At Big Think, there was a discussion between cosmologists Ethan Siegel and Lee Smolin on whether we are approaching quantum gravity all wrong:
Gravitation, governed by General Relativity, and the Standard Model, governed by quantum physics, are fundamentally incompatible. It’s possible, however, that the incompletenesses plaguing both theories are related, and that by completing both, together, we may discover quantum gravity. Lee Smolin, a pioneer in that endeavor, shares his thoughts about how we might find the best way forward to solve this conundrum.
Ethan Siegel, “Are we approaching quantum gravity all wrong?” at Big Think (September 16, 2021)
Experimental physicist Rob Sheldon responds:
It’s a rambling interview that only a physics geek will love, but I had to reprint this dialogue, because it captures so much of what ID is about:
“Ethan Siegel: …So far, everyone I know who’s tried to come up with a concept of “gravity is emergent” or “space is emergent” or some other quantity that we normally look at as fundamental is in fact emergent, takes something that in typical physics thought we view as emergent and makes that fundamental. I would say the typical view of physics is that entropy is an emergent property that you can calculate based on, say, the microscopic quantum state of all the particles aggregated together. Are you basically doing something similar to that, except with this thing you define as “variety” instead of entropy?
Lee Smolin: Roughly speaking yes, but that’s a long discussion. Because the role of entropy in cosmological theory is something we have to get our heads straight about. “
Translating, Ethan is saying that the old 20th century materialism that says “entropy” or “information” emerges from the particles is being replaced by a 21st century view that “entropy” or “information” is fundamental and the material particles emerge from the immaterial field. Recall that the late John Wheeler coined “it from bit”, that matter proceeds from information. Lee Smolin agrees that his “variety” theory is of the 21st century, post-materialism type.
Rob Sheldon is the author of Genesis: The Long Ascent and The Long Ascent, Volume II
as to:
Not only is “entropy” or “information” fundamental in the 21st century view of physics, but in quantum information theory it is now held that “we wouldn’t say entropy is a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.”,,,
And as the following 2011 article similarly stated, “In measuring entropy, one should bear in mind that an object does not have a certain amount of entropy per se, instead an object’s entropy is always dependent on the observer. ”
Perhaps the clearest way to experimentally demonstrate that “entropy is (not) a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.” is with the quantum Zeno effect.
With the quantum Zeno effect we find that “an unstable particle, if observed continuously, will never decay.”
The reason why I am very impressed with the preceding experiments demonstrating that “entropy is (not) a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system” is because entropy is very foundational in our scientific descriptions of the world.
As the following article states, “Entropy explains time; it explains every possible action in the universe;,,”,, “Even gravity,,,, can be expressed as a consequence of the law of entropy.,,,”
On top of the fact that “(Entropy) explains time; it explains every possible action in the universe”, entropy is also, by a very wide margin, the most finely tuned of the initial conditions of the Big Bang. Finely tuned to an almost incomprehensible degree of precision, 1 part in 10 to the 10 to the 123rd power. As Roger Penrose himself stated that, “This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.”
In the following video, Dr, Bruce Gordon gives us a small glimpse as to just how enormous that number truly is. Dr. Gordon states, “you would need a hundred million, trillion, trillion, trillion, universes our size, with a zero on every proton and neutron in all of those universes just to write out this number. That is how fine tuned the initial entropy of our universe is.”
In fact, entropy is also the primary reason why our own material, temporal, bodies grow old and eventually die in this universe,,,
Thus, considering entropy’s central importance in scientific explanation, (as well as in our own lives), the statement “we wouldn’t say entropy is a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.” is just fascinating!
Why in blue blazes should the finely tuned entropic actions of the universe, entropic actions which also happen to explain time itself, and is the primary reason why our material bodies grow old and die in this universe, even care if I myself am consciously observing them, (and/or ‘describing’ them), or not unless the immaterial mind really is more foundational to reality than the finely tuned 1 in 10^10^123 entropy of the universe is?
To state the glaringly obvious implication of all this, this finding of entropy being “a property of an observer who describes a system” is very friendly to a Mind First, and/or to a Theistic view of reality and is very antagonistic to the atheism of Darwistist’s materialistic view of reality.
For instance Romans chapter 8: verses 20 and 21 itself states, “For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.”
Shoot, the preceding Bible verse is all but a direct scientific prediction, via two thousands years ago, that “we wouldn’t say entropy is a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.”
Supplemental notes as to how entropy, information, and life are related
Sept. 2020
https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/researchers-have-been-confirming-quantum-entanglement-in-brain-tissue/#comment-713172