[PianoBlack]

Here's an interesting article by Freeman Dyson, Professor of Physics at Princeton University: Is Life Digital or Analog?

In the very very long run (think dead-cold expanding universe), it seems that analog lifeforms hypothetically will survive while digital life will be long gone...

Kinda answers the question of why LPs are still around. Sorta.

But seriously, an fascinating easy to read article not only on the feasibility of survival but also of how humans could be digital or analog or both.

 

[Neruda]

oh yeah? oh yeah? Well Richard Dawkins believes that everything in the universe is composed of nothing but digital information.

he's probably right too, but I haven't done any research on the subject.

 

[PianoBlack]

Quote:

Well Richard Dawkins believes that everything in the universe is composed of nothing but digital information.

Oh great. That means the whole universe is eventually going to hell...
Here's what he said about all stuff in digital bits being unable to survive forever:
Quote:

If any material system, living or dead, is finite, it will have only a finite set of accessible quantum states. A finite subset of these states will be ground-states with precisely equal energy, and all other states will have energies separated from the ground-states by a finite energy-gap. If the system could live for ever, the temperature would ultimately become much lower than the energy-gap, and the states above the gap would become inaccessible. From that time on, the system could no longer emit or absorb energy. It could store a certain amount of information in its permanently frozen ground states, but it could not process the information. It would be, according to our definition, dead. ... [The] argument is valid for any system that stores information in devices confined within a volume of fixed size as time goes on. It is valid for any system that processes information digitally, using discrete states as carriers of information. In a digital system, the energy gap between discrete states remains fixed as the temperature goes to zero, and the system ceases to operate when the temperature is much lower than the energy gap.

But hey this is the best part:
Quote:

So it was unexpected to find that under very general conditions, analog life has a better chance of surviving than digital life. Perhaps this implies that when the time comes for us to adapt ourselves to a cold universe and abandon our extravagant flesh-and-blood habits, we should upload ourselves to black clouds in space rather than download ourselves to silicon chips in a computer center. If I had to choose, I would go for the black cloud every time.

kudos to anyone who got this far...

 

[mbriant]

Quote:

kudos to anyone who got this far...

I got that far.

I'm not quite sure where I am however.

 

[daycart1]

This is interesting! In everyday contexts, the distinction between what is analog and what is digital is pretty easy to make out. But in the contexts discussed in the article, definitions are hard to come by and the distinction breaks down.
Here is an approach to the question: consider an analog clock face controlled by a digital chip. Is the device analog or digital? This is a crude example since it mixes the two, but more complex examples make the point, I think.

 

[Beagle]

I think Captain Beefheart summed it up best...

"The stars are matter, we are matter...but it doesn't matter"

 

[acidtripwow]

I think women are digital while men are analog and that's why we're so different. Just a thought...

 

[thomas]

Quote:

The number of quantum states becomes so large that classical mechanics becomes exact.

If you increase the resolution of digital high enough, it is essentially analog.

Which is why digital (if record companies ever release it, and consumers ever buy it) will eventually store the exact same information found in the master tapes, yet have none of the analog disadvantages...


And its funny that we're talking about survival at the end of the universe, trillions of years away... A recent UN report stated that the next 30 years will determine if we survive- if people continue ignoring the environment, calling it a "personal virtue" and dropping out of international agreements like kyoto in favour of SUV's and the energy lobby, we won't be around 200 years from now, much less 100000000000000 years

 

[PianoBlack]

Quote:

Originally posted by acidtripwow I think women are digital while men are analog and that's why we're so different. Just a thought...

A tangential addendum to that would be:
In the mythical representation of the genders (read: Joseph Campbell), the feminine is almost consistently portrayed as round, circular... From Mother Earth to pregnancy, the general idea of the female sex is a non-direct but nevertheless forceful presence.

The male on the other hand is depicted with phallic symbolisms: Zeus and his lightning bolts. In fact, in Greek mythology, the women and the men worked together to further progress: take many of the early dictatorial father gods (Kronos etc.). Their wives (Rhea?) urged their sons to usurp their father's hold on power, which the sons did appropriately.

So what I'm suggesting (nonsensically) is that the women appears as 0s and the men as 1s, thus working together to create a digital signal...

hehehe.

Quote:

Originally posted by thomas If you increase the resolution of digital high enough, it is essentially analog. Which is why digital (if record companies ever release it, and consumers ever buy it) will eventually store the exact same information found in the master tapes, yet have none of the analog disadvantages...

I definitely don't know much about digital versus electronic circuitry, but I'm puzzled by your first statement. No matter how high the digital resolution is, won't the devices reading them still perform basic digital functions and thus still be dictated by digital limitations? <--ramblings of the confused.

Quote:

Originally posted by thomas And its funny that we're talking about survival at the end of the universe, trillions of years away... A recent UN report stated that the next 30 years will determine if we survive- if people continue ignoring the environment, calling it a "personal virtue" and dropping out of international agreements like kyoto in favour of SUV's and the energy lobby, we won't be around 200 years from now, much less 100000000000000 years

When have scientists ever talked about the practical? Hmmm? Yes, I know that there is a high chancec that I'll live long enough to see the world end.

Kinda reminds of the Twilight Zonish story about a guy who can't buy insurance (from a bug-free insurance uber-computer) because when he dies, the world ends. ...




right...

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally posted by thomas If you increase the resolution of digital high enough, it is essentially analog

True enough. If you have a connect-the-dots picture and you have enough dots, it is the picture.

 

[gerG]

He lost me. I can't think of anything that we refer to analog which would not fit the definition of "digital" if I zoomed in far enough. His reference to finite quantum states is how matter works anyway, so maybe he just proved that analog is only a descriptive, and when the clock runs down and potential differences cease to exist, the game is over. Of course, the laws of physics will probably shift by then anyway. Nature is a mother.


gerG

 

[Neruda]

Quote:

Originally posted by thomas And its funny that we're talking about survival at the end of the universe, trillions of years away... A recent UN report stated that the next 30 years will determine if we survive- if people continue ignoring the environment, calling it a "personal virtue" and dropping out of international agreements like kyoto in favour of SUV's and the energy lobby, we won't be around 200 years from now, much less 100000000000000 years

not suprised.

 

[thomas]

Quote:

definitely don't know much about digital versus electronic circuitry, but I'm puzzled by your first statement. No matter how high the digital resolution is, won't the devices reading them still perform basic digital functions and thus still be dictated by digital limitations? <--ramblings of the confused.

I'm not an expert here, and a lot of that article doesn't make sense to me either... but as greg/beagle said, in anything analog, there are still finite steps- energy can only exist in discrete quantites, matter can only exist in certain states- so nothing is totally continuous, or "analog"... Same with master tapes or LP's, there are only certain number of magnetic domains/molecules of vinyl that "round" off a trulely analog signal...

As for the actual processing of information, there are differances in the way we do it, but i don't know enough about it... But an "analog" dust cloud, simply obaying "analog" physics laws, really be considered a life form?!?

 

[PianoBlack]

Quote:

Originally posted by thomas As for the actual processing of information, there are differances in the way we do it, but i don't know enough about it... But an "analog" dust cloud, simply obaying "analog" physics laws, really be considered a life form?!?

Mmhmm...not too sure how far we can scientophilosophize but Dyson has a disclaimer:
Quote:

For the purposes of this discussion, life is defined as a material system that can acquire, store, process, and use information to organize its activities. In this broad view, the essence of life is information, but information is not synonymous with life. To be alive, a system must not only hold information but process and use it. It is the active use of information, and not the passive storage, that constitutes life.

And hey,
Quote:

Originally posted by Greg Freeman He lost me. I can't think of anything that we refer to analog which would not fit the definition of "digital" if I zoomed in far enough. His reference to finite quantum states is how matter works anyway, so maybe he just proved that analog is only a descriptive, and when the clock runs down and potential differences cease to exist, the game is over. Of course, the laws of physics will probably shift by then anyway. Nature is a mother.

so true. that's pretty much what I got out of it too: it's kind of saying when we die, are we more dead or less dead?