This report reviews what quantum physics and information theory have to tell us about the age-old question, How come existence? No escape is evident from four conclusions: (1) The world cannot be a giant machine, ruled by any preestablished continuum physical law. (2) There is no such thing at the microscopic level as space or time or spacetime continuum. (3) The familiar probability function or functional, and wave equation or functional wave equation, of standard quantum theory provide mere continuum idealizations (...) and by reason of this circumstance conceal the information-theoretic source from which they derive. (4) No element in the description of physics shows itself as closer to primordial than the elementary quantum phenomenon, that is, the elementary device-intermediated act of posing a yes-no physical question and eliciting an answer or, in brief, the elementary act of observer-participancy. Otherwise stated, every physical quantity, every it, derives its ultimate significance from bits, binary yes-or-no indications, a conclusion which we epitomize in the phrase, it from bit. (shrink)

Examines the philosophical, scientific, and theological aspects of the character of the human mind.

Sheehan and coworkers have claimed [D. P. Sheehan et al., Found. Phys. 30, 1227 ; 32, 441 ; D. P. Sheehan, in Quantum Limits to the Second Law, AIP Conference Proceedings 643, p. 391] that a dilute gas trapped between an external shell and a gravitator can support a steady state in which energy flux by particles in one direction is balanced by energy flux by radiation in the opposite direction, and in which work can be extracted from an isothermal (...) heat reservoir, thereby violating the second law of thermodynamics. In this paper, we identify a fundamental error in their simulation and analysis of their model system that vitiates their conclusions. We analyze a simpler, exactly soluble, three-dimensional model of a very dilute gas in a gravitational field between two thermal reservoirs, and show that their conclusions are not supported for the simple model. We show that their method of simulation, when applied to either the simple model or their more complex model under simpler conditions where the answers are known, leads to unphysical results. We also show that, when appropriate sampling is done, their model gives results in accord with the second law and detailed balance. (shrink)

Am 4. November 1915 legte EINSTEIN seine beriihmte Arbeit "Zur allgemeinen Relativitatstheorie" der PreuBischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin vor. 50 Jahre spater organisierte die Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften im Andenken daran eine dreitagige Konferenz, in deren Verlauf auch eine Gedenkfeier abgehalten wurde. Ich hatte die Ehre, eine Gedenkrede iiber EINSTEIN und sein Werk zu halten. In der Zwischenzeit wurde unser Wissen urn viele wichtige neue Zusatze erweitert. Wir sehen nun, daB die Dynamik der Einsteinschen Theorie in einem Superraum ablauft. (...) Seine Struktur und seine Eigenschaften sind von graBter Bedeutung. Infolgedessen habe ich jenen Teil meines Berichtes von 1965, der iiber die Quantengeometrodynamik handelt, geandert und erweitert, urn vom § 12 an unser Wissen iiber den Super­ raum zusammenzufassen. Einige Teile des hier enthaltenen Materials sind schon friiher in anderer Form erschienen. Der Autor dankt fiir die Erlaubnis, dieses Material wieder ab­ drucken zu lassen, den folgenden Verlagen: Akademie-Verlag, Berlin; W. A. Benjamin, Inc., New York; Gordon and Breach, New York; und Springer-Verlag, New York und Heidelberg, sowie den Organisatoren jener Konferenzen, auf denen diese Beitrage vorgelegt wurden: Einstein-Symposium aus Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 1965; International School of Non-Linear Mathematics and Physics, Miinchen, J uli 1966; Academie Internationale de Philo sophie des Sciences, Oberwolfach/Freiburg i. Br., Juli 1966; Society of Engineering Science, Raleigh, North Carolina, Oktober 1966; Colloque Internationale sur Fluides et Champ Gravitationel en Relativite Generale, Paris, J uni 1967; und Battelle Ren­ contres in Mathematics and Physics, Seattle, Juli 1967. (shrink)

Ed. Daniel Greenberger, 750pp May 1995 164.95.

The geometry of lattice universes in general is reviewed, and particular attention is given to the 3-geometry of a 5-black hole model universe at the momentarily static phase of maximum expansion as an illustration of the insights to be won by considering symmetries and reflections. Three models for the black holes in this lattice universe are compared and contrasted. Reasons are given for working with Misner's “flange backup” model. The geometry interior to the individual tetrahedral cell of this lattice is (...) compared and contrasted with the electrostatic field produced by a point charge located in the center of a cavity of the same shape that has perfectly conducting walls. (shrink)