= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wnoise comments on Ask an experimental physicist - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (294)
Sure; the point is that we have lots of equivalent formulations of entropy and I don't see the need to pick out one of them as the correct way of understanding it. One or another may be more intuitively appealing to particular students, or better suited to particular problems, but they're all maps and not territories.
Given a quantum state, you can always tell me the entropy of that specific quantum state. It's 0. If that's the territory, then where is entropy in the territory?
Only for pure states. Any system you have will be mixed.
I believe you mean "you will have incomplete information about any system you could really have."
Operationally, it's a distinction without a difference.
Since the way this whole nest of comments got started was whether it makes sense to identify entropy with incomplete information, I'd say my reply to you was made with loaded language :P