19 ms·
What is entropy? A measure of just how little we know
- widea 2y agoEntropy, a measure of freedom in a contained environment.
- kqr 2y ago> As physicists have worked to unite seemingly disparate fields over the past century, they have cast entropy in a new light — turning the microscope back on the seer and shifting the notion of disorder to one of ignorance. Entropy is seen not as a property intrinsic to a system but as one that’s relative to an observer who interacts with that system. Maybe I have the benefit of giant shoulders, but this seems like a fairly mundane observation. High-entropy states are those macrostates which have many corresponding microstates. The classification of several microstates into the same macrostate, is this not a distinctly observer-centred function? I.e. if I consider 5 or 6 to be essentially the same outcome of the die, then that will be a more probable (higher-entropy) outcome. But that's just due to my classification, not inherent to the system!
- niemandhier 2y agoIn physics the requirement for a valid changing the frame of reference is, that the laws of physics transform according to the transformation. Every observer should discover the same fundamental laws when performing experiments and using the scientific method. To stay in your analogy, saying 5 and 6 are the same would only work if the rules of the game you play could transform in such a way that an observer making a distinction between the two would arrive at the correctly transformed rules in his frame of reference. Given that we have things like neutron stars, black holes and other objects that are at the same time objects of quantum physics and general relativity, the statement feels pretty fundamental to me, to a degree even that I wonder if it might be phrased to strongly.
- bubblyworld 2y agoI think you may have misunderstood the OP's point - the entropy you calculate for a system depends on how you factor the system into micro and macro states. This doesn't really have anything to do with changes of reference frame - in practice it's more about limitations on the kinds of measurements you can make of the system. (you can't measure the individual states of all the particles in a body of gas, for instance, so you factor it into macrostate variables like pressure/temperature/volume and such)
- lizzas 2y agoCan we take the anthropic out of this? I reckon it'll make things easier. Instead of me knowing, do other physical objects get affected. I might get anemsia and forget what the dots on a dice mean and say they are all the same: all dotty! Imagine each hydrogen atom has a hidden guid but this is undetectable and has no effect on anything else. This is a secret from the rest of physics! I guess!!! (Armchair pondering!) that that guid cannot be taken into account for entropy changes. At least from any practical standpoint. You could imagine each atom having a guid and come up with a scheme to hash the atom based on where it came from ... but is that info really there and if so does it affect anything physically beyond that atoms current state (as defined by stuff that affects other stuff).
- bubblyworld 2y agoWhat anthropic do you mean? I'm describing properties of models, not people. Physics (probably) doesn't care what you "know". On the guid idea - fundamental particles are indistinguishable from one another in quantum mechanics, so they don't have anything like a guid even in principle. There is no experiment you could perform on an electron to determine whether it had been swapped out for a "different" one, for instance. Maybe I'm missing your point though?
- lizzas 2y agoSorry ... I am replying mostly to the dice idea which wasn't you. Yes correct about the guid idea. My point is the discussion is easier to follow if grounded in reality (as best modelled since that is all we have plus some evidence stored in the same "SSD"!)
- guerrilla 2y ago> mundane observation What makes an observation mundane? I think what you said is insightful and demonstrates intelligence. I don't think it's at all obvious to the masses of students that have poured over introductory physics textbooks. In fact, it seems to me that often entropy is taught poorly and that very few people understood it well but that we are beginning to correct that. I point to the heaps of popsci magazines, documentaries and YouTube videos failing to do anything but confuse the public as additional evidence.
- LudwigNagasena 2y agoMaybe if you opened only introductory physics textbooks then it’s not mundane; but If you opened introductory information theory textbooks, statistical textbooks, introductions to Bayesian probability theory, articles about MaxEnt thermodynamics including articles by E.T. Jaynes, then it’s a quite mundane observation.
- guerrilla 2y agoSo, what you're saying is, not very mundane at all and, in fact, that it's specialized knowledge requiring advanced education. ;)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- mitthrowaway2 2y agoJaynes definitely made the case for this a long time ago, and in my opinion he's correct, but I think that view is still not mainstream; or even if mainstream, certainly not dominant. So I think we should welcome other people who reach it on their own journey, even if they aren't the first to arrive there.
- kergonath 2y ago> Maybe I have the benefit of giant shoulders, but this seems like a fairly mundane observation. It is not mundane, and it is also not right, at least for entropy in Physics and Thermodynamics. > High-entropy states are those macrostates which have many corresponding microstates. That is how you deduce entropy form a given model. But entropy is also something that we can get from experimental measurements. In this case, the experimental setup does not care about microstates and macrostates, it just has properties like enthalpy, heat capacity and temperature. We can build models after the fact and say that e.g. the entropy of a given gas matches that predicted by our model for ideal gases, or that the entropy of a given solid matches what we know about vibrational entropy. That’s how we say that e.g. hydrogen atoms are indistinguishable. It’s not that they become indistinguishable because we decide so. It’s because we can calculate entropy in both cases and reality does not match the model with distinguishable atoms. > The classification of several microstates into the same macrostate, is this not a distinctly observer-centred function? It seems that way if we consider only our neat models, but it fails to explain why experimental measurements of the entropy of a given materials are consistent and independent of whatever model the people doing the experiment were operating on. Fundamentally, entropy depends on the probability distribution, not the observer.
- LudwigNagasena 2y ago> It is not mundane, and it is also not right, at least for entropy in Physics and Thermodynamics. Articles about MaxEnt thermodynamics by E.T. Jaynes where he talks about the “anthropomorphic” nature of entropy date back to 1960s. How is that not right in physics?
- kergonath 2y agoBy the look of it, it is another misguided attempt to apply information theory concepts to thermodynamics. Entropy as information is seductive because that way we think we can understand it better, and it looks like it works. But we need to be careful because even though we can get useful insights from it (like Hawking radiation) it’s easy to reach unphysical conclusions. > How is that not right in physics? Why would it be right? Was it used to make predictions that were subsequently verified?
- pndy 2y agohttp://www.thelastquestion.net/ http://www.thelastquestion.net/ - in case someone missed it somehow
- niemandhier 2y agoWow. When did we take the turn from sci-fi like that to the ever dystopian laments we read today.
- guerrilla 2y agoThis is my favorite Isaac Asimov story and the reason I started reading him.
- srean 2y agoFor all who haven't, please read the other two as well. Last Answer Nightfall
- pndy 2y agoGotta mention that Nightfall exists as both Asimov's short story and a novel he co-wrote with Robert Silverberg nearly 50 years later
- pessimizer 2y agoAnd that the short story is the important one.
- perihelions 2y agoA related thread from earlier this year, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41037981 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41037981 ("What Is Entropy? (johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com)", 209 comments)
- ChaitanyaSai 2y agoLovely article. The subjective nature of entropy and information immediately makes me think of the IIT theory (integrated information theory) of consciousness and its foundational futility. Information cannot be discussed without perspective. Someone has to define the states. A die have 6 states only to us humans. What about an ant that's likely to have the die land on it? Bringing the observer back into discussions of information is fascinating because it then begs the question: How is the observer put together? And how does a perspective, an I, emerge in a multi-trillion-cell entity? For those interested in this detour, you might like reading this and our book (mentioned in there) https://saigaddam.medium.com/consciousness-is-a-consensus-mechanism-2b399c9ec4b5 https://saigaddam.medium.com/consciousness-is-a-consensus-me...
- 3abiton 2y agoFor me CS with Physics BSc, it's always fascinating to still see how entropy is still sich a wild measure.
- tsoukase 2y agoMy perspective: 1) entropy is a mathematical concept. Physics apply it, like any other mathematical one 2) math entropy does not change, everything is reversible, as it is based on known quantities 3) entropy measures how far we are from perfectly knowing a system 4) logarithm is chosen to measure entropy because of its convenient properties, not because of any deeper law. It could be a sum, a product etc 5) the Second thermodynamic law is a tautology: "every system tends to higher entropy state because it is more common" becomes "the more common is the more common"
- currymj 2y agoi think those convenient properties are the sign of some deeper law. you do want to work with the exponential and logarithm, same as in so many other places. you don’t necessarily want some other generalized “entropy”.
- pixl97 2y ago5) there is no every system, there is only the universe in which all systems increase in entropy even if individual objects (block of ice) do not. You're bleeding off entropy into the universe you can never get back.
- rawgabbit 2y agoThermodynamics is a young and poorly thought out science. My beef is the adoption of bad names and pseudo-philosophy. In Gibbs free energy equation, there is a term called entropy but it is nothing more than the value for heat transferred for the given elements and given constant temperature and derived from experimental observation. Instead of calling it entropy, they could have called it Clausius constant. No need to confuse generations of students.
- openrisk 2y agoIs there a specific name for the art and craft of presenting a topic online (as a web page) using a flow of text interspersed with interactive activities? Whatever the name of this approach, quantamagazine is definitely good at it!
- gyomu 2y agoSome people have coined the term explorable explanation/explorables https://explorabl.es/ https://explorabl.es/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explorable_explanation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explorable_explanation
- openrisk 2y agoaah, this is nailing it. It helps to differentiate from game-like experiences and special purpose apps. Another interesting term from the wiki link is "active essays": > The related term "active essays" was used by Alan Kay to refer to text-based explorable explanations But I don't know if by text-based he meant strictly no visuals. Like just ASCII art? :-)
- TheSpiceIsLife 2y agoIt looks like this might be the original paper by Kay, can anyone provide a link that isn’t behind a paywall? Search results seem to indicate he was referring to text based plus interactive components something something Java(script?). I’m not a programmer and know less about the history..
- TheSpiceIsLife 2y agoMultimedia? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia Multimedia refers to the integration of multiple forms of content such as text, audio, images, video, and interactive elements into a single digital platform or application.
- openrisk 2y ago
- dvh 2y ago[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- inshard 2y agoFails to mention Heisenberg uncertainty, which in my opinion is a theoretical ceiling to this approach. Also it needs to account for cost of compute relative potential useful work from these quantum engines. If the energy cost of compute exceeds potential useful work, then it’s still net negative (or useless work). Finally there’s the question of hidden patterns and the spectrum of randomness. Some systems are more random than others. The potential for useful work within a reasonable energy cost of compute will decline when we travel down the spectrum of randomness. Systems which are at maximal Heisenberg uncertainty, I.e. particles are not entangled, and have no correlation with a superstructure of other entangled particles, will not hold any further improvement to knowledge and thus zero potential work. This is the ultimate entropy of the local and macro system. Probably also the cause of certain violation of conservation of energy principles, such as dark energy.
- daoboy 2y agoThe interactive graphic that tries to show entropy is subjective doesn't sit right for me. They fail to properly define the macrostate of the system under consideration, then show two different observed entropies for two different macrostates (Colors for Alice and Shapes for Bob). That doesn't show entropy is subjective, it shows that defining the system is subjective. The same two macrostates would still have the same entropy
- Serenade 2y agoThank you for articulating what was bothering me about this. I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but you're right. They are confusing defining the system with defining the entropy of a system and then saying it's the entropy that is subjective. That isn't the case at all. Entropy is just a measurement.
- goatlover 2y agoThat can't be right, because the arrow of time depends on the universe being in a high entropy state when the Big Bang happened. There were no observers then. Also, the 2nd law of thermodynamics doesn't depend on observers. The universe overall will continue to evolve into a higher entropy state without any intelligent observers making measurements. As in stars will burn out and blackholes will evaporate, and the temperature of the universe will get close to absolute zero.
- kgwgk 2y ago> the 2nd law of thermodynamics doesn't depend on observers Thermodynamics entropy is not just a property of a system - it depends on how we choose to describe the system. Of course, we can define the thermodynamic entropy for a system without observers. (In fact, we can only define the classic equilibrium thermodynamic entropy for a system without observers!)
- markisus 2y agoMaybe if you take Alice and Bob to be two separate alien species it could make more sense. Alice’s species has no measurement devices capable of detecting Bob’s version of entropy, and therefore Alice is not able to extract any useful work from Bob’s system and vice versa. Therefore any objective definition of entropy needs to include the capabilities of the measurer. Which is just the same as what you were saying about macrostates.
- 752963e64 2y ago[dead]
- plank 2y agoInteresting to read this, 27 years after my PhD* (theoretical physics), in which I did compare the view WITH and the view WITHOUT ‘unknowns’ causing entropy as a driver. * My PhD was about how to treat a (quantum mechanical) system inside a cavity: a cavity with one perfect mirror and one 99.999999% perfect mirror. The (one dimensional) universe was made whole by another perfect mirror at the other side of the non-perfect mirror (in ASCII art: [100%] —l— [100-epsilon] ——L——— [100%] With L >> l. The ‘whole universe’ solution was simple (using standard quantum mechanics techniques), the ‘lossy’ ‘small universe’ was not. But they needed to be the same (physically). Thus using the exact solution for the ‘complete’ (l+L) universe and comparing it to possible ‘small’ (l) universe models in which some non-linear term accounted for loss. The connection between how a lossy system (in which entropy exists/is a driving ‘force’) and a losless system (in which everything is conserved) is thus not a new insight;-0
- mojomark 2y agoI read you're comment with interest, but ultimately I can't understand the point being made because I don't know what kind of mirror you're referring to (optical?), I don't know what 'l' or 'L' represent (lateral spacing of mirrors?, vacuum energy desnities?), and the last sentence I think maybe the word 'how' should be deleted?
- plank 2y agoAnswers to your questions: 1): all the way to the left, a mirror with a reflectivity|r| of 1 (or a 100%). In the middle an |r| of slightly below 1. Yes, optical, system with photons (a and a^dagger with [a,a^dagger]=1). 2) distance between mirrors 1 and 2: l. Distance mirror 2 and 3:L. (Later taking the limit L/l ==>> infinity) 3) the how is actually correct, I guess the word behaves is missing twice: .... how .... behaves and a .... behaves.
- dfee 2y agoThis is madness.
- IIAOPSW 2y ago
- amelius 2y agoMakes sense. If we knew the theory of everything and the initial conditions of the universe, then we could just compute the next episode of a series instead of streaming it.
- api 2y agoNot necessarily. A theory of everything does not imply either the computability of a future state or determinism. Even if our ToE is deterministic the universe may be computationally irreducible, meaning it cannot be computed accurately at lower resolution in all cases. Note that such a universe could contain within it regions that are computationally reducible, just not the whole and not all regions. I would expect a ToE to give us knowable bounds to either determinism or computability. It should tell us what is precisely knowable or predictable and what isn’t. Edit: to understand how a ToE could leave some things unknowable (but tell us what they are) consider the Hubble horizon. Light beyond it will never reach us making sufficiently distant things unknowable. Limits may be great. It means we can at least subjectively consider ourselves as having free will — even with a deterministic theory it may be unknowable determinism. It’s just like how the speed of light might be why we got to evolve before being bum rushed by aliens.
- FrustratedMonky 2y ago"cannot be computed accurately at lower resolution" The Map is not the Territory. Our universe is the lowest resolution. So to compute the next instant in our Universe, would need another entire Universe. We could be the computation occurring.
- api 2y agoThat’s what I meant, but perhaps did not describe well.
- FrustratedMonky 2y agoSorry, I was really just re-stating it, to see if I was grasping the point.
- wtcactus 2y agoI remember that somewhere during my physics degree this idea of the article clicked with me. Entropy is just a simpler way of manifesting properties of a system that we didn’t measure because it is too difficult (when I was still at classical physics level) or it’s not possible to measure (when quantum mechanics became present in everything we learned). We use it because we can’t measure the position and momentum of every particle (same goes for temperature) so we created theories on how a system with a particular entropy behaves, but it’s just a clever way to work with aproximations. I find this idea fascinating.
- akira2501 2y agoThe chart of "Thermodynamic Beta" on wikipedia is great. I like to think about the big bang as a population inversion where the entropy temporarily becomes negative leading to the hyperinflationary epoch as the universe "collapses" into existence finally cooling to a near "infinite" temperature making the CMB nice and smooth. The big bang clearly defies thermodynamic laws so why wouldn't be a negative entropy and temperature phenomenon? It's the "cheat code" the "primordial universe" uses to dodge problems like realities popping into existence. Anyways.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_beta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermodynamic_beta
- noiv 2y agoWhat about the efficiency to remove entropy? Is there a threshold our combined efforts called science cannot surpass? Do we need Frank Herbert’s spice to progress?
- Trasmatta 2y agoA localized reduction of entropy will always result in an increase of entropy in the larger system. It doesn't matter how efficient your process is, the entropy of the surrounding system will ALWAYS increase as the result of the work needed to effect a localized reduction.
- ziofill 2y agoVery nice article. There’s an alternative way of thinking of the Gibbs paradox, which is to attach labels to the particles. This naturally makes them distinguishable and increases the total number of possible configurations, and with it the maximum value of the entropy.
- zV62drdTw6CM 2y agoHappy to see the article being discussed here! I was responsible for the technical implementation of the interactives. If you are interested in the source code, you can find it here: https://github.com/jnsprnw/mip-entropy https://github.com/jnsprnw/mip-entropy It’s built in Svelte 5 with Tailwind.
- azemetre 2y agoMay I ask why you chose svelte 5 rather than something else? I’ve noticed that a lot of “one off” interactions are being built with svelte nowadays. What are the benefits of using it?
- zV62drdTw6CM 2y agoFirst, when I joined the project, it wasn’t clear how it would be published. Svelte, which outputs compiled JavaScript, can fit into many CMS workflows that newspapers/publishers use. I believe Svelte was developed by Rich Harris at the NY Times for this very reason. We ended up using iFrames, so other frameworks like React could have been used. Second, Svelte is very well suited for these small interactives because it has built-in state, transitions, and reactivity with low overhead. Third, it was a personal choice, as I now do most of my work in Svelte.
- kqr 2y ago> We ended up using iFrames, so other frameworks like React could have been used. Wait, wasn't one of the original selling points of React that it could be embedded piecewise to enhance interactivity of the parts of pages that needed it? It should certainly not need a separate page!
- gligorot 2y agoIt’s a PITA to extract a stateful react component to a standalone piece of code that can be inserted in a random place (in another page, served via API etc.). Not sure about Svelte, but achieving this in React was unexpectedly hard/impossible in our use case.
- johnea 2y agoBut consider the "monkeycide paradox". If we start a nuclear war, and kill every single primate on the planet, does the universe cease to exist? Does time start running in reverse? Maybe time would go back to before we nuked everyone out of existence, and life would be like one of those endless time loop anime? Will matter start spewing out of black holes instead of going in because there was no monkey there to watch it? Would it be enough if a dog observed the universe? (they're "like our family" after all) or a squid? What about a yeast cell? Obviously this is hyperbole 8-) but I think the point is clear. If anyone really believes that the existence of primate life on our little planet "observing the universe" is what makes all physical processes advance, they have some serious issues of overcharged ego. Of course a theory doesn't have to be completely correct to be useful. Old ideas of heat as a fluid have been supplanted, but they still helped design working systems in their time. Modern ideas of quantum mechanics, as incomplete as they are, still model a concept of "tunneling" that's sufficiently accurate to make semiconductors work. Or, you can just run with the Rovelli quote from the article: “What they’re telling me is bullshit” 8-)
- shorefire 2y agoFor the longest time I had no real intuition of what entropy actually represented. This veritasium video explained it in a way that finally clicked for me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxL2HoqLbyA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxL2HoqLbyA
- TexanFeller 2y agoEntropy got a lot more exciting to me after hearing Sean Carroll talk about it. He has a foundational/philosophical bent and likes to point out that there are competing definitions of entropy set on different philosophical foundations, one of them seemingly observer dependent: - https://youtu.be/x9COqqqsFtc?si=cQkfV5IpLC039Cl5 https://youtu.be/x9COqqqsFtc?si=cQkfV5IpLC039Cl5 - https://youtu.be/XJ14ZO-e9NY?si=xi8idD5JmQbT5zxN https://youtu.be/XJ14ZO-e9NY?si=xi8idD5JmQbT5zxN Leonard Susskind has lots of great talks and books about quantum information and calculating the entropy of black holes which led to a lot of wild new hypotheses. Stephen Wolfram gave a long talk about the history of the concept of entropy which was pretty good: https://www.youtube.com/live/ocOHxPs1LQ0?si=zvQNsj_FEGbTX2R3 https://www.youtube.com/live/ocOHxPs1LQ0?si=zvQNsj_FEGbTX2R3
- swyx 2y agowhy is it exciting at all? it is the most depressing concept i have ever heard.
- hnfong 2y agoWhat's depressing about it?
- datavirtue 2y agoThey are hung up on determinism and absolutes. In that world-view entropy is literally the devil.
- mithametacs 2y agoI’ll wait for the GUT before I declare something the most depressing concept
- TexanFeller 2y agoThe exciting part is there are different concepts of it that start from different foundations and arrive at the same thing. It’s suggestive that our understanding is incomplete and there are deeper levels of understanding to uncover. And it _could_ just be the case that the universe started with low entropy for no reason, but if there are reasons and we ponder them it could lead to some massive epiphanies in physics/cosmology.
- Jerrrry 2y agoComputers are finite ergo the largest number any computer can compute is all ones in binary. That's it's Busy Beaver number, but think how easy all ones in binary is to compress from an information theory standpoint. So the most entrophic state would be the one state requiring the most compression.
- kayo_20211030 2y agoWhy has Quanta degenerated into a mad combination of ineffective science communication and breathless, and slightly envious references to yoga retreats in the North of England. It's become a lifestyle magazine for the self-important, science-adjacent middlebrows. Most obviously, it's nerd-sniping for HN. And before you _instinctively_ (it will be instinctive) downvote me to oblivion, please read the piece and assure yourself that it's not truly a piece of rote trash.
- kayo_20211030 2y agoThis is an example of better writing on the same subject. Clear and concise, and with less extraneous material. It doesn't have the nice animations, but the writing is just better. https://adamilab.blogspot.com/2014/06/whose-entropy-is-it-anyway-part-2-so.html https://adamilab.blogspot.com/2014/06/whose-entropy-is-it-an...
- kwoff 2y ago"Carnot’s book was largely disregarded by the scientific community, and he died several years later of cholera. His body was burned, as were many of his papers." Poetic? albeit depressing.
- timonoko 2y agoMr Action Lab of Youtube defined Entropy something like "Not a measure of how many states a system reaches, but a measure of how many states a system can reach". I like this very much as it neatly summarizes information and other shit too.
- mjan22640 2y agoEntropy is the opposite of potential.
- rwoerz 2y agoI don't get the example under "What is entropy?". This works only under the assumption that reality (phase space in particular) is somehow "pixelated". If reality is continuous, 9 particles that are clumped together can already be in uncountalbly many states.
- NKosmatos 2y agoGreat article, reminds me of the “big chill” or the heat death of the universe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe
- ljosifov 2y agoI didn't see this Sabine video mentioned in the comments. Maybe of interest to someone interested in entropy in physics. "I don't believe the 2nd law of thermodynamics. (The most uplifting video I'll ever make.)" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s I come to entropy from Machine Learning, Information Theory and probability. For me it's fairly straightforwad. Of interest and useful - but nothing mysterious there. The p.d.f. aka a fancy histogram is my current best knowledge of how many times an outcome is expected to happen. When I do one experiment - I can't tell the outcome. I can only count the number of different outcomes, without being certain when will any of them appear exactly. A flat p.d.f. means my knowledge is poor: every outcome is about equaly possible. I'm very ignorant (high entropy). A spiky p.d.f. means I have good knowledge: some outcome is much more likely (low entropy). In extremis the p.d.f. is a Dirac impulse - that's deterministic knowledge. The only mildly interesting thing is when a new observation reduces my knowledge. Say right now I'm fairly certain I have not got cancer. My chances are 90:10 for my age. Tomorrow I take a test, the test comes back positive. Of people of my age that test positive, aboout half have cancer for real. After the test my chances are 50:50. Now I am perfectly ignorant whether I have cancer or not. Whereas before I took the test and got a positive result, I was very certain I have not got cancer. The new information (positive test result), transformed my probability of cancer from spiky marginal P_Y(y)={0.9,0.1} to perfectly ignorant conditional P_Y(y|+ve test)={0.5,0.5}. This example is from "How to measure the information gained from one symbol" by DeWeese and Meister (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10695762/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10695762/).
- pipes 2y ago"To flip this around, imagine you would remove the functionality that Vim mode in VSCode gives you from Neovim. " I keep rereading this and still don't understand it!