Philosophy Now Forum

Consider this as Philosophical teaser, deny that it is not true using all the tools you have got at your disposal, try to kick fundamentals out of its foundation try to do everything to brake it. I have more on the site i created and will give link if allowed by community. But for now just try to brake this logic.

Theory Of Everything

Information, qubits, is all there is.
Information ,qubits, can form systems of information of multiple qubits that act like a single qubit for other higher systems of information
Information(qubits) shapes the systems of information and systems of information shapes the information
Information is governed by the power law
Space-time-energy-mass-gravity-complexity-entropy-all the forces everything, everything is information and systems of information
Universe has tendency to form higher/bigger systems of information (Entropy, systems reaches thermal equilibrium to for bigger systems of information with the same features ) And that’s all you need for gravity, that’s how information “clumps up” and forms the systems of information from massive amounts of information (like stars and planets moons asteroids comets nebulas everything the more you go to the centre of these objects the more information you’ll find) there is a point where that code that system of information becomes a qubit of higher information system, we have a black hole. Why? Because more and more information is born in the universe. How? You travel in space and time!
Systems of information can be connected where “smaller” one has a fundamental influence on the “bigger” one and other way around thus forming multi-level system of information.
The more possibility’s there are for “smaller” system of information to form/become a part of the “bigger” one the less likely it is to stay on its own or in the smaller system of information.
To become part of the bigger/higher systems of information, systems of information can first “decay” into smaller ones depending on the higher system of information they are in.
Complexity of information forms information systems of its own, it forms life. Life is abundant in the universe and life forms even higher systems of information called knowledge, we are those higher systems of information we are the knowledge.

cabalabro wrote:Consider this as Philosophical teaser, deny that it is not true using all the tools you have got at your disposal, try to kick fundamentals out of its foundation try to do everything to brake it. I have more on the site i created and will give link if allowed by community. But for now just try to brake this logic.

Will do my best, and I'm quite good at it.

cabalabro wrote:Theory Of Everything

A theory of everything should talk about everything at every angle, the only thing you have produced is an everything of your own finite set by first stating "information, qubits, is all there is", which is ridiculous, as I'm now sitting at a computer and that computer is not qubits... it is what it is: a computer, with all the unique aspects of being one and all the history that came about it. THAT is an inch closer to everything, but it's still not everything. In order to talk about everything you must have generic parts of the "all of everything" that can be anything at all, or else it doesn't actually talk about everything except a niche.

cabalabro wrote:Information, qubits, is all there is.

Things are themselves and not something else. The assignment operation doesn't work unless you are just using a synonyms or assigning point of origin (like "this ice is cold" is not saying "ice" and "cold" are synonyms but that "cold" originates from "ice").

cabalabro wrote:Information ,qubits, can form systems of information of multiple qubits that act like a single qubit for other higher systems of information

Why does it have to be that way? Cannot the whole be greater than the sum of its parts? What is a higher system of information? Haven't you already said qubits is all there is?

cabalabro wrote:Information(qubits) shapes the systems of information and systems of information shapes the information

You have not said how. Without how this is close to word salad, doesn't make any sense.

cabalabro wrote:Information is governed by the power law

No intuition points towards that, besides, how can something govern qubits if qubits is all there is?

cabalabro wrote:Space-time-energy-mass-gravity-complexity-entropy-all the forces everything, everything is information and systems of information

Please explain how. I hope you realize some time that qubits is a language of communication and that saying qubits is all there is, is extending to say communication is all there is. Which is definitely ridiculous.

cabalabro wrote:Universe has tendency to form higher/bigger systems of information (Entropy, systems reaches thermal equilibrium to for bigger systems of information with the same features ) And that’s all you need for gravity, that’s how information “clumps up”

What does "clumps up" mean, especially in this context... ?

cabalabro wrote:and forms the systems of information from massive amounts of information (like stars and planets moons asteroids comets nebulas everything the more you go to the centre of these objects the more information you’ll find) there is a point where that code that system of information becomes a qubit of higher information system, we have a black hole. Why? Because more and more information is born in the universe. How? You travel in space and time!

Why should more information come from going to the centre of those stellar objects? Why does a black hole consist of qubit of higher information?

cabalabro wrote:Systems of information can be connected where “smaller” one has a fundamental influence on the “bigger” one and other way around thus forming multi-level system of information.

What constitutes a small system and a big one? Is it the number of qubits or the number of subsystems?

cabalabro wrote:The more possibility’s there are for “smaller” system of information to form/become a part of the “bigger” one the less likely it is to stay on its own or in the smaller system of information.

Why? Why is that less likely?

cabalabro wrote:To become part of the bigger/higher systems of information, systems of information can first “decay” into smaller ones depending on the higher system of information they are in.

Why does the size of any system of information relate to its possibility to relate to other systems? I don't see any intuitive connection there.

cabalabro wrote:Complexity of information forms information systems of its own

So an abstract and subjective word like "complexity" can create some system of information out of thin air?

cabalabro wrote:, it forms life. Life is abundant in the universe and life forms even higher systems of information called knowledge, we are those higher systems of information we are the knowledge.

You've been taking drugs, this is not philosophy, this is definition-play. You throw around words in the hope that they might vaguely satisfy your imagery of how things are. You shouldn't make claims about things that you cannot support by any means but loose talk. To a desperately seeking mind this might seem beautiful but to somebody less desperate it appears rather useless and meaningless not to mention it says nothing about anything since it's out of touch with reality, talking as if real things don't exist.

If you scrap it all and throw it in the garbage and start anew, you may do better next time, and one time, like a writer who tries over and over again until he succeeds, you will master thought, but right now, you are clearly very fresh, and need a reality-check.

The Voice of Time wrote:

cabalabro wrote:Consider this as Philosophical teaser, deny that it is not true using all the tools you have got at your disposal, try to kick fundamentals out of its foundation try to do everything to brake it. I have more on the site i created and will give link if allowed by community. But for now just try to brake this logic.

Will do my best, and I'm quite good at it.

cabalabro wrote:Theory Of Everything

A theory of everything should talk about everything at every angle, the only thing you have produced is an everything of your own finite set by first stating "information, qubits, is all there is", which is ridiculous, as I'm now sitting at a computer and that computer is not qubits... it is what it is: a computer, with all the unique aspects of being one and all the history that came about it. THAT is an inch closer to everything, but it's still not everything. In order to talk about everything you must have generic parts of the "all of everything" that can be anything at all, or else it doesn't actually talk about everything except a niche.

cabalabro wrote:Information, qubits, is all there is.

Things are themselves and not something else. The assignment operation doesn't work unless you are just using a synonyms or assigning point of origin (like "this ice is cold" is not saying "ice" and "cold" are synonyms but that "cold" originates from "ice").

cabalabro wrote:Information ,qubits, can form systems of information of multiple qubits that act like a single qubit for other higher systems of information

Why does it have to be that way? Cannot the whole be greater than the sum of its parts? What is a higher system of information? Haven't you already said qubits is all there is?

cabalabro wrote:Information(qubits) shapes the systems of information and systems of information shapes the information

You have not said how. Without how this is close to word salad, doesn't make any sense.

cabalabro wrote:Information is governed by the power law

No intuition points towards that, besides, how can something govern qubits if qubits is all there is?

cabalabro wrote:Space-time-energy-mass-gravity-complexity-entropy-all the forces everything, everything is information and systems of information

Please explain how. I hope you realize some time that qubits is a language of communication and that saying qubits is all there is, is extending to say communication is all there is. Which is definitely ridiculous.

cabalabro wrote:Universe has tendency to form higher/bigger systems of information (Entropy, systems reaches thermal equilibrium to for bigger systems of information with the same features ) And that’s all you need for gravity, that’s how information “clumps up”

What does "clumps up" mean, especially in this context... ?

cabalabro wrote:and forms the systems of information from massive amounts of information (like stars and planets moons asteroids comets nebulas everything the more you go to the centre of these objects the more information you’ll find) there is a point where that code that system of information becomes a qubit of higher information system, we have a black hole. Why? Because more and more information is born in the universe. How? You travel in space and time!

Why should more information come from going to the centre of those stellar objects? Why does a black hole consist of qubit of higher information?

cabalabro wrote:Systems of information can be connected where “smaller” one has a fundamental influence on the “bigger” one and other way around thus forming multi-level system of information.

What constitutes a small system and a big one? Is it the number of qubits or the number of subsystems?

cabalabro wrote:The more possibility’s there are for “smaller” system of information to form/become a part of the “bigger” one the less likely it is to stay on its own or in the smaller system of information.

Why? Why is that less likely?

cabalabro wrote:To become part of the bigger/higher systems of information, systems of information can first “decay” into smaller ones depending on the higher system of information they are in.

Why does the size of any system of information relate to its possibility to relate to other systems? I don't see any intuitive connection there.

cabalabro wrote:Complexity of information forms information systems of its own

So an abstract and subjective word like "complexity" can create some system of information out of thin air?

cabalabro wrote:, it forms life. Life is abundant in the universe and life forms even higher systems of information called knowledge, we are those higher systems of information we are the knowledge.

You've been taking drugs, this is not philosophy, this is definition-play. You throw around words in the hope that they might vaguely satisfy your imagery of how things are. You shouldn't make claims about things that you cannot support by any means but loose talk. To a desperately seeking mind this might seem beautiful but to somebody less desperate it appears rather useless and meaningless not to mention it says nothing about anything since it's out of touch with reality, talking as if real things don't exist.

If you scrap it all and throw it in the garbage and start anew, you may do better next time, and one time, like a writer who tries over and over again until he succeeds, you will master thought, but right now, you are clearly very fresh, and need a reality-check.

What is information? Can anyone tell me one thing that you would not interpret as information? Information is that one thing that unites everything all fields of science all reality without it nothing would not exist(literally because there was ones nothing (and that's what every cosmologist will tell you) first information was born telling all the qubits that followed it that there was ones nothing). It is now that quantum mechanics finally conceived the concept of a qubit. The one indivisible piece of information that can explain all the aspects of the universe. Everything follows this one trend of creation of new information in accordance to the power law. That is why the space is flat The value of Omega was always 1 because information of space is created at the same rate as all the other systems of information to satisfy this trend. From the beginning of time universe created more and more information at the same steady rate, from quarks and hadrons (my theory explains that) it explains anti matter and mater it explains why forces are what they are they explain why evolution of life the creation of information via complexity of life always followed the same pattern the same power law. Look at evolution of the universe how according from nothing everything inflated to what it is today and keeps on doing that. How from hydrogen and few heavier elements galaxies formed nebulas stars that from the start of their formation strive to create more information in the form of heavier elements and light and radiation and everything to satisfy the same universal trend, the same power law. Same thing happened to the life on this planet, it grew it formed bigger more complex life forms that shaped the environment that led to creation even more complex and diverse life forms all at the same rate. And we humans we also follow this universal trend striving to produce more and more complex information, always in accordance to this rule. We shape society we are in and it shape us in such a way to produce more information more complex society in the next generation. If you would consider this "coincidence" to be true would you also not think of such "crack pot on drugs" statement at the end of this theory?

You are going home from your grocery shopping and you need to cross the bridge. You see that the bridge is ones again guarded by Plato. Ones again he tells you “if in the first proposition which you utter, you speak the truth, I will permit you to cross. But surely, if you speak falsely, I shall throw you into the water”. You are really tired and just don’t feel like starting a debate with him today and instead of replying something like “You will throw me into the water”, or “I will throw you into the water” you just say “INFORMATION IS ALL”, he will stand there speechless and you will cross that bridge without any trouble. I mean could he dispute by pointing out to one thing that could not be interpreted as information? Even "nothing" shapes our understanding as information.

cabalabro wrote:What is information?

In the most basic sense it's actually more of an umbrella term, it covers many things. A computer has a different form of information than a written text. Even if it's possible to "convert" text into bytes, bytes "is" not text, the computer first interprets the bits to be a pattern by which the computer should carry out a task, like drawing on the screen, and then we interpret the drawing on the screen to mean symbols which in turn becomes text. In this way, the origin of text stems from bits causal procedure, but the bits themselves will only exist in the first procedure.

cabalabro wrote:Can anyone tell me one thing that you would not interpret as information?

My meal. It's not information, it's food, and I will interpret it as food, and not information. I will probably use some of it "as" information, the sensing and reacting part of it, but it "is" not anything besides food.

cabalabro wrote:Information is that one thing that unites everything all fields of science all reality without it nothing would not exist(literally because there was ones nothing (and that's what every cosmologist will tell you) first information was born telling all the qubits that followed it that there was ones nothing).

This is speculative pseudo-philosophy, cosmologists knows nothing and only come up with whatever story they can sell to their buddies. Physical cosmologists wouldn't even bother to answer the question.

cabalabro wrote:It is now that quantum mechanics finally conceived the concept of a qubit.

How exactly does a discipline which started in the 20th century conceive of anything when it's not a person even and especially when we're talking about the time right after a theoretical sudden appearance of the universe out of nothing?

cabalabro wrote:The one indivisible piece of information that can explain all the aspects of the universe.

It's possible to give a heck of a bad explanation for anything. A good explanation is a very different thing. Try telling people the answer to The Life, The Universe and Everything in bits ^^ Somebody already tried, they said "42", and people were like "whaaat?".

cabalabro wrote:Everything follows this one trend of creation of new information in accordance to the power law.

Show me how, don't just say it. If I said the moon is really one huge ball of white fire, would you believe it? No, so why should I believe you? Explain.

cabalabro wrote:That is why the space is flat

Space is flat? And how the heck do you go from the power law to "that is why the space is flat"?

cabalabro wrote:The value of Omega was always 1 because information of space is created at the same rate as all the other systems of information to satisfy this trend.

How... why... explain?

cabalabro wrote:From the beginning of time universe created more and more information at the same steady rate, from quarks and hadrons (my theory explains that) it explains anti matter and mater it explains why forces are what they are they explain why evolution of life the creation of information via complexity of life always followed the same pattern the same power law.

Your theory as of yet does not explain that. So please do explain that, for real this time.

cabalabro wrote:Look at evolution of the universe how according from nothing everything inflated to what it is today and keeps on doing that. How from hydrogen and few heavier elements galaxies formed nebulas stars that from the start of their formation strive to create more information in the form of heavier elements and light and radiation and everything to satisfy the same universal trend, the same power law.

A chemical element is not information. It is nothing but itself, and you're still not supplying any explanation, you are just making claim after claim.

cabalabro wrote:Same thing happened to the life on this planet, it grew it formed bigger more complex life forms that shaped the environment that led to creation even more complex and diverse life forms all at the same rate. And we humans we also follow this universal trend striving to produce more and more complex information, always in accordance to this rule. We shape society we are in and it shape us in such a way to produce more information more complex society in the next generation. If you would consider this "coincidence" to be true would you also not think of such "crack pot on drugs" statement at the end of this theory?

What theory? All I see is claims, no theory. Information is not "produced" by time at the same rate as changes in general, that is a fatal misunderstanding. Changes happen over time, and we describe those changes by acquiring information from it, as human beings we do that. I've described the physical nature of an informatic system before in another thread, and following that description information would be instances of states of that physical nature.

cabalabro wrote:You are going home from your grocery shopping and you need to cross the bridge. You see that the bridge is ones again guarded by Plato. Ones again he tells you “if in the first proposition which you utter, you speak the truth, I will permit you to cross. But surely, if you speak falsely, I shall throw you into the water”. You are really tired and just don’t feel like starting a debate with him today and instead of replying something like “You will throw me into the water”, or “I will throw you into the water” you just say “INFORMATION IS ALL”, he will stand there speechless and you will cross that bridge without any trouble. I mean could he dispute by pointing out to one thing that could not be interpreted as information? Even "nothing" shapes our understanding as information.

Well you said it right there. Interpret. Interpretation, that's the difference. To interpret something as something else, is not that thing being it, but we are not usually interpreting things as information at least if information is qubits. Instead we interpret it as whatever we happen to prefer in that moment. To some a "best before" date on the milk container is trivial and they interpret it as "something to drink" while for others it's "something to throw in the garbage", to some geek down in some cellar perhaps it's bits and he'll use it to make a visual representation on his screen of it, but at the point he decides to drink it, he thinks "something to drink" of it.

In the most basic sense it's actually more of an umbrella term, it covers many things. A computer has a different form of information than a written text. Even if it's possible to "convert" text into bytes, bytes "is" not text, the computer first interprets the bits to be a pattern by which the computer should carry out a task, like drawing on the screen, and then we interpret the drawing on the screen to mean symbols which in turn becomes text. In this way, the origin of text stems from bits causal procedure, but the bits themselves will only exist in the first procedure.

The English word was apparently derived from the Latin stem (information-) of the nominative (informatio): this noun is derived from the verb "informare" (to inform) in the sense of "to give form to the mind", "to discipline", "instruct", "teach": "Men so wise should go and inform their kings." (1330) Inform itself comes (via French informer) from the Latin verb informare, which means to give form, or to form an idea of. Furthermore, Latin itself already contained the word informatio meaning concept or idea, but the extent to which this may have influenced the development of the word information in English is not clear.

The ancient Greek word for form was μορφή (morphe; cf. morph) and also εἶδος (eidos) "kind, idea, shape, set", the latter word was famously used in a technical philosophical sense by Plato (and later Aristotle) to denote the ideal identity or essence of something (see Theory of Forms). "Eidos" can also be associated with thought, proposition, or even concept.

This however do not reflect the full gravity of this concept. It is when you chop it even further, when you go down to "ink" that this message was written with, you will find that you can go just as far. If you view a word written on a piece of paper as information and chose to ignore its "meaning" and you look all the ink, at paper this massage is written. You will remarkably get more information more complex more fundamental information as you "zoom in", the more down you go to explore it the more information you will find that will shape your perception of this world far more than any word that was initially written on that piece of paper. But you can only go that far and at the "smallest" of scales you will meat that quibit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloch_sphere. It will give you one and only yes/no answer at a time that will only depending on the question you are asking.

My meal. It's not information, it's food, and I will interpret it as food, and not information. I will probably use some of it "as" information, the sensing and reacting part of it, but it "is" not anything besides food.

Your meal is information on multiple scales of systems of information. Your meal can and will shape you, inform you just like any other information. If you had a good meal you will feel full and it will influence, shape your next decisions, if you don't feel satisfied with your meal it will undoubtedly have thoughts about getting something more to eat that will influence your decisions and perceptions in life just as well as an article about politics you have just red in the newspaper. If your meal just happens to be poisoned you will die. On the smaller scales where your "meal" is in your stomach, the molecules it is made of will shape your stomach, they will inform what enzimes are needed to brake it, via even more complex mechanisms it will inform you just how "good or bad" this meal was for you, And if it was poisoned your body will shape itself to be dead in much the same way.

This is speculative pseudo-philosophy, cosmologists knows nothing and only come up with whatever story they can sell to their buddies. Physical cosmologists wouldn't even bother to answer the question.

Well we can agree to disagree on that. I am just pointing out the most mainstream models hare "the big bang" and "inflation" that are describing the universe as something that first came out of that "infinitely dense atom". Also recent studys of the supernovae (that earned the Nobel prize to the scientist that was studying this phenomenon) show that the universe is "expanding" at steady ever increasing rate.

How exactly does a discipline which started in the 20th century conceive of anything when it's not a person even and especially when we're talking about the time right after a theoretical sudden appearance of the universe out of nothing?

It is the best description of the universe we got at this point in time. The QCT (quantum chromodynamics) despite all of its paradoxes and fuzzy logic has stood the test of time and scrutiny of other scientist since the beginning of the 20th century and most of our technology thanks to it. You did however raise one of the most fundamental questions of this theory of everything. If you see yourself not as person but as an integral part, the system of information that shapes/makes up other systems of information like the group of friends/family/work/society/culture etc. You will see that you shape each one of them and each one of them shapes you/influences your decisions the path you are going. Now view QCD as group of scientist that formed the logic of quantum world, share this logic try to find a way to improve it invent something. Each of those scientist, the work that they are doying is influenced by other scientists in that field the discoveries that ware made, it is what shapes the direction where this field is going and this is how as you said "not a person" can achieve these things because scientist in "qcd" act much same as neurons in your brain. This is crazy idea, that we humans are no different from all the reality all the information that surrounds us, that we work on the same principals same laws!

Remember this is philosophy forum so consider this crackpot model of genesis only using the logic of those first initial 10.

"At the beginning there was nothing, thus the first information was born “telling” that there was “nothing”. Since it was alone the new information was born telling it that it was alone and then another came telling both of them that the amount of information in the universe has changed. Let’s just say that to the “horror” of that first bit of information, new information was/is showing up at ever increasing rate. It is only logical to assume that the rate of increase of information could be described by simple power law –the omega is staring right at you (the information of “space-time” is created at the same rate as all the other information). "

I have got the rest of the story if you want.

It's possible to give a heck of a bad explanation for anything. A good explanation is a very different thing. Try telling people the answer to The Life, The Universe and Everything in bits ^^ Somebody already tried, they said "42", and people were like "whaaat?".

Meaning of life? This theory give purpose to meaning. In short universe is subjected to the law where it creates ever more bigger higher more complex more knowledgeable systems of information at the rate that was always constant. Just look at your ancestors at all the people around you what is the most universal trend you can notice? All the time we/our ancestors shaped/formed societys/cultures that at the same time shaped us among all the other things little and small. All for the same purpose, to create next generation that would form even more complex/knowledgeable systems of information even more complex societies worlds. Just look at where we are now at this point in time, what humans have achieved, cant you see this trend? The meaning of our life just like all the universe is the same. To create more information, to create more complex more knowledgeable systems of information at the rate universe demand us!

Show me how, don't just say it. If I said the moon is really one huge ball of white fire, would you believe it? No, so why should I believe you? Explain.

The pure logic of creation that i mentioned. As an example take a look at the earthquakes. All of them no mater how big or small, no mater when or where hey happened they are all connected much the same way. The more powerful the earthquake the less frequent it will happen the less powerful the more frequent. All of them are connected to follow this strict rule this power law, this straight line.

How... why... explain?

Power law, logic of creation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatness_problem Information called space is created at the same rate as all the other information because there is fundamentally no difference between them. That is what makes the space "flat" or "curved" when in presence of other forms of information. The reason why it curves is to follow this law.

A chemical element is not information. It is nothing but itself, and you're still not supplying any explanation, you are just making claim after claim.

How can it not be? It shapes the elements around it that in turn shapes the chemical. It can be information for other systems of information. You me are made of them. Ingest the wrong chemical and you will see the full chain of information where one chemicals inform the other, they in turn inform the systems they are made of be it cells, that then inform the systems of information called organs and so on and so forth up till the system called your consciousness is informaed/shaped in such a way that you realize that you are dying.

Well you said it right there. Interpret. Interpretation, that's the difference. To interpret something as something else, is not that thing being it, but we are not usually interpreting things as information at least if information is qubits. Instead we interpret it as whatever we happen to prefer in that moment. To some a "best before" date on the milk container is trivial and they interpret it as "something to drink" while for others it's "something to throw in the garbage", to some geek down in some cellar perhaps it's bits and he'll use it to make a visual representation on his screen of it, but at the point he decides to drink it, he thinks "something to drink" of it.

But we can all agree that it is information. As i sayd the answer will always depend on the question, on who is asking the question and what is the question. That is why there is so many ways to interpret the information, such diversity of complexity. But the more you zoom in, the less of that "freedom" of choice there is. You can only go as far as qubit. hare there is only 1 way to look at it. The one yes or no answer, the one o or 1.

I have a very simple fact for you, I will answer the rest later. The fact is: for things to make sense as information, they need to act upon something which is not information. Every perspective a human being has will consist of an information part and a part of just existing and causing and being in particular ways and fashions that has nothing to do with information but is simply just itself. Every perspective has this, and every perspective need both parts.

There is no information unless there is a product of its arrangement, and because of that there is no such thing as "information is all there is". If you had an infinite amount of perspectives then everything at some perspective would be covered as information, but it would never all be information at the same time (unless you were an omniscient God)! Information simplifies our understanding of things, but there must always be something for which we are to understand with the information in order for the information to be information.

Our brain has information but only when we view it that way. When we don't view it that way the brain doesn't have information, then it's just "existing and causing and being in particular ways and fashions".

and another thing before I answer full. There is a clear difference between the pouring of wine from a butler into a cup (which in Norwegian is called "skjenke") and the pouring of wine from a butler into a garbage bin (which in Norwegian is called "helle"), while they both presume to be the same thing, they are only the same thing when what you need to know about it is restricted to those parts of act that are the same between the two.

For instance, they have both in common that they dispose of the wine from its storage location. What they do not have in common, is manners, because a butler would show manners when pouring for a person, but would be less mannered when pouring into the garbage. If you reduce the act of pouring to a common word (in Norwegian it'd be choosing either "skjenke" or "helle") it would loose the specifics about itself (and specifics it has already lost because people cannot, as Ludwig Wittgenstein noted, show a particular thing in language, only loosely hint towards its lookalike). Loosing this specifics you would not be able to answer questions that are particular to that situation and which would've required the other word.

The word you already have may say too much or too little to be accurate. In the same way, reducing the world to information takes away its particularity and its actuality, its "transcendent" quality that makes it possible to say new things about it all the time as you come up with new ideas about it, and all you have left is qubits which does nothing, means nothing (because it's not attached to something particular and actual), and has not even a being about itself that makes its components unique from each other. Instead it's all the same, void of reality.

I have a very simple fact for you, I will answer the rest later. The fact is: for things to make sense as information, they need to act upon something which is not information. Every perspective a human being has will consist of an information part and a part of just existing and causing and being in particular ways and fashions that has nothing to do with information but is simply just itself. Every perspective has this, and every perspective need both parts.

There is no information unless there is a product of its arrangement, and because of that there is no such thing as "information is all there is". If you had an infinite amount of perspectives then everything at some perspective would be covered as information, but it would never all be information at the same time (unless you were an omniscient God)! Information simplifies our understanding of things, but there must always be something for which we are to understand with the information in order for the information to be information.

Our brain has information but only when we view it that way. When we don't view it that way the brain doesn't have information, then it's just "existing and causing and being in particular ways and fashions".

But what if in this theory in this logic in this particular model - you don't need anything else to create that act other than information? We are talking here about what quantum mechanics call http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_state What if information is self shaping to create more information in accordance to the laws that are represented in them? What if all you experience in life all the forces follow that logic. Would it be quite a coincidence?

We can never deny the right for all the other information, all the other constituents of mater energy and anything you can think of to perceive each other as information, as something that shapes their behaviors, what shapes who they are.

Our brain always processes information whether it is information about the meal you had (the amount of food in you stomach the amount of "energy" it produces) all that information "piles up" to a certain point (based on the system of information "will to resist hunger") and forms a new system of information that acts as an "idea" in your consciousness called "i will go and have a snack" or information about work related subject that will also shape what you think and do. I mean do you really need anything else to exist to live to gain knowledge?

and another thing before I answer full. There is a clear difference between the pouring of wine from a butler into a cup (which in Norwegian is called "skjenke") and the pouring of wine from a butler into a garbage bin (which in Norwegian is called "helle"), while they both presume to be the same thing, they are only the same thing when what you need to know about it is restricted to those parts of act that are the same between the two.

For instance, they have both in common that they dispose of the wine from its storage location. What they do not have in common, is manners, because a butler would show manners when pouring for a person, but would be less mannered when pouring into the garbage. If you reduce the act of pouring to a common word (in Norwegian it'd be choosing either "skjenke" or "helle") it would loose the specifics about itself (and specifics it has already lost because people cannot, as Ludwig Wittgenstein noted, show a particular thing in language, only loosely hint towards its lookalike). Loosing this specifics you would not be able to answer questions that are particular to that situation and which would've required the other word.

The word you already have may say too much or too little to be accurate. In the same way, reducing the world to information takes away its particularity and its actuality, its "transcendent" quality that makes it possible to say new things about it all the time as you come up with new ideas about it, and all you have left is qubits which does nothing, means nothing (because it's not attached to something particular and actual), and has not even a being about itself that makes its components unique from each other. Instead it's all the same, void of reality.

But which act creates more information? More complex knowledge? The pouring of the wine in to the cup or into the garbage bin? All depends on which acts creates more information for the systems of information of knowledge - us. The answer will always depend on the question asked. That is why at this moment in time you will see wine used and dispensed in cups and glasses quite more often than poured in to the garbage bin. Unless of course you go to the modern theatre where someone will be pouring ridiculous amounts of wine into the garbage bin. Bear in mind that wine does not poor itself in to the cups or garbage bins on its own. It us us humans that do it thus making this information of an action be the part of our system of information, our knowledge. It is only logical to assume that if humans no longer saw wine as means of producing more complex information at the rate universe demands them they will stop drinking it and pouring it into the garbage bin would look much wiser for them than pouring it into the cup.

You have not said how. Without how this is close to word salad, doesn't make any sense.

By using the logic i explained above. From the scale of individual bits to everything else. All can be done using this logic and hare is how. http://universal-unification.com/genesis/ (please remove my link if you consider it as spam this was not my intention all the content of the site can be copy pasted hare if needed)

Why should more information come from going to the centre of those stellar objects? Why does a black hole consist of qubit of higher information?

To keep the creation of new higher bigger systems of information at a steady rate in accordance to the power law. Black hole is a qubit, a pure state for higher system of information called galaxy. As i said systems of information always shapes itself to become even bigger higher ones, there are different scales (thats why power law is called scale invariance law) where systems of information starts acting as a qubits, pure states for bigger higher systems of information. The black hole represents the transition to to this new scale. Just like humans the beings of knowledge represent transition from the other forms of complexity of life.

.



I LOVE the image of the eye that you used.




.

Bill Wiltrack wrote:.



I LOVE the image of the eye that you used.




.

I wanted to use an eye with human brain inside of it as a symbol. The "eyes are my best witness" and the brain the knowledge the thing that's shape i think is unique for us humans in this region of our universe. The thing that helped us to achieve this knowledge.

This theory has pure state as one of its fundamental foundations and sets the quest for more complex knowledge as the meaning of life. This is the monstrosity i created that you as philosophers have to deal with. Enjoy

cabalabro wrote:Consider this as Philosophical teaser, deny that it is not true using all the tools you have got at your disposal, try to kick fundamentals out of its foundation try to do everything to brake it. I have more on the site i created and will give link if allowed by community. But for now just try to brake this logic.

Theory Of Everything

Information, qubits, is all there is.
Information ,qubits, can form systems of information of multiple qubits that act like a single qubit for other higher systems of information
Information(qubits) shapes the systems of information and systems of information shapes the information
Information is governed by the power law
Space-time-energy-mass-gravity-complexity-entropy-all the forces everything, everything is information and systems of information
Universe has tendency to form higher/bigger systems of information (Entropy, systems reaches thermal equilibrium to for bigger systems of information with the same features ) And that’s all you need for gravity, that’s how information “clumps up” and forms the systems of information from massive amounts of information (like stars and planets moons asteroids comets nebulas everything the more you go to the centre of these objects the more information you’ll find) there is a point where that code that system of information becomes a qubit of higher information system, we have a black hole. Why? Because more and more information is born in the universe. How? You travel in space and time!
Systems of information can be connected where “smaller” one has a fundamental influence on the “bigger” one and other way around thus forming multi-level system of information.
The more possibility’s there are for “smaller” system of information to form/become a part of the “bigger” one the less likely it is to stay on its own or in the smaller system of information.
To become part of the bigger/higher systems of information, systems of information can first “decay” into smaller ones depending on the higher system of information they are in.
Complexity of information forms information systems of its own, it forms life. Life is abundant in the universe and life forms even higher systems of information called knowledge, we are those higher systems of information we are the knowledge.

Have you read or heard of Leibniz's Monadology?

Arising_uk wrote:

cabalabro wrote:Consider this as Philosophical teaser, deny that it is not true using all the tools you have got at your disposal, try to kick fundamentals out of its foundation try to do everything to brake it. I have more on the site i created and will give link if allowed by community. But for now just try to brake this logic.

Theory Of Everything

Information, qubits, is all there is.
Information ,qubits, can form systems of information of multiple qubits that act like a single qubit for other higher systems of information
Information(qubits) shapes the systems of information and systems of information shapes the information
Information is governed by the power law
Space-time-energy-mass-gravity-complexity-entropy-all the forces everything, everything is information and systems of information
Universe has tendency to form higher/bigger systems of information (Entropy, systems reaches thermal equilibrium to for bigger systems of information with the same features ) And that’s all you need for gravity, that’s how information “clumps up” and forms the systems of information from massive amounts of information (like stars and planets moons asteroids comets nebulas everything the more you go to the centre of these objects the more information you’ll find) there is a point where that code that system of information becomes a qubit of higher information system, we have a black hole. Why? Because more and more information is born in the universe. How? You travel in space and time!
Systems of information can be connected where “smaller” one has a fundamental influence on the “bigger” one and other way around thus forming multi-level system of information.
The more possibility’s there are for “smaller” system of information to form/become a part of the “bigger” one the less likely it is to stay on its own or in the smaller system of information.
To become part of the bigger/higher systems of information, systems of information can first “decay” into smaller ones depending on the higher system of information they are in.
Complexity of information forms information systems of its own, it forms life. Life is abundant in the universe and life forms even higher systems of information called knowledge, we are those higher systems of information we are the knowledge.

Have you read or heard of Leibniz's Monadology?

Actually no its the first time reading now on Wikipedia. He had the right mindset but the age he lived in just did not permit him to reach the same conclusions. If he lived at our time and worked in the field of philosophy of science, tried to come up with something better than Copenhagen interpretation while trying to philosophically interpret fields like complexity science, chaos and just generally science as a whole, he would have reached the same conclusions.

From wiki. This theory(Monadology) leads to:

1. Idealism, since it denies things in themselves (besides monads) and multiplies them in different points of view. Monads are “perpetual living mirrors of the universe.”

2. Metaphysical optimism, through the principle of sufficient reason, developed as follows:

a) Everything exists according to a reason (by the axiom "Nothing arises from nothing");

b) Everything which exists has a sufficient reason to exist;

c) Everything which exists is better than anything non-existent (by the first point: since it is more rational, it also has more reality), and, consequently, it is the best possible being in the best of all possible worlds (by the axiom: "That which contains more reality is better than that which contains less reality").

The “best of possible worlds,” then, is that “containing the greatest variety of phenomena from the smallest amount of principles.” See fractal for a strong relationship.

This is however not where the theory of everything leads us to not even close.

cabalabro wrote:But what if in this theory in this logic in this particular model - you don't need anything else to create that act other than information?

Then it doesn't make sense and has no contact with reality.

cabalabro wrote:We are talking here about what quantum mechanics call http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_state What if information is self shaping to create more information in accordance to the laws that are represented in them?

It wouldn't mean anything or have any effect upon anything even if it did it. If the entire universe was only qubits, then I wouldn't exist and be able to talk about them, and they would do what the heck they wanted without it making any difference.

A very important lesson here: when we use information in any way, we attach meaning to it, it doesn't have meaning on its own. Unlike a rock rolling down a hill, which will do that regardless of our interpretations of it, qubit only do what we order it to do in our minds, and the only reason we have it, is so that we can compare things by reducing them into information that will give us what we want (an answer from the comparison, it's basically the set-up of a game with rules). The fact that anything can theoretically be seen as information from at least one angle never equates the same thing to information, it can only describe some causal factors springing from the perspective you are looking from, however, you must first know the causal factors before you can make it into information that will not be word salad or random but actually something meaningful.

cabalabro wrote:What if all you experience in life all the forces follow that logic. Would it be quite a coincidence?

I wouldn't be surprised if things could be informatized, no. I would not be surprised even if generative rates about the entirety of the universe, like its expansion and number of atoms etc. followed a power law (at least an approximate one within a limit of time, as I don't think the universe lets itself be tamed as easily as that it won't vary over time), because it's only mathematics. I'm not very pleased however that you try to equate information to be something it is not, and any person who would follow that belief would end up making the mistake of attributing qualities to information that information does not carry, like finiteness, ultimate truth, or the likes.

Information only makes sense when it resides in context, not when talked about in general like you do, because there's no way to prove it, and therefore no way to deny it. It's the question about the existence of God all over again. You can't prove nor deny it, it's unsatisfactory to ask the question and expect an answer.

cabalabro wrote:We can never deny the right for all the other information

what right?

cabalabro wrote:all the other constituents of mater energy and anything you can think of to perceive each other as information, as something that shapes their behaviors, what shapes who they are.

Things do not perceive. You are treating matter like it's human beings, this is an ultimate proof of your total lack of grasp with reality.

cabalabro wrote:Our brain always processes information whether it is information about the meal you had (the amount of food in you stomach the amount of "energy" it produces) all that information "piles up" to a certain point (based on the system of information "will to resist hunger") and forms a new system of information that acts as an "idea" in your consciousness called "i will go and have a snack" or information about work related subject that will also shape what you think and do.

This is not information, this is causation. Causation can be described in terms of information, food and hunger can fundamentally not be so. If you've ever eaten before you'd know by experience that there is no "information" in the food, it's just food. You might attribute to it a causal relationship and then form information about that, but that is an activity you do after you've eaten, not while you eat.

cabalabro wrote:I mean do you really need anything else to exist to live to gain knowledge?

Certainly, to be a human being is what you need to exist to gain knowledge. If you were information you'd never learn, because again, you wouldn't exist, only information would.

cabalabro wrote:But which act creates more information?

Your activity of reducing it to such.

cabalabro wrote:More complex knowledge?

People who don't know how to shorten what they are saying.

cabalabro wrote:The pouring of the wine in to the cup or into the garbage bin? All depends on which acts creates more information for the systems of information of knowledge - us. The answer will always depend on the question asked.

"All depends" what does this mean, what all? Does my choice of where to pour it depend upon what creates more information? In that case, where do you get that idea from?

cabalabro wrote:That is why at this moment in time you will see wine used and dispensed in cups and glasses quite more often than poured in to the garbage bin.

I'm not sure I follow... why exactly does that happen? I would think it was because people liked drinking their wine more than pouring it into the garbage ^^

cabalabro wrote:Unless of course you go to the modern theatre where someone will be pouring ridiculous amounts of wine into the garbage bin. Bear in mind that wine does not poor itself in to the cups or garbage bins on its own. It us us humans that do it thus making this information of an action be the part of our system of information, our knowledge.

It's not information just because you say it is. To the butler it's just what he does, for some cause; it's not information. So why are you saying it's information when it's not?

cabalabro wrote:It is only logical to assume that if humans no longer saw wine as means of producing more complex information at the rate universe demands them they will stop drinking it and pouring it into the garbage bin would look much wiser for them than pouring it into the cup.

The Universe doesn't make demands and people don't follow commands by the universe. People do what the heck they want within the limits causal nature, so how do you disprove of that?

cabalabro wrote:To keep the creation of new higher bigger systems of information at a steady rate in accordance to the power law.

Which power law? Why shouldn't things be simpler? What if the universe became simpler? How are you supposed to know whether size brings complexity? And how are you supposed to know whether the universe is not recycling itself into simpler parts?

cabalabro wrote:Black hole is a qubit, a pure state for higher system of information called galaxy. As i said systems of information always shapes itself to become even bigger higher ones

That is not an act of information, again, you attribute things to information that are in fact products of human endeavour (which by the way neither always go that way). Information cannot do things on its own! It needs a human agent!

cabalabro wrote:there are different scales (thats why power law is called scale invariance law) where systems of information starts acting as a qubits, pure states for bigger higher systems of information.

What? I thought you said everything is qubits? Now you're saying some things are not (acting as) qubits?

cabalabro wrote:The black hole represents the transition to to this new scale. Just like humans the beings of knowledge represent
transition from the other forms of complexity of life.

Represent for whom?

cabalabro wrote:This however do not reflect the full gravity of this concept. It is when you chop it even further, when you go down to "ink" that this message was written with, you will find that you can go just as far. If you view a word written on a piece of paper as information and chose to ignore its "meaning" and you look all the ink, at paper this massage is written. You will remarkably get more information more complex more fundamental information as you "zoom in", the more down you go to explore it the more information you will find that will shape your perception of this world far more than any word that was initially written on that piece of paper. But you can only go that far and at the "smallest" of scales you will meat that quibit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloch_sphere. It will give you one and only yes/no answer at a time that will only depending on the question you are asking.

But here is the big point: yes/no of "what"? Yes/no of qubits does not give justice to the things we see and the things that matter to us. So there must exist something for which is not qubits and for which the qubits can describe, hence, fail, not everything is qubits.

cabalabro wrote:Your meal is information on multiple scales of systems of information. Your meal can and will shape you, inform you just like any other information.

If your meal is talking to you you should see a doctor. It's not normal.

cabalabro wrote:If you had a good meal you will feel full and it will influence, shape your next decisions, if you don't feel satisfied with your meal it will undoubtedly have thoughts about getting something more to eat that will influence your decisions and perceptions in life just as well as an article about politics you have just red in the newspaper. If your meal just happens to be poisoned you will die. On the smaller scales where your "meal" is in your stomach, the molecules it is made of will shape your stomach, they will inform what enzimes are needed to brake it, via even more complex mechanisms it will inform you just how "good or bad" this meal was for you, And if it was poisoned your body will shape itself to be dead in much the same way.

Yes, my body will do all that, but it will never need qubits for it, it will do it without qubits, very easily in fact. And there's no need for informing, you could just say that "a makes x-changes and because of that b will make x-changes", there's no need for information to exist in the context. It's just causation.

cabalabro wrote:Well we can agree to disagree on that. I am just pointing out the most mainstream models here "the big bang" and "inflation" that are describing the universe as something that first came out of that "infinitely dense atom". Also recent studys of the supernovae (that earned the Nobel prize to the scientist that was studying this phenomenon) show that the universe is "expanding" at steady ever increasing rate.

We were talking about nothingness and not expanding universes.

cabalabro wrote:It is the best description of the universe we got at this point in time. The QCT (quantum chromodynamics) despite all of its paradoxes and fuzzy logic has stood the test of time and scrutiny of other scientist since the beginning of the 20th century and most of our technology thanks to it.

You didn't get my question, which was, again, that you were attributing human capacities to abstract concepts, which is fundamentally wrong.

cabalabro wrote:You did however raise one of the most fundamental questions of this theory of everything. If you see yourself not as person but as an integral part, the system of information that shapes/makes up other systems of information like the group of friends/family/work/society/culture etc. You will see that you shape each one of them and each one of them shapes you/influences your decisions the path you are going. Now view QCD as group of scientist that formed the logic of quantum world, share this logic try to find a way to improve it invent something. Each of those scientist, the work that they are doing is influenced by other scientists in that field the discoveries that were made, it is what shapes the direction where this field is going and this is how as you said "not a person" can achieve these things because scientist in "qcd" act much same as neurons in your brain. This is crazy idea, that we humans are no different from all the reality all the information that surrounds us, that we work on the same principals same laws!

Reality is not information, that is quite an absurd claim. Yes we do work by similar (at least) laws of causal relationships as the rest of the physical world, but one should never treat the human as finite because of it.

cabalabro wrote:Remember this is philosophy forum so consider this crackpot model of genesis only using the logic of those first initial 10.

What 10?

cabalabro wrote:Meaning of life? This theory give purpose to meaning. In short universe is subjected to the law where it creates ever more bigger higher more complex more knowledgeable systems of information at the rate that was always constant.

What? How do you know it's constant?

cabalabro wrote:Just look at your ancestors at all the people around you what is the most universal trend you can notice? All the time we/our ancestors shaped/formed societys/cultures that at the same time shaped us among all the other things little and small. All for the same purpose, to create next generation that would form even more complex/knowledgeable systems of information even more complex societies worlds.

This is historicism and not valid thinking. History is not proof of how the future is gonna be, and history is full of proofs of de-complexification as well. For instance, the dark ages as opposed to the advancements of the Roman Era, how things became "less complex" in a sense by barbarians setting back technological development and putting to ruin advanced systems of government and craftsmanship that had risen in the Roman Empire.

About the earlier times we don't know so we don't know for certain how things were, but the complexities of ancient Egypt for instance could likely be compared to later periods (after Alexander's conquest) where things would be simpler than the powerful theological dynasty would've made it.

In today things like smartphones simplify for us things that ought to be extremely complex. So as the complexity of having to do all sorts of things ourselves wanes, the simplicity of an Android, Windows Phone or iPhone makes the world extremely simple as well. Not like 30 years ago before modern cellphones where the complexity of having to use a phone would be many-doubled for the consumer, with the things they had to think about, the things they had to learn, the complexity of "situational" components and conditions for the consumer to be able to carry out the task they wanted. The less complexity in having to buy a wrist-watch and instead just tap the screen of your phone. Your perspective is shaping its own truths and I wouldn't be able to imagine you've even tried to see things from other perspectives before you write.

cabalabro wrote:Just look at where we are now at this point in time, what humans have achieved, cant you see this trend? The meaning of our life just like all the universe is the same. To create more information, to create more complex more knowledgeable systems of information at the rate universe demand us!

To get rid of complexity can be a big blessing as well. How nice wouldn't it be to rid of theology? Or how nice wouldn't it be to have simple answers for things? These are also advances that can be made, and when completed should be able to provide us with a life that is both better AND simpler.

cabalabro wrote:The pure logic

The logic isn't pure. Before you start attributing yourself any other non-existent quality.

cabalabro wrote:of creation that i mentioned. As an example take a look at the earthquakes. All of them no mater how big or small, no mater when or where hey happened they are all connected much the same way. The more powerful the earthquake the less frequent it will happen the less powerful the more frequent. All of them are connected to follow this strict rule this power law, this straight line.

There is no necessity in that, and just because there happens to come a fitting "compensation" earthquake later on doesn't mean the earth quake is actually being compensative of a former one, instead of it just being caused by something independent of compensation. Like a nuclear explosion underground, which is known to trigger earth quakes.

cabalabro wrote:Power law, logic of creation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatness_problem Information called space

What is information called space?

cabalabro wrote:is created at the same rate as all the other information because there is fundamentally no difference between them. That is what makes the space "flat" or "curved" when in presence of other forms of information. The reason why it curves is to follow this law.

You've not explained.

cabalabro wrote:How can it not be? It shapes the elements around it that in turn shapes the chemical.

And it can do so without being information.

cabalabro wrote:It can be information for other systems of information. You me are made of them. Ingest the wrong chemical and you will see the full chain of information where one chemicals inform the other, they in turn inform the systems they are made of be it cells, that then inform the systems of information called organs and so on and so forth up till the system called your consciousness is informaed/shaped in such a way that you realize that you are dying.

Chemicals don't inform each other. Events about them cause new events about themselves and other chemicals.

cabalabro wrote:But we can all agree that it is information.

No we can't.

cabalabro wrote:As I said the answer will always depend on the question, on who is asking the question and what is the question. That is why there is so many ways to interpret the information, such diversity of complexity. But the more you zoom in, the less of that "freedom" of choice there is. You can only go as far as qubit. Here there is only 1 way to look at it. The one yes or no answer, the one o or 1.

You can go further, to the thing itself presumably, and there'll be no information about it, it will only be itself. Nothing can be said about it, because it's only itself.

Thank you for your most informative reply, The Voice of Time, i cant ask for anything more.

It wouldn't mean anything or have any effect upon anything even if it did it. If the entire universe was only qubits, then I wouldn't exist and be able to talk about them, and they would do what the heck they wanted without it making any difference.

A very important lesson here: when we use information in any way, we attach meaning to it, it doesn't have meaning on its own. Unlike a rock rolling down a hill, which will do that regardless of our interpretations of it, qubit only do what we order it to do in our minds, and the only reason we have it, is so that we can compare things by reducing them into information that will give us what we want (an answer from the comparison, it's basically the set-up of a game with rules). The fact that anything can theoretically be seen as information from at least one angle never equates the same thing to information, it can only describe some causal factors springing from the perspective you are looking from, however, you must first know the causal factors before you can make it into information that will not be word salad or random but actually something meaningful.

Why wouldn't you exist if the universe was a made of qubits, if the universe was set up to create more and more information in accordance to the game rules it created when it took "nothing" as a point of reference. If you set up the game like that with the rules i gave, 13.7 billion years later beings of such unseen knowledge and complexity like you and me would be an inevitability and not a lucky coincidence. You have raised a good question about the perspective, i tried to answer this question for quite some time, trying to analyze as much data as i could... the conclusion: There is no angle, or perspective were you could not see and explain all the things as information as a "game" of qubits.

I wouldn't be surprised if things could be informatized, no. I would not be surprised even if generative rates about the entirety of the universe, like its expansion and number of atoms etc. followed a power law (at least an approximate one within a limit of time, as I don't think the universe lets itself be tamed as easily as that it won't vary over time), because it's only mathematics. I'm not very pleased however that you try to equate information to be something it is not, and any person who would follow that belief would end up making the mistake of attributing qualities to information that information does not carry, like finiteness, ultimate truth, or the likes.

Information only makes sense when it resides in context, not when talked about in general like you do, because there's no way to prove it, and therefore no way to deny it. It's the question about the existence of God all over again. You can't prove nor deny it, it's unsatisfactory to ask the question and expect an answer.

But i have reached these conclusions by looking at what science has come up with in the last century or so. For instance, you can only get one and only one answer, one bit of information from one particle(a qubit) at a time. In 100 years of quantum mechanics no one managed to violate this, not even theoretically. So why should we not make the conclusions about information in this form of "like finiteness, ultimate truth, or the likes."

I think it can be proven and will be proven. The idea however is much ahead of its time, the fields of science, the "tools" to prove it are not fully formed yet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexity, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantities_of_information, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_theory

Things do not perceive. You are treating matter like it's human beings, this is an ultimate proof of your total lack of grasp with reality.

Yes and no. There are many distinct scales that can be connected to each other but are never the less much different from each other. I mean you and me are made of matter and energy (or many distinct forms of systems of information) but that is not what makes us human. It is the ability of all those things to connect to form higher and higher systems of information, form particles to chemicals to biochemistry individual cells and organs that end up with us. And not just that, but the ability of all these systems to create something ever more complex. And how can we humans, beings of knowledge be any different when we ourselves create even bigger systems of information much the same as cells create organs, we two create societies and cultures, all the smaller integral parts that they are made of like communitys, "organs of power". If something like state could talk it will also tell you that it is not human being and should not be treated as one.

This is not information, this is causation. Causation can be described in terms of information, food and hunger can fundamentally not be so. If you've ever eaten before you'd know by experience that there is no "information" in the food, it's just food. You might attribute to it a causal relationship and then form information about that, but that is an activity you do after you've eaten, not while you eat.

If your meal is talking to you you should see a doctor. It's not normal.

If the causation can be describe in terms of information, maybe just maybe it is just information i mean don't you find it quite a coincidence that these two ideas are so compatible? The analogy hare however is much more simpler to understand. If you saw someone littering in the park you don't go straight to your president/prime minister/queen to report it, you contact the right organs of power, the person that work in the appropriate system. Will your queen know anything about what you did in her kingdom or will all the kingdom know about your deed? And what if you start spreading Anthrax in the kingdom (poisoned food) how long it will take until not only the queen is informed about it but all the kingdom?

Certainly, to be a human being is what you need to exist to gain knowledge. If you were information you'd never learn, because again, you wouldn't exist, only information would.

But i do not claim that humans are just information. It is a most complex system of information made out of other systems of information and why would you claim that something like that would never learn? And if we allow this possibility where all is information that play by the rules it creates (just like we humans create our own rules of play, just like anything else in our universe) then there is nothing more that is missing from the picture. Personalty i don't know a way to gain Knowledge other than the computation of the information.

Your activity of reducing it to such. People who don't know how to shorten what they are saying.

Exactly you gain knowledge by computing information thus the knowledge depend on the information you compute.

"All depends" what does this mean, what all? Does my choice of where to pour it depend upon what creates more information? In that case, where do you get that idea from?

Yes! Your choice of what you are pouring, where you are pouring, at what circumstances and all the rest will decide what information will be there for you to gain knowledge from.

I'm not sure I follow... why exactly does that happen? I would think it was because people liked drinking their wine more than pouring it into the garbage ^^

But i am not talking about what people like or dislike. I am trying to explain why they like or dislike some things or the others things in the first place trying to find this one universal pattern. My point is that the things happen, the way they happen and when(time) that they happen is because of this logic of creation of new more complex information. It might sound as a word salad but i just cant ignore all these coincidence that i see in our history. I mean it is you who mentioned wine, what a coincidence that creation of our first great human civilization (Sumer, Akkadian Empire, Babylonia) coincided with invention of alcoholic beverage called ale? Since then look at all the new beverages and ways to consume them that ware somehow invented. I am not even talking about all the drugs and all the new drugs constantly being mentioned on the news i mean where the hell are they coming from why?

It's not information just because you say it is. To the butler it's just what he does, for some cause; it's not information. So why are you saying it's information when it's not?

We might not agree on what information is. As i can understand for you it is some kind of human invention that we are free to use or not while for me it is something much more fundamental. We wont understand each other if we keep on looking at things from these 2 different perspectives i am not sure how to bridge this gap even tho i do want to do that.

The Universe doesn't make demands and people don't follow commands by the universe. People do what the heck they want within the limits causal nature, so how do you disprove of that?

Universe makes its own demands that it itself follows. It makes demands in form of laws that everyone bends to. For example it creates laws like when you jump up you fall down. You cant violate this law no matter how much you protest unless you create system of information that does not follow these rules (because it will follow the main law of creation of new information) and you'll fly away with one of these flying machines.

Which power law? Why shouldn't things be simpler? What if the universe became simpler? How are you supposed to know whether size brings complexity? And how are you supposed to know whether the universe is not recycling itself into simpler parts?

The answer to that question is still to be found, the exact values that is. I however just do not see any other alternatives just look at what power laws we got so far http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_law each of the examples of power law is so fundamental to our universe that there just can be no alternative. You are raising good questions, i wish our science was concentrated on answering exactly these questions. The universe becomes "simpler" for a philosopher(or does it? I have serious doubts about this statement), for the scientists that means that not only quantum mechanics and relativity (i don't see these things as simple) are still a play but you need even more new fields of science with same or i think even more complex formulation to understand the universe in "scientific" terms.. To gain ever more knowledge...

That is not an act of information, again, you attribute things to information that are in fact products of human endeavour (which by the way neither always go that way). Information cannot do things on its own! It needs a human agent!

I don't need anything else(like god) but me to act on other people, to shape their perception of me and the environment, to inform gain knowledge and share it. So why does information need a god(human) to act on other information, to do things on its own?

What? I thought you said everything is qubits? Now you're saying some things are not (acting as) qubits?

1 human will be just one human and will act like one, 2 will be a pair and act like a pair, the more you add the different thing you will get that will make out something even more different. When you get enough people a crowd of people, the crowd behavior kicks in, you get riots and disorder(as an example) from the crowd even when the crowd was actually made out of ever so peaceful people that would never act this way on their own. There are so many perspectives to look it at it not just because we humans learned the ability to recognize but because they are real and always present.

Chemicals don't inform each other. Events about them cause new events about themselves and other chemicals.

For me and quite few scientist working in the fields of information science the above statement would be equivalent to "information creates more information" . The idea is however that you can use the term information to describe chemicals events and causes, the term is just so universal. That is why it stands in the heart of this theory it can generalize things without loosing all their meaning by stating the context.

I will answer all of your questions in time please bare with me i can only say that philosophical pleasure of gaining the knowledge via such discussion is fantastic