Einstein-Landauer culinary units
Einstein-Landauer culinary units
89 comments
-
That doesn't work anyway, since based on wheat variety, growing season, and grinding method, different flours have different information density.
-
They have an international prototype sack of flour in an old missile silo in Kansas. Ultimately that's what all the measurements are relative to
-
And the "Room Temperature" room, which is located in Greendale.
-
Computational biochemists are working with a crack team of mathematicians as we speak to develop an alternative standard which does not need a reference mass
-
-
I like to read bedtime stories to my wheat, so it learns more and has higher information density
-
I just plug mine into USB ports
-
-
Sounds like the culinary world would benefit from having a measurement system that accounts for these factors.
-
We usually just look at the protein values on the package xD
-
-
-
Still a more acceptable measurement than “1 cup”.
-
The whole point of cups is that you can buy an ingredient by the gallon and it's very likely that you can double or halve the recipe to your heart's content and eventually use up the entire package with no waste.
-
-
Wouldn't this make the units temperature-dependent?
Landauer limit is one kTln2 per bit of information, so at 300K about 3 zeptojoule per bit.
Dividing by c² we get 32 micro-quectogram per bit, so 32 yoctogram per terabit. 256 yoctogram per terabyte.
The Author wants half a septillion terabytes, 0.5•10²⁴ terabytes, half a yotta-terabyte.
That makes 128 grams.Since I don't know what on earth "a cup of flour" is, I can't judge if the comic character proposes a reasonable conversion, but 0.1kg seems like a reasonable amount to use in cooking.
For baking I would rather have my units temperature dependent than density dependent (I can compact my flour or work with water or nuts, all having different densities, but my room temperature will always be roughly 300).
I endorse einstein-landauer units.-
184 grams is a touch high for "a cup of flour", but I'm not gonna check your math, and the comic probably wanted to use "close enough" round-ish numbers. The weight of a cup of flour is usually somewhere between 120g and 145g, going by the conversions used by major baking recipe publishers like King Arthur, Cooks Illustrated, Washington Post, New York Times, etc.
-
I fear their apartment is at -50°C and this is a cry for help.
At least I am relieved to know that even acclaimed authors native to the cup-measurement system don't know what "a cup of flour is".
I'll be off baking my pannenkoek with 150g of flour then.
-
I figured it out. Typed the ln2 into my text and then forgot it in the calculator.
Great, I'ma redo alll my numbers then rq -
Mass, not weight! Only because we're being technical already.
-
-
-
The real problem is measuring flour by volume instead of mass.
-
Solve both by measuring with moles
-
are other burrowing animals also ok?
-
Except that moles would only work for counting granules of ground flour, as there is no "flour" molecule. Also, you'd need to have a very accurate measurement of the average mass of a single granule (or you'd need a packing efficiency coefficient and an average granule radius, otherwise you'd have to literally count them. Also, a mole of flour granules would be INSANELY large. 6.0210^23 of anything larger than a macromolecule is no joke. At this point, since you'd have to weigh it or measure its volume anyway (unless you feel like counting microscopic flour particles for the next few trillion years), you might as well just use grams.
-
-
Made even worse by mixing cups, spoons, pints, gallons and their crazy ratios
-
-
Information is physical? I'm gonna need a source on that one.
-
The idea is that information must have a physical representation. But I don't know how that would lead to a standardized mass of a byte.
-
No, you missed the point. See @milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee's comment and link to Landauer's Principle, the namesake of which is literally named in the title of the post.
TL;DR: Storing information requires a change in entropy. A change in entropy requires a change in energy. There must be a minimum non-zero amount of energy required for a given quantity of information. Energy is mass due to mass-energy equivalence. ∴ information has mass independent of its physical representation.
-
-
Entropy in information theory is equivalent to entropy in quantum dynamics / thermodynamics
-
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landauer%27s_principle
Also see Redjard's comment to this post
-
i will Physically bitchslap you then you can deduce yourself the information about whether your face hurts or not, ayy lmao.
At least that's how I choose to interpret this new information
-
I’d give a source but it’s physically in my house and it’s heavy
-
Information is physical?
Information only exists in the world in the form of physical media, such as computer circuits, DNA or electrical/neuron pattern in your brain.
-
-
Oh sure, throw a fit — just wait until you want to convert those units to kilojoules!
Who's laughing now, tablespoons?!
-
Hundred sextillion terabytes. Yeah, everybody of calling it hungry sex bites in minutes.
-
I have absolutely no understanding of whatever is said here
-
Metric appears to end at 10^30, but even then, I think the better way to phrase that number would be 5,000 quetta-bytes
Tera = 1012; ~~Septillion~~ Sextillion = 1021
Source-
*500 000 quettabytes
*Sextillion = 10^21 ( = Zetta)I'd recommend wikipedia here, your source seems to have taken 3 years to update their table and their image is still outdated.
They likely didn't use quetta because it was only added 3 years ago, and is still not widely known. Or maybe it sounded better.
-
Derp, that's what happens when you have to bounce between too many pages on mobile.
Thanks for the pointer!
-
-
-
This kind of humor is what's wrong with modern males.
-
Seek help.
-
I've arrived
-
-
89 comments