Tuesday, 24 October 2017

Complex Words

Complex words

When Claude Shannon used the word 'entropy' to describe a unit of measurement that could compare signal-to-noise ratios in different channels, by how much was he relying on the previous thermodynamic understanding of the word? Either he knew he was inverting the meaning or he considered the two meanings to be at some deeper level one and the same (ignoring the non-starting possibility that he simply didn't understand physics). To solve this problem, it is unfortunately necessary to swim deeply into the history of entropy and its various formulations, most notably by considering that the definition differs itself when considered by statistical mechanics or by thermodynamics, which is as much to say that the word was already a complex word by the time of the publication of 'A Mathematical Theory of Communication' (Shannon, 1948).

Thermodynamics concerns itself with the generalized energy potential of homogenous fields of matter in any state. Though fields can be broken down into smaller and smaller units, potentially to the sub-atomic level and beneath, it is not necessary to account for the motions of each and every unit in the field; rather, the potential energy can be indirectly inferred through Gibbs' formula utilizing the Boltzmann constant 8.3144598(48) J*mol-1*K-1. Frightening as this may appear, it is simply a mathematical pseudo-constant that is always true regardless

neighbour-girls, whose phone has lost its electricity, in the next room, calling the phone company, will they let themselves out? so now

regardless of where in the universe you happen to be.

We should speak more about Shannon, an interesting person in his own right, who is known as the founder of information theory. Born in Michigan in 1916, Shannon as a graduate student at MIT completed his thesis which outlined several forms of switching circuits; the last chapter famously contained a diagrammatic illustration of a full-bit full adder. This circuitry is at the heart of every virtual machine (a.k.a. 'computer') used to this day.

During the Second World War, Shannon applied his genius to cryptology and other fields, most notably (and unpredictably) in fire-control, and it was in fire-control that he engineered the breakthrough we are most interested in here, namely, his formalization, using symbolic logic, of the problem of noise in channels, intending on getting at a method of accurately predicting the truth of any medium‑which led, as mentioned above, to the famous 1948 paper that he published in 1948. In his A Mathematical Theory of Cryptography (1945), he wrote: "We suppose that the possible messages of length N can be divided into two groups, one group of high and fairly uniform probability, while the total probability in

a phone company technician along with his apprentice, telling me none of the phones in nbrhd work, almost blaming me cuz my line's the faulty one they think, down in the basement with sensors at walls, neighbour-girls now in kitchen making coffee for all

in the second group is small. This is usually possible in information theory if the messages have any reasonable length."

Now consider: how did Shannon write this statement‑and on what? (Considering that it would be a full ten years before the essay 'I, Pencil' (Read, 1958) would be published, we may ignore picayune analysis.) In the composition process, the residua of noise is apparent, firstly in the ten years of thoughts Shannon discarded theoretically (red herrings, dead ends, will-o-the-wisps, etc-etc-etc) and secondly by the very reception of the ideas which he promulgated, which ran into resistance from for example such-and-such a person who is mentioned in my rough notes which I cannot get my hands on because they're out in the kitchen.

Returning to Shannon, it is evident that the quote above is relevant, for why else would it have been used by Bell Labs in its online centenary celebration of Shannon (Internet, 2016)? So‑by what mechanism (recalling that the Boltzmann constant is equal to 8.3144598(48) J*mol-1*K-1) is it decided that some piece of information is

one's yelling hey! and I can't describe the noise, I dash into the basement past my coffee-drinking neighbours who don't lift a finger, I hear water because the phone guys have drilled into a pipe, they're pulling wall away and plugging saying, It's nothing we'll have it all back together in no time, we'll call city, and a city guy shows up to shake his head

is a message and another piece of information is not? Recalling that almost anything can be a channel‑even a channel of water or a water pipe‑and that it can carry information possibly even in the form of small origami boats, we see that noise can be caused by, say, a leak in the pipe that introduces interference (though in the electrical world the interference can come from the channel in the form of heat-loss) and that this is precisely what the notion of 'noise' implies.

Bletchley Park, 1941. The finest mathematicians and physicists are busy deciphering Nazi messages. But decryption is a slow process and the Nazis are employing one-use pads. In a communication, there can be more noise than signal, easily. What is this story I am telling you, i.e. am I making myself clear? If we consider this essay as a signal, how can you decide what is noise and what is not? Shannon argued that 'white-space' should be considered

And now there's dogs barking, many dogs outside and someone's banging, banging, banging to the door and there's a woman walking seven dogs who says there's smoke billowing out my basement window; and sure enough there it is puffing out like some Victorian ocean-liner; I go in and she follows me for no good reason, with the dogs barking; I pass my neighbours who are laughing and down in the basement to say there's smoke out the window; they laugh!

considered a twenty-seventh character, and the ensuing half-century has proved his intuition true: the addition of 4% reduced ambiguity (and noise) by 23% according to research (currently unavailable).

Nonetheless, it is currently understood that Message through Channel is inhibited by anything that can be called Noise, and that Noise in a Channel can be measured in all kinds of ways which we will get to soon enough, maybe in Chapter Two or Chapter Three. This introductory chapter is more interested in how water escapes from pipes and how smoke emerges from windows, i.e. the creation of noise that emerges from the signal itself, absenting the fact that damage to a channel can be from an external source‑consider electromagnetic interference to a pacemaker that's meant to rpevent someone from suffering from sever heart

There's another knock at the door and the dogs go crazy in the kitchen, I go to the door and I recognize who it is, it's my cousin Bernie and his wife and their son and Bernie tells me their car broke down a block away and What a Coincidence they have to call for car help (mentioning some smoke they saw) so I explain crazily then get them into the living room and the dogs and drills and laughter are all over the house, heavy boots on stairs, the city guy says he's almost done and the electrical fire's out and I say, "Almost two-thirds of the way through!"

heart attack‑thus we have the channel attacked from two sides at once, which it's no matter which or which it's all the same, noises that interfere with the signal, and Shannon chose the word noise for just that reason. In the fourteenth century the loudest noise an ordinary person could ever hope to hear was the noise of dogs barking. I don't think it was even called noise back then. Look it up. So anyway, noise, noise:

Claude Shannon was born in 1916 in Medford, Massachusetts, which was a quiet town. He was a sensitive child who absolutely hated noise and he became obsessed with it to such an extent

There seems to be a knocking at the door and I say seems because the dogs sound to be fighting and what can one expect with seven dogs in a kitchen?; Bernie yells, "Door!" and I droppitall and go to the door and it's a woman with a wooden box over her shoulder dressed nice with a blue pillbox hat and she says Did someone here phone for some Botox injections and I of course say No, come in; and I wonder where to put her, in the livingroom, kitchen, even basement, but as we're passing the livingroom my cousin's wife screams DAPHNE!!! and then they're laughing like it's been a century; gets the dogs louder yet coincidentally the basement drilling stops and the three men down there cheer from some success;

extent that the measurement and reduction of it, (being noisy), was to become his great heroic goal, to make the rest of us, his people of the future, unwittingly (for he wasn't some circus freak) into the people of the Information Age, which is what the present right-now really is, you know? So the object-lesson here is that you can be doing stuff for one reason and the result could be something else entirely, something completely unexpected.

Signal-to-noise ratios, channel-wise, can be expected to remain determinate to a

I get to understand that there's more knocking at the door, as heard through dog-fights and re-unions and drillings and sandings, so I go to the door and there I find a young man and a young woman. He is dressed in a white shirt and black pants and he's wearing a tie; She's in a white blouse and a blue skirt and she's also wearing a tie. I say, "You're Mormons, right?" and they say, "Why yes, how did you know?" I say, "Come on in." He starts forward but she holds him back. He says, "That wouldn't be proper." I say, "There's plenty of people here. I'm sure they'd like to meet you." Finally I get them to come inside and I introduce them to the people in the living-room, the kitchen, and the basement; I leave them in the living-room. As it turns out, the young man is fond of dogs.

a high degree, and a measurable one, you can understand this, I an getting through despite the noise that comes with the channel of language, I am talking about it as I am doing it, showing you how an encoding works; in any case, this channel is carrying thought or sound, one or the other depending on how you look at it, either what I am

There is a knock at the door and I wonder if the floors of my house will survive, I wonder if this will go on forever, I wonder how to set stop to this structure; at the door is a delivery-woman armed with clipboard. She says she's come from Amazon and that she has six pizzas and a case of scotch, prepaid; I say I didn't know Amazon sold scotch and she says they don't and winks. I lead her fleetingly through the living-room and greetingly into the kitchen where I point out where the glasses and plates rest expectantly; wonderingly I drop to the basement: the phone man and the city guys are talking baseball! I say, "Come up, come up." I can feel the climax incipient, I am not breathless. Wide with wonder I take me up-the-stairs, whence then I snap back to the reality of deadline and blush and cough at myself; all my guests are calamitous and two of the dogs are resting their paws and rabbit-dreaming; I return to my desk;

am is the channel or perhaps it is the NOISE or where is the NOISE coming from and consider music because we don't know what it is or why animals don't care for it; now how does the attitude of the receiver affact whatever

I know it's to come and I am ready for it, like a joke's punchline to an audience of one. To the door, to the door; and I find no less than four. Two men and two women, one of each carrying black violin cases. I say, "Hello." The man with the case says, "We are travelling minstrels who have seen many entering your home. We are here to play for them. This (indicating the woman without a case) is my girlfriend Annie; and this (the man sans case) is my musical partner's boyfriend Arnie. May we come in?" "And how!" I reply. I lead them into the living-room where folks are not surprised by their appearance, as if their noise called into existence a harmony of the spheres. The workers downstairs have come up and they are drinking wee drams of scotch; my neighbour-girls appear like conspirators who orchestrated everything (though I know they did not); the Mormons are greater than their stereotypes; my cousin and his wife are chatting up the delivery-woman and the dog-walker. Arnie and Annie want me to join in the entertainments; I tell them I have to finish up my Chapter One.

whatever the subject believes they are hearing, how real is the signal, or is the noise good? Now read my Chapter Two.

Hee-haw, haw-hee, haw-hee, hee-haw squalked the fiddles in the living-room as tables and chairs moved into kitchen and stairs.

I go out into the living-room and I see they'd almost all set themselves out, fiddlers in the corner, one of the neighbour-girls with Arnie, the other neighbour-girl (Daphne) with the boy Mormon, the phone-man with the delivery-woman, the apprentice with the female Mormon, the man from the water department with the Botox applicator, cousin Bernie with his wife, their son with the dog-walker, and Annie standing, holding out her hand, to make us all into pairs.

"Time for double quadrille," calls the fiddler, and we make ourselves set

In rectangular formation in separate designations, preparing to sweat,

An afternoon's festival of noise and the odd contusions

(For my living-room's small when we buck our illusions)

We dance and we dance like we've done it for years

This patterny process of back-and-forth and up-and-down to the music of the spheres,

Or so we believe of the background radiations

That keep all the planets upon their foundations,

And here in my house is an echo of that

While we dance in our circles like acrobats,

Whilst singing is heard from afar and away,

Where the signal is noise with a second's delay,

And thus we are dancing, two years and a day.

No comments:

Post a Comment