[Jukia]

Originally Posted by JWStipple

No, entropy in information theory is entirely different than entropy in thermodynamics:



There is no attempt whatsoever to suggest that information can or should increase or decrease...that there is any kind of one-way flow associated with this in the same way there's a one-way flow in thermodynamics.

All tripe has managed to do here is pile yet another misunderstanding on top of all his other misunderstandings in order to keep his belief system from imploding.

But the word is the same, and Pastor Bob questioned the Ph.D.'s
paper, and Stripe posts all this stuff all the time. Goodness that should be enough for everyone.
Stripe is way too busy posting to do any real analysis other than "guess". You cannot expect him to understand the math as well.

[JWStipple]

I hear ya, Jukia. It's somewhat unfortunate, as far as this kind of debate is concerned, that they used the same word. On the other hand, once one understands how the word is used, there's a nuanced conceptual link that actually makes the word "entropy" a good choice. tripe is outrageously incompetent at nuance of any kind or shape.

FROM: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_entropy

Entropy is a measure of disorder, or more precisely unpredictability. For example, a series of coin tosses with a fair coin has maximum entropy, since there is no way to predict what will come next. A string of coin tosses with a two-headed coin has zero entropy, since the coin will always come up heads. Most collections of data in the real world lie somewhere in between.

English text has fairly low entropy. In other words, it is fairly predictable. Even if we don't know exactly what is going to come next, we can be fairly certain that, for example, there will be many more e's than z's, or that the combination 'qu' will be much more common than any other combination with a 'q' in it and the combination 'th' will be more common than any of them. Uncompressed, English text has about one bit of entropy for each byte (eight bits) of message.

If a compression scheme is lossless—that is, you can always recover the entire original message by uncompressing—then a compressed message has the same total entropy as the original, but in fewer bits. That is, it has more entropy per bit. This means a compressed message is more unpredictable, which is why messages are often compressed before being encrypted. Shannon's source coding theorem says (roughly) that a lossless compression scheme cannot compress messages, on average, to have more than one bit of entropy per bit of message. The entropy of a message is in a certain sense a measure of how much information it really contains.

Shannon's theorem also implies that no lossless compression scheme can compress all messages. If some messages come out smaller, at least one must come out larger. In the real world, this is not a problem, because we are generally only interested in compressing certain messages, for example English documents as opposed to random bytes, and don't care if our compressor makes random messages larger.

So...uh...where does it say anything at all in here about whether information can increase or decrease?

Nowhere...because it has NOTHING to do with this aspect of information theory.

The definition for "information", provided by and for information theory, has only one purpose: to disambiguate the term for use in calculating the minimum amount of information needed to maintain the integrity of information transmission in communication.

That's all. That's it. If tripe says there's anymore to it, he's bluffing utterly and completely. A while back, I would write that off as simple ignorance. We know tripe by now, and know that he's deliberately and relentlessly dishonest.

The information theory that's now being examined in physics is fundamentally different.

[DavisBJ]

Originally Posted by Stripe

Nobody should try to counter his work because his work does not address a legitimate challenge.

Then you think that Tom from Mabank was just blowing hot air when he specifically said the “Second Law” precluded evolution?

[Yorzhik]

The great thing about entropy is that evolution doesn't work given either type, be it information or energy.

Even worse, Shannon doesn't cover all the aspects of information that makes life work, but evolution doesn't even work given Shannon information either.

What we can count on is BJ continuing to be belligerent, and JW continuing to be a clown. Honestly, if BJ could relax I'd like to discuss this with him. And it'd be nice for JW to chip in, too, just because we like watching a pompous *** parade around in a kiddie car.

[JWStipple]

The great thing about entropy is that evolution doesn't work given either type, be it information or energy.

That's completely and utterly untrue...and only someone who doesn't understand either kind of entropy would say such a thing. And only a dishonest person would continue to insist upon these kinds of un-truths...because the information that would correct them is easily and widely available.

Even worse, Shannon doesn't cover all the aspects of information that makes life work, but evolution doesn't even work given Shannon information either.

Again...completely and utterly un-true. Only a dishonest person wouldn't realize it.

What we can count on is BJ continuing to be belligerent, and JW continuing to be a clown. Honestly, if BJ could relax I'd like to discuss this with him. And it'd be nice for JW to chip in, too, just because we like watching a pompous *** parade around in a kiddie car.

Typical ignorant, dishonest creationist posturing.

Honesty and truth aren't the same thing, of course...but they're most certainly kissin' cousins. It completely amazes me how someone could assert that they're on the side of truth...and yet be so completely dishonest. Utterly discredits their entire belief system...and the entire process they use to arrive at their hopelessly distorted version of "truth".

[Silent Hunter]

Originally Posted by Silent Hunter

So? You're making NO sense. Information is added to the genome exactly according to the laws of thermodynamics as far as anyone knows.

Heat? Isn't entropy (at least the way theists use it) about increasing disorder. Why don't you pick an argument and stick with it instead of equivocating the 2nd Law.

Nothing about anything I've said makes evolution "unworkable." That there are things we don't presently know (about a lot of things) doesn't mean godidit by default.

You're determined to ignore it, aren't ya? You use your invisible friend to fill gaps in our knowledge which isn't exactly honest knowing how many gaps he/she/it used to fill.

[DavisBJ]

Originally Posted by Stripe

Yes. There is Shannon's information entropy that is of the same form as thermodynamics.

I agree that the forms are similar, and Frank Lambert identifies that as one of the reasons the word “entropy” got assigned to two similar looking, but in fact different animals.

But it's important to know the definition of information that is important to the life of an organism. Shannon information doesn't cover that.

Hey, your first word in your reply was “Yes” – you say that there is “specific proof that information inevitably decreases”. But then your second sentence correctly acknowledges that it is only the form of the two types of entropy that are similar. And then in your final two statements you explicitly say that Shannon information doesn’t cover the information that is important to the life of an organism.

So once again you claim there is a specific proof that information theory kills evolution, but you then turn right around and mention two things that are not those killer ideas. Please don’t make us go through another series of requests for this evolution killing proof. Have the pleasure of showing that you really have a silver bullet, and are competent to lay us low with it. Don’t kill us with post after post of hand-waving and generalities. Put us out of our misery, quickly and mercifully.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by DavisBJ

Then you think that TomfromMabank was just blowing hot air when he specifically said the “Second Law” precluded evolution?

Tom might be able to clear his discussion with you up.

Originally Posted by Yorzhik

The great thing about entropy is that evolution doesn't work given either type, be it information or energy.

What we can count on is BJ continuing to be belligerent, and JW continuing to be a clown. Honestly, if BJ could relax I'd like to discuss this with him. And it'd be nice for JW to chip in, too, just because we like watching a pompous *** parade around in a kiddie car.

Noguru can join in too .. remember he has never met a YEC he is not more well informed than.

[Yorzhik]

Originally Posted by JWStipple

That's completely and utterly untrue...and only someone who doesn't understand either kind of entropy would say such a thing. And only a dishonest person would continue to insist upon these kinds of un-truths...because the information that would correct them is easily and widely available.

That's completely and utterly untrue...and only someone who doesn't understand either kind of entropy would say such a thing. And only a dishonest person would continue to insist upon these kinds of un-truths...because the information that would correct them is easily and widely available.

Again...completely and utterly un-true. Only a dishonest person wouldn't realize it.

Again...completely and utterly un-true. Only a dishonest person wouldn't realize it.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by Silent Hunter

Heat? Isn't entropy about increasing disorder.

Yes. And thermodynamics is about heat. And information is about intelligent arrangements of matter or energy.

Try to keep up.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by DavisBJ

Is there any equivalent specific proof that information inevitably decreases?

Originally Posted by DavisBJ

...you claim there is a specific proof that information theory kills evolution

Wow. You move those goalposts so easily. Do you have them on rails?

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by Yorzhik

That's completely and utterly untrue...and only someone who doesn't understand either kind of entropy would say such a thing. And only a dishonest person would continue to insist upon these kinds of un-truths...because the information that would correct them is easily and widely available. Again...completely and utterly un-true. Only a dishonest person wouldn't realize it.

Spittle.

[Silent Hunter]

Originally Posted by Stripe

Yes. And thermodynamics is about heat. And information is about intelligent arrangements of matter or energy.

Intelligence isn’t necessary in order for information to be present.

Try to keep up.

You’re confused.

[JWStipple]

Yorz has no other choice but to c&p my words...'cuz he knows that he doesn't have any arguments of his own.

[Stripe]

Originally Posted by Silent Hunter

Intelligence isn’t necessary in order for information to be present.

Yeah .. look how well ordered your posts are.