You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

passive_fist comments on Open thread, Jan. 19 - Jan. 25, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: Gondolinian 19 January 2015 12:04AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (302)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: passive_fist 20 January 2015 07:54:43PM *  0 points [-]

Well, no.

Temperature is the thermodynamic quantity that is shared by systems in equilibrium. "Cup of tea + information about all the molecules in the cup of tea" is in thermodynamic equilibrium with "Ice cube + kinetic energy (e.g. electricity)", in that you can arrange a system where the two are in contact but do not exchange any net energy.

Note that it is NOT in thermodynamic equilibrium with anything hotter than an ice cube, as Eliezer described in spxtr's linked article: http://lesswrong.com/lw/o5/the_second_law_of_thermodynamics_and_engines_of/

Basically, if you, say, try to use the information about the water and a Demon to put the system in thermal equilibrium with some warm water and electricity, you'll either be prevented by conservation of energy or you'll wind up not using all the information at your disposal. And if you don't use the information it's as if you didn't have it.

The salient point is that the system is not in thermal equilibrium with anything 'warmer' than "Ice cube + free energy."

If you know everything about the cup of tea, it really is at absolute zero, in the realest sense you could imagine.

Comment author: shminux 20 January 2015 10:01:54PM 0 points [-]

Hm. I have to think more about this.