Paul's comment regarding the "Ripples in a Pool" post brought to my mind the theme for this Post. In that comment, Paul said that the universe is ever-changing and that increasing entropy is basic to this change—that what is organized gradually becomes disorganized.
To the physicist entropy is a thermodynamic quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work. In its more general form, entropy is defined as the degree of disorder or randomness in a system. In either form, the arrow of time is inescapably associated with increasing entropy.
The thermodynamic definition of entropy preferred by the physicist is appropriate for a universe made of matter—the universe we experience every day. However, that same universe, as seen from the quantum level, is not made of matter but of information; from that level, it can be seen that elementary particles are not tangible objects but are bits of information only. The eminent quantum theorist Paul Davies says, “it is easy to be seduced into believing that there really is a little thing ‘out there’, like a scaled-down version of a billiard ball, producing the results of [our] measurements. But this belief does not stand up to scrutiny." The elementary particles out of which matter supposedly is composed, are not really elementary at all. According to Davies, they are of a secondary, derivative nature. Rather than providing the concrete ‘stuff ’ from which the world is made, these ‘elementary’ particles “… are actually essentially abstract constructions based upon … [our] ‘observation events’ or measurement records.”[Note 2]
Entropy in our universe, seen from this quantum-level perspective, likely takes the form of increasing complexity—our world is accumulating more information than we can responsibly, safely, and usefully manage.
Additional complexity is an unavoidable result of change for with change we must now deal with both the old and the new.[Note 3] Our attempts to cope with this complexity—to maintain order so that the change improves or at least does not lower the quality of our lives—typically involve technological change, which in turn produces more change and complexity. We seem to be in a desperate—perhaps futile—race to deal with the increasing complexity of our world through technological change. Nevertheless, if we are to deal with what from this perspective seems to be a runaway increase in entropy, it is at this more fundamental level that we should focus our attention.
Change frequently is presented as progress—as an unalloyed good or a necessary evil. But sometimes change is followed by enormously complex problems that we are not prepared to handle. Development of atomic energy and the atomic bomb ushered in the atomic age and, as former president Eisenhower pointed out in his farewell speech of 1961 [Note 4] , the awesome destructive potential of atomic weapons led many nations to feel that a continual state of readiness to respond was a necessary defensive measure to protect their citizens from atomic attacks by other nations. This required the maintenance of standing armies and large defense industries with consequent disruptions to the economies and political structures of nations.
How do we avoid similar mistakes in the future? Some changes—and the change discussed in the previous paragraph may be an example—may be unavoidable at the time the go|no go decision is made. Other changes might cause fewer problems for technologies to solve if we identified in advance those changes that will likely present problems and required that they conform to certain standards in the way they are introduced. But the breakneck rate of current change makes it difficult to see in advance of their introduction which changes will result in problems and what the problems might be.
I liken this inability to see the future to driving at night on a country road. We are driving too fast for the reach of our headlights. If we could slow down and allow the road to be bathed in the glare of our headlights as we advance, the ability to see and avoid problems would be greatly enhanced. This more measured pace might be accomplished by, among other things, limiting corporate political influence in democratic forms of government, appropriate regulation of free enterprise systems, and insuring that diplomacy plays a primary role in foreign policy.
We would do well to heed the sage advice of Fred Rogers, host for many years of television’s Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood, who told us that we should all slow down, that life should be lived at a pace that allows us to discover that “deep and simple” is better than “shallow and complex.”[Note 5] We cannot change the arrow of time—our universe will become more complex; perhaps we can slow the rate at which complexity increases.
Notes
1. This Post is adapted from Donald W. Jarrell, At the Edge of Time: Reality, Time, and Meaning in a Virtual Everyday World (North Charleston, South Carolina: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2012, rev 2014), 66-68. See At the Edge of Time.
2. Paul Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint: New Discoveries in Nature’s Creative Ability to Order the Universe (New York, NY: Simon and Schuster, 1988), 175.
3. David Deutsch sees unavoidable increase in complexity to be a result of the increasing differentiation of the multiverse of which we are a part. New universes emerge only with change and this change inevitably brings added complexity. Interview with David Deutsch, in P. C. W. Davies and J. R. Brown, The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics (Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 86.
4. Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961, Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040.
5. See the 2011 DVD, “Mister Rogers and Me.”
Next post on a bi-weekly schedule: October 23, 2015.
How to comment, for first-time commenters: With the blog page open in front of you, find the post that you would like to comment about. Go to the end of the post and click on "comments" which will allow you to read previous comments (if any). You will be invited to enter your comment in a "comment" window.
2 comments:
First, the multiverse. Is there any evidence of it? Perhaps it is the result of some mathematical deduction (string theory), but without evidence. Start with the big bang and this increible complex and, at the same time simple, limitless universe develops. Where, then, can a multiverse be?
Now, second, if entropy and other events produce more and more complexity, the universe must get awfully crowded in a hurry. Doesn't the universe allow anything to be discarded? Why is it kept if there is now way to access it? If there is no use for it?
Third, information is always about something. It has no body. It may be carried on a particle, a light wave, a nerve cell or a printed page, but it has no body itself.
Finally, the universe starts with nothing. An incredible event! Its structure must know what nothing is. If so, it is not hard to imagine that it can make nothing out of something like a tiny bit of energy.
It also occurs to me to ask if information comes in little bits, what are the characteristics of those bits?
Paul K.
"Deep and simple" IS better than "shallow and complex." I would believe that even it came from a lesser authority than Mr. Rogers! It seems to me that regardless of how complex things become, we - as humans with choice - are empowered to simplify and deepen our personal conscious lives. Zen and Tao practices (which, by the way, do not need to be tethered to any particular religious beliefs) are quite useful along these lines. Change is not necessarily progress and "more" is not always better than "less." It seems silly to believe that we could slow down and thereby simplify the universe (and many would probably say we shouldn't even WANT to do that). But each of is part of the universe; we are so many slivers of reality. What if we all looked within, cultivated personal simplicity and depth, and followed the advice of Lao-tzu: "In dwelling, live close to the ground; in thinking, keep to the simple; in work, do what you enjoy; in family life, be completely present." I am willing to wager that if enough of us did that, the universe would become a simpler and less chaotic place. I believe that in a very literal sense. And bonus: We'd all be way happier and way healthier!
Post a Comment