somewhere, you haven't created new information. Instead, all you've done is change the information which already existed, plus change the existing information within your brain to interpret it as being meaningful to you.

No new quantity of information is created.

Information is a concept, the universe is made of objects.

[Roger_Murdock]

There is a major fallacy within this whole argument.

The Universe is information itself. When you store information somewhere, you haven't created new information. Instead, all you've done is change the information which already existed, plus change the existing information within your brain to interpret it as being meaningful to you.

No new quantity of information is created.

Information is a concept, the universe is made of objects.

But aren't "objects" also a concept? I've considered the "universe is information" formulation before and found it appealing. I've also considered the possibility that the universe is consciousness. But perhaps the most we can say is that "the universe is."

[flynn]

1) information = inverse of entropy

2) the entropy of a closed system always increase with time (2nd law of thermodynamics)

3) the Universe is a closed system

4) There is not such law as of "information conservation" Information can be easely destroyed. Kick a jigsaw for example, or crash a harddisk by dropping it on the floor for that matter.