Ok, I might be quite wrong on that, given the fact that I am a tad drunk. But here it goes. First law of thermodynamics says that no energy is created nor destroyed, but it is always transformed. That is really basic and understandable. You eat sugar, you get energy to make your body work. Now, what is, in fact, energy? When I type the keystrokes send electronic signals to my computer. When I use a pencil some of its mass is transfered to the paper. But what about knowledge? When someone composes a song this person is using his/her energy on the said task. Therefore, the persons transforms energy into brain activity. But how much of the energy that powered the brain is inside the music? Not on its actual physical representation (of notes written on a paper, data burnt into a cd… you name it)? Knowledge and culture are a result of a transformation of energy made inside the human brain, right? So… is there a limited amount of knowledge / culture we can produce?
Pronfroundly quemeshtion my drank frindo.
This topic is dealt with all the time in the world of computer science, where a somewhat nebulous (at least to my mechanical mind) concept of “information” and entropy are married and mired together and dealt with. My wild ass guess is that quantifying the amount of energy contained in the “composition” of a song is in the order of a few picojoules, whilst it probably takes may thousands of calories to keep that composing brain humming along over the course of a few days/weeks it takes to compose said song. In other words, biological systems are incredibly inefficient machines while converting any kind of energy into another type of energy. Par for the cousre my friend.
Thanks for stepping in, The Niply Elder. I’d already done my First Law of Thermodynamics addressing for the week. Also, the First Law says energy is conserved. (Either that or “Allow no human to come to harm.” I always get those mixed up.) Not “Is always transformed.”
Oops <nitpick>- it’s “Do not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.”
David Attwell, if you’re lucky, might be a good drinking partner:
I
[Neuron
6 September 2012, Vol.75(5):762–777, doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2012.08.019
“Synaptic Energy Use and Supply”
Julia J. Harris, Renaud Jolivet, David Attwell](Synaptic Energy Use and Supply - ScienceDirect)
A relatively recent overview. See in particular the section “The Energy Cost of Synaptically Transmitting One Bit of Information.” Complete article on line.
II
[Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2001) 21, 1133–1145; doi:10.1097/00004647-200110000-00001
“An Energy Budget for Signaling in the Grey Matter of the Brain”
David Attwell and Simon B Laughlin](www.nature.com/jcbfm/journal/v21/n10/full/9591146a.html)
Complete article online.
ETA: FTR, duck legs and many fruits are also conserved.
From an energy perspective, the creation of the music is a side effect of the expenditure of energy in the brain. You know you’ve written a song, but the universe only knows that you’ve transformed some glucose into electrical impulses and ultimately into heat.
In a theoretical sense, yes. For example, we can’t simulate the entire universe (i.e. create a model that captures every feature of the evolving universe) because that would require more energy than is contained in the universe itself.
Which John Sladek parsed correctly in “Broot Force”:
Interesting. I thought at first this was a misunderstanding of duck leg confit, but I see many recipes that call for a duck leg conserved in its own juice. Thanks for the new word.
Assuming a heat death of the universe, that means all things are finite as everything is dissipated into individual molecules that cannot have heat, or even information. Even assuming an initially infinite universe, any local section of it will suffer this fate. But this is meaningless to apply to human culture, which is more precipitously finite.
only so much time so there is a limit.
also much done is derivative.
Yeah, I wanted to keep it short - like the First Law of Thermodynamics. I bet those inhabitants of that fictional universe would have kept it short as well, but for different reasons perhaps. Not to nitpick the great Asimov, but isn’t what he wrote encompassed by what I did?
This. Nebulous really means ‘only in what-if thought experiments’ Treat it like there is no marriage between information and energy …
Entropy then has two different meanings, 1. the amount of information 2. the loss of energy from systems (eg from a planet) … But they are not the same thing. Its Imaginary what-if thoughts to work on the basis they are.