Saturday, January 23, 2016

entropy, physics, markets, A.I., evolution, short summary

Physics is our best known (most efficient) set of non-lossy compression functions for the data observed in the world, which is a way of saying Occam's razor was applied. Other sets of compression functions like religion + democracy + free markets are more intelligent than physics's functions if they result in more profit for the computing device implementing the functions (algorithms), in keeping with Marcus Hutter's definition of intelligence. Deciding the most efficient way to move the symbols around with electrons in CPUs, ions in brains, votes in government, reputation in open source, or money in markets allows the computing device (CPUs implementing real A.I., brains, government, open source, markets) to most efficiently move the much larger real-world objects that the symbols represent so that the computing device can more efficiently make copies of itself (seek lower entropy). This is how entropy relates to information and how information relates to intelligence and evolution which are the result of least action dynamics seeking lower physical entropy in the distribution of N atoms on Earth, as the excess entropy is sloughed off to space with 17 low-energy un-directed photons per incoming sun-directed photon, so that the Universe can expand (entropy and energy per comoving volume of the universe is constant): entropy is emitted from gravitational systems to fill the expanding void: entropy is not always "increasing" it is emitted). The result is higher energy bonds (lower entropy due to smaller volume) of the N atoms on Earth of n types, which is why machines that utilize metal and metalloid (e.g. silicon) atoms with their previously attached oxygen atoms removed (resulting in carbon-carbon, metal-metal, silicon-silicon) are replacing biology: they are more efficient due to the higher energy low entropy bonds. This is why entropy is important.

high social entropy for low physical entropy. Another short summary

Physical entropy on planet Earth is lowered by capitalism's combination with democracy because it keeps social entropy high by redistributing the wealth evenly. This causes a greater use commodities like metals, metalloids, and carbon with their oxygen atoms  removed from the "ores", creating very strong bonds in smaller volumes (lower entropy). These strong bonds happen to acquire energy (solar cells), use it to move matter around (electrical motors), and to think about how to do it most efficiently (silicon-based CPUs), much more efficiently than biology which is why biology is being replaced.  Our economic problems since the use of rocks have been due to non-rock users becoming outdated and thereby replaced.  The great depression was caused by not printing enough money when farm and factory muscle was replaced by steel and copper.  Now silicon with its oxygen atoms removed is replacing brains that have to move ions instead of electrons which weigh 40,000 times less.  

Cooperation on the whole is lowering  entropy is what evolution is about.  Regions of gravity (mass accumulation) emit entropy via lower-energy photons so that the universe can expand. On an expanding-volume basis, cosmological entropy is observed to be constant. Earth, economies, and engines are not isolated thermodynamic systems. Is there no such thing?  Entropy is emitted.  It "increases" only when the expanding universe is not considered.  Genes are passive. Randomness combined with them do not lead to order. Dynamics, the Sun, and the universe sucking entropy out of Earth leads to the physical order seen in evolution. In order incorporate the "entropy always increases" law, the view that evolution is not leading to higher order was assumed, but in looking at how the mass on Earth is organizing itself, entropy is being lowered.  The selfish gene view gives rise to justifying capitalism without government. The fatalistic view that "entropy always rises" supports that error. Fixed volumes of the universe are becoming more and more isolated and their entropy is increasing.

group selection, moon low-entropy

The Hadza hunter-gatherer groups, one of the very few remaining, split up and rejoin every few weeks. The individuals select which group they want to be in, and you can leave anytime you want, if you find someone willing to take you in. You can imagine people fighting to be with people who have an altruistic and successful reputation, and since there is a limit, the altruistic are more likely to find each other and have more opportunity to succeed and breed.

I do not think the “problem” or “question” has been well formed. Is gene selection occurring at the genetic, individual, kin, group, species, or planetary level? The genes are only a memory of what chemical interactions exploit energy resources the fastest, emitting as much entropy as possible to the universe. Genes do not exert forces of their own accord, but exist as a result of what the environment forces. If the genes only appear selfish because of what the environment forces with potentials, I question if there are any other forces from the genetic all the way to the planetary level that can or should be viewed as either selfish or altruistic. This is assigning thought as a force as if it is independent of potential and kinetic energy sources which are the only cause of all forces. Thought is a physical process subject to dynamics like everything else, not something mystical. The environment is following the physical potential gradients that release heat and thereby entropy to the universe. The moon might be the pre-existing order that makes Earth different, giving rise to tidal flows where some of the earliest life is known to have lived, and giving rise to a constantly-churning mantel that gives rise to ore concentrations and veins that modern economies depend on. The odd tilt of the earth’s axis, also probably a result of the collision that created the moon gives rises to seasons and wind complexities which are another source of decreased entropy compared to Mars et al. So not only the Sun’s energy, but the moon’s lower-entropy may be giving rise to life (it’s mere existence is like a gas constantly having more molecules forced to one side of a box which is lower entropy).

This is why everything in the above discussion appears vacuous. There is not any terminology being used that I can grab on to and falsify or subject to observation. It’s like trying to argue about the old and discredited mind-body problem. The mind is a result the body. Selection is the result of the flow of energy, not a force in and of itself. Genes, groups, altruism, and selfishness are results to be observed, not causes to which forces can be assigned. The Sun and moon seem to be like a father and mother.  One gives the energy and the other replenishes the order.  If the moon ceased to exist and the axis was straight, things might more quickly devolve to a more stable and boring state.

Our economic machine is on a path towards more machines and less biology. Wikipedia says the species extinction rate is 1,000 to 10,000 times the background rate. Muscle, brains, and photosynthesis are being rapidly replaced in their relevance to the economic machine due to oxygen being removed from metal and metalloid ores, creating far stronger bonds which means lower entropy. The selection of which bonds are the strongest is limited compared to the possibilities, so they appear as copies and pseudo-copies. DNA crystals are pretty strong. Copies are lower entropy, but copies may be a side effect of the increasing density of the mass on Earth (stronger bonds result in a lower volume of the mass constituents, which also means lower entropy … see the specific entropy of the elements involved, or look up how the entropy of solids is calculated).
Since the use of rocks, people who utilized the stronger bonds were “economically” more viable than those who did not. We normally view this as simply stronger shells and teeth. Now there is steel, concrete, carbon fiber, and nanotubes available for structures. Refined metals and silicon are replacing the ores that had oxygen attached and they are far and away better at not only structural strength, but in moving matter (electrical motors are about 200x more economically efficient than muscle), thinking about how to move matter more efficiently (CPU’s based on silicon need to move and compute with electrons whereas brains depend on ions and molecules weight 50,000 to 1,000,000 times more), and acquiring the energy to do it (silicon solar cells are 20x more efficient per surface area than photosynthesis).
So maybe the moon is keeping things unstable so that matter on Earth can become more dense. The Earth is an open thermodynamic system, emitting more entropy via 17 photons of low energy and in random directions for each photon from the Sun’s direction. Isolated systems having increasing entropy, but open systems like the Earth have been known since the 1960’s to be capable of increasing order (lower and lower entropy). If this is the case, what is the limit to the order that can be extracted from the moon’s disturbances? It may be that the 75% missing dark matter in the universe is the result of Dyson Sphere’s of “life” capturing all the light from enclosed Stars, turning the excess energy into local matter. The Universe on an expanding basis BTW is not increasing in entropy. This has been known even before the COBE observations. See the highly respected 1970’s book “The first 3 minutes” by Weinberg. This means on a local volume basis, entropy must be decreasing. Gravitational systems (mass concentrations) seem to be emitting the entropy needed for space to expand. Isolated systems with increasing entropy seem to be merely an engineering ideal, not to be used on a cosmological basis. I mention this because there is often the argument that life could not decrease entropy because it can’t possibly be violating the “entropy always increases” law. Entropy is always emitted, not exactly “increasing” on an Earth-wide basis, and definitely not (by theory and observation) on a Universal basis. You can measure it here on Earth by following the commodities and it seems to me to be decreasing as the excess entropy is emitted.
Spontaneous negative entropy reactions can occur when the internal energy decrease is greater than the negative dS*T.  dG=dU-dST is spontaneous if dG is negative. 

The Earth-moon interaction that results in a depletion of Earth's rotational free energy appears to do this. The Earth is putting the moon into a higher orbit, 3.78 cm per year (1.37E19 Joules), at a cost of rotational energy.  The amount of rotational energy lost from the Earth is more than this as there are additional friction losses generating heat on Earth. 

Consider the dU lost from Earth's water and air as the Earth's rotation rate slows.  Applying rotational mechanics for a spherical solid and spherical shell, I get that 0.00038 of the energy sent to the moon is being lost from the oceans' rotational energy (the rest is in the mantle and core). There is a force*distance on the water over and above the friction heat that is generated.  Looking at Gibb's free energy equation and using 270 K, this is a maximum potential entropy reduction of 330,000 J/K per second. I get 1,260 J/K per second for the air mass. They are more than this as the Earth's core does not have the same reduction in rotational velocity, and I assumed uniform distribution of Earth's mass when it actually concentrates giving it a smaller moment of inertia. 

There is a velocity increase in the moon, but I calculated that to be only 3 J/s. The real energy cost appears to be in getting it into the higher orbit.

Isaac Asimov said the tides were required to get life on land. It also churns the mantle that I think is a major source of the veins and ore concentrations (lower entropy) that modern economic life relies on.  It is the original cause of the Earth's tilt which causes the seasons which is another source of periodic disturbance (external force) that makes the Earth a bit different. I can imagine life would get boring more quickly if the seasons, tides, and mantle churning stopped. 

The rotational energy lost in the interior of the Earth could not contribute to life except by churning the mantle which could have allowed more "hot vents" and such.  But it also resulted in a more orderly arrangement of ores, veins, etc that modern economies tap into at a great savings compared to if the resources were evenly distributed in the mantle.   

The movement of commodities on Earth may also lower entropy.  For example, metals and metalloids (especially silicon needed for solar cells and CPUs) are much stronger bonds than the "oxygenated" ores, which means they are lower molar specific entropy, at least for the iron and silicon atoms. But the CO2 released negates this. Even if captured back to a fossil fuel, more O2 in the atmosphere from the original Fe2O3 or SiO2 has enough entropy to negate my point.  Is concrete lower entropy than the raw materials?  

We're depleting the entropy caused by the non-random geographical distribution of ores in nature (although I'm not sure roads and building are less order).  But the geographical re-distribution change in entropy should be small compared to the chemical bond differences. 

Biology is apparently being replaced by these stronger, denser, bonds.  Interestingly, moving matter, acquiring sun energy, and thinking about how to most efficiently do it are greatly improved by making use of the stronger, lower specific entropy bonds: electrical motors, silicon solar cells (20x more efficient than photosynthesis), and CPUs (electrons weigh 50,000 times less than ions).  Not to mention stronger structures, and even metal-air batteries may replace fossil fuel for energy storage.  It's not just bones and teeth. 

Selection is not a force. Genes are just the memory of what the environment found. Arguments over gene, individual, kin, and group selection are errant and non-physical, like the old mind-body discussions.

The entropy of the universe on a comoving volume (expanding volume) basis is constant.  See Weinberg's "First Three Minutes" book.  Also, since there is not a heat transfer on cosmological scale, there is no entropy transfer, so constant entropy is a direct observation.  This means entropy is required to decrease on a fixed-volume basis.  My view is that gravitational systems (mass concentrations) must be releasing entropy to the universe "so that it can expand."  If life became so advanced in efficiency and reducing the rate of entropy released, would the universe expand more slowly?  Is dark matter Dyson spheres converting all the starlight they surround to mass?
post to physics stack exchange

The moon's orbit is increasing 3.78 cm/year due to the faster spinning Earth and tides pulling on it. The Earth slows down 15 microseconds/year. From this I've estimated (assuming the core's rotation reduces as much as the mantle and an even distribution of mass) there is 10 times more heat from friction in the tides, mantel, and core than the amount of internal energy from Earth's decreased rotation that is transferred to lift the moon. The resulting heating does not raise Earth's temperature much, as it is constantly dissipated, bringing it back down to the Sun's heating (the Sun heats the Earth something like 10,000 times more than the rotational heat). This heating is not an offset for the internal energy transferred to the moon. I might have errors in these estimates, but it does not change my question.
When Gibbs free energy (Gibbs=U+pV-TS) is negative, spontaneous reactions can occur even if entropy is reduced. I believe this is how crystals and/or snowflakes form, losing internal rotational energy that is greater than the TdS decrease. An internal energy loss gives a negative Gibbs free energy for the Earth (on open thermodynamic system), and there is not a temperature increase directly connected to the internal energy loss, so it seems the Earth can have some of its entropy decreased by the presence of the moon, if the correct "things" are in place (chemical or mass distribution).
Asimov said life could not have made it to land without tides, and modern economics depends heavily on the uneven distribution (lower entropy) of ores and veins, a lot of which I believe is the result of the moon keeping the mantel more active. The seasons and complex but not random wind patterns also seem to benefit life.
Since the Earth is an open system, it can have a decrease in Entropy. Daniel Styer estimates life decreases entropy on Earth about 300 J/K per second. If the water and air portion of the lost internal energy were converted to lowering entropy at 300 K, I get 300,000 J/K per second.
Compared to if there was not a collision that created the moon, how do you estimate the amount of entropy reduction due to 1) tides not being an even distribution of the water 2) other mass not distributed as evenly as it might have been 3) the axis tilt?
Does all that internal energy loss HAVE to be balanced by a T*S decrease? If T is so constant, is it a pure S decrease?

Many have said life does not violate the 2nd law because the Earth emits so much entropy. The presence of the moon seems to have had a huge beneficial impact for life on Earth from an "information-type" of effect (forced oscillations from the Earth's own internal energy). If the moon is decreasing entropy on Earth from this effect did this make life a lot more probable instead of just possible?

No comments:

Post a Comment