4 ms·
A raindrop does not have that much information in it. A raindrop only has some simple function that completely describes it, and this function likely has only s
by markessien 18y ago
A raindrop does not have that much information in it. A raindrop only has some simple function that completely describes it, and this function likely has only some bytes. You can't take any information out of a raindrop, because the particles within it are random.
A raindrop is made up of a certain number of atoms, but these atoms are all the same, and cannot store any information. To store information, you need items that are dissimilar to each other. So the comparisons he makes are not correct.
- celoyd 18y agoAs you say, the particles are random(ish), and this is exactly what makes them hard to describe completely with a simple function. "Random" means "the simplest description of it is the literal one", and the literal description of the position, orientation and motion of that many water molecules is a lot of information. If raindrops were perfect crystals at absolute zero (and there were only one isotope each of hydrogen and oxygen), they would be a lot less information in them.
- markessien 18y agoYou are looking at things backwards. If you try to describe a raindrop by mapping the position of every single atom or molecule, you are creating information. But the raindrop itself does not contain any information, because it is completely random. It has no memory, and so cannot store information. There is a very small amount of information in a raindrop, no matter how complex it is from the molecular structure. The entire argument is flawed. It's based on a completely wrong premise - information is not the same thing as structure. I can't explain this any better, you will need a leap of intuition to understand what I mean, but when you get it, it will be obvious.