morgangiraud/fundamental-bias-collection

This is a collection of potential and proven fundamental bias existing in our universe

fundamental-bias-collection's Issues

2nd law of thermodynamics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

Summary:
Given an isolated system (a system which can't have any interaction with other systems), the entropy of that can only increase.

Entropy :
To definite it clearly, we must first define a self-sufficient set of quantities that define our system at a macro-level.
Now the entropy of a system is proportional to the natural logarithm of a number of microstates which would result in the same values of the measurement of the macro-level quantity.

If you give a uniform probability over all the possible microstates. This is equivalent to saying that the entropy will end up being the most probable macrostate.

Implication: Unless you give energy to a system, it will never naturally evolved into a less probable state than the most probable one which is also the less ordered one :

• Gas will never naturally confine itself to less space than it can
• Broken things will never repair itself.

One thing to note is that solid is more organised and so less probable than liquid which is itself more organised and so less probable than gas.

Also, the second law says "can only increase". This is because, if the isolated system is in equilibrium, nothing happens but if it's not, the entropy will increase.
Create an isolated system with an ice cube and a lot of heat, you'll end up with a hot gas

The world is deterministic

The paper: ftp://ftp.idsia.ch/pub/juergen/everything.pdf

I'll let Juergen Schmidhuber explain this one:

The universe is deterministic, and the most efficient program that computes its entire history is short and fast, which means there is little room for true randomness, which is very expensive to compute. What looks random must be pseudorandom, like the decimal expansion of Pi, which is computable by a short program. Many physicists disagree, but Einstein was right: no dice.
There is no physical evidence to the contrary (see Don't forget randomness is still just a hypothesis).
For example, Bell’s theorem does not contradict this. And any efficient search in program space for the solution to a sufficiently complex problem will create many deterministic universes like ours as a by-product. Think about this.
See Computable Universes & Algorithmic Theory of Everything: The Computational Multiverse and the talk here http://www.kurzweilai.net/in-the-beginning-was-the-code

Theory of life (WIP)

See :

• https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-thermodynamics-theory-of-the-origin-of-life-20140122/
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10cVVHKCRWw
• https://twitter.com/lifelikephysics

The world follows a "forward, generative, causal direction".

I've encountered this idea reading this blog post from Max Welling: https://staff.fnwi.uva.nl/m.welling/wp-content/uploads/Model-versus-Data-AI-1.pdf

To give a little bit more context, it has to be read in response to the blog post of Richard Sutton here: http://www.incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/BitterLesson.html

I'm more on the side of Richard Sutton on this debate, whatever the world is, it looks like compute power and engineering will help us solve everything.
The last example that computes beats us (outside of things like AlphaGo) is this paper. CNNs happens to be challenged by random neural networks.

Biology as information dynamics (WIP)

Need to watch:
https://redwood.berkeley.edu/seminars/john-baez-march-2019/

Darwinism is just an autocurriculum (WIP)

The main paper which explores auto-curriculum: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1903.00742.pdf