Re: Extropy

Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 03:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ed Close <authors2@showme.net>
To: quantum-d@teleport.com
Subject: Re: Extropy


>Ed,
>
>Any chance i can persuade you to specifically comment on the definition
>that Joel Henkle gave? Is there any connection between your two uses
>of the word?
>

Subject:  Response to "QUANTUM-D:  Extropy" 7/20/96
and subsequent request from Rhett Savage 7/23/96

I.      Regarding Joel Henkel's definition of "extropy":

In general, I like Joel's ideas, but the term "extropy" is not new.  As
far as I am aware, use of the term "extropy" originated with work I did
beginning in 1986 and published in 1990.   However, extropy is such a
natural concept that someone else may have coined the term prior to 1990.

Our definitions are similar.  The word "extropy"  is defined on Page 36 of
my book (see following quotes) and was used to describe the mirror image
of entropy.

     "...the organizing force existing prior to relative motion...
       Ex = before or beyond, tropy = turning or relative motion.

Conceptually, entropy is a measure of uniformity, or lack of structure,
defined within a closed physical system.  Conversely, extropy is a measure
of recognizable patterns, i.e., order, or structure.  Defining extropy as a
meta-mechanical concept, and describing it in terms of matrices which can
connect partitions of Hilbert space through non-unitary transformations,
appears to be a reasonable way to accommodate open, organizing systems that
borrow energy from surrounding systems to create and sustain order and
structure.

II.     Elaborating on the term "extropy":

In my work, extropy is treated from a different mathematical perspective,
utilizing an adaptation and extension of G. Spencer Brown's calculus of
indications, which I call the calculus of distinctions.  This approach is,
in my opinion, superior to conventional mathematics because it applies
prior to enumeration and quantification, and allows us to include the act
of the drawing of distinctions, which is a function of consciousness, in
the objective description of phenomena.  All extropy, from the order
exhibited in quantum phenomena to the multitude of systems of structure
making up the entire universe, is ultimately described in terms of
distinctions drawn by a conscious observer.  Therefore, extropy, and in
fact every description of reality, is actually defined in reference to a
conscious observer.

As human beings, the distinctions that we draw are uniquely determined by
the limitations of our organs of observation and the extensions that we
have devised.  Thus, extropy is a concept used to describe structures that
are recognizable and meaningful to human beings.  Other types of sentient
beings may exist whose sense organs receive different amplitudes,
frequencies, and velocities of energy, and perhaps even different forms of
energy.  Such observers may draw a different set of distinctions from the
spectrum of reality than we do and perceive an entirely different universe.


III.    General Comments:

Application of the calculus of distinctions to the interaction of con-
sciousness and the physical universe sheds considerable new light on
the quantum mechanical concepts of nonlocality, coherence, and wholeness.
In addition, some of the concepts of classical physics, relativity, and
quantum mechanics are shown to be incomplete, or even meaningless when
taken out of the context of consciousness.

IV.     In summary:

I see no major conflict between our definitions and use of the term
extropy.  While our mathematical methods and descriptions are quite
different, they are not contradictory and may prove to be complimentary.

Looking forward to your response,


Ed Close



...who had previously written:

> The word "extropy" was used to describe the mirror image of entropy
> in the book INFINITE CONTINUITY, author Edward R. Close, published by
> C&C Publishers, Los Alamitos, CA, registered with Library of Congress
> 1990...
>
> For further discussion or information on INFINITE CONTINUITY, contact
> Ed Close via e-mail:  authors2@showme.net.
>

The post being responded to can be found at
http://www.teleport.com/~rhett/quantum-d/posts/jhenkel_7-20-96.html