universe as Babel
If we think of the universe as continuous information out of which we attempt to make meaning we can recognize its infinite characteristics. Using quantum language, if the universe is made of qubits, quantum entangled bits, that are basically undetectable or at least "unknowable", but still and always present then it is that the world is theoretically knowable but physically unknowable. Unless, we get to the point where we can "know" qubits.
Glick says that if we had a quantum computer, we could not watch its computing functions but could only look at its "output". In the quantum world, the object of observation is always disrupted by the observer.
So, we live in a quantum world fill with ultimately un-measurable phenomena that we can kind of measure or we can pretend we measured or we can probably measure. All the world's information is within these qubits and all we can do is deduce parts of the information. It's like we are digital processors in an analog world. We keep "subtracting" pieces from the continuous flow. And from those pieces attempt to determine what the continuous flow is.
In Deutsch's The Beginning of Infinity, he is making the claim that the universe is infinite and we will keep on making inroads into that infinity, but obviously we will never know it all (by definition, that's what infinite means).
So is knowledge of The Information really just a human imposed understanding of a chaotic and random "mess"?
Is this what Borges was getting at in his story, "The Library of Babel?"
If information is infinite, what can we know?
As we get more and more information (and more and more access--thank you Google), does it get harder and harder to figure out what's the important or meaningful information?
Is there ever too much information? If so, when?
Glick writes, "Forgetting used to be a failing, a waste, a sign of senility. Now it takes effort. It may be as important as remembering." (p. 407). Is that true?
We use "filters" to get through all this information. One of the main filters is Google. And Google's filtering mechanism is basically that which has the most links to it is the most important? The most important what?
Glick says that if we had a quantum computer, we could not watch its computing functions but could only look at its "output". In the quantum world, the object of observation is always disrupted by the observer.
So, we live in a quantum world fill with ultimately un-measurable phenomena that we can kind of measure or we can pretend we measured or we can probably measure. All the world's information is within these qubits and all we can do is deduce parts of the information. It's like we are digital processors in an analog world. We keep "subtracting" pieces from the continuous flow. And from those pieces attempt to determine what the continuous flow is.
In Deutsch's The Beginning of Infinity, he is making the claim that the universe is infinite and we will keep on making inroads into that infinity, but obviously we will never know it all (by definition, that's what infinite means).
So is knowledge of The Information really just a human imposed understanding of a chaotic and random "mess"?
Is this what Borges was getting at in his story, "The Library of Babel?"
If information is infinite, what can we know?
As we get more and more information (and more and more access--thank you Google), does it get harder and harder to figure out what's the important or meaningful information?
Is there ever too much information? If so, when?
Glick writes, "Forgetting used to be a failing, a waste, a sign of senility. Now it takes effort. It may be as important as remembering." (p. 407). Is that true?
We use "filters" to get through all this information. One of the main filters is Google. And Google's filtering mechanism is basically that which has the most links to it is the most important? The most important what?
Comments
Post a Comment