Thanks to Curiosity Stream for supporting PBS Digital Studios.
If you have perfect knowledge of every single particle in the universe,
can you use the laws of physics to rewind all the way back to the Big Bang?
Is the entire history of the universe perfectly knowable? Or has information somehow been lost along the way?
[Intro Music]
The laws of physics are equations of motion.
They are mathematical rules that dictate how systems evolve in time.
Newton's equations for classical mechanics,
Maxwell's equations for electromagnetism.
and the Schrödinger equation for quantum mechanics.
These laws can be used to predict how the universe will evolve into the future.
They are deterministic.
Perfect knowledge of a system in the present perfectly predicts
how the system will change in the next instant and the instant after that, ad infinitum.
But determinism in the forward time direction does not guarantee that the same laws can perfectly predict the past.
And yet this sort of deterministic symmetry, time-reversal symmetry, is essential for information itself to be conserved.
Today, we learn why conservation of information is such a fundamental requirement of quantum mechanics.
In a future episode, we'll see how this law might be broken by black holes.
An important tool for making predictions with the laws of physics
are the conservation laws that we derive from them.
As we discussed recently, we can use Noether's theorem to discover quantities that are conserved in a system
by looking at the symmetries of the equations of motion.
For example, if the equations stay the same from one point in time to the next, then energy is conserved.
Noether's theorem applies to smooth continuous symmetries
where we can transform the chosen coordinate
however much we like without changing the system.
But there are also symmetries under discrete transformations.
They're more like on-off switches.
For example, we could reverse all electric charges
or we could flip the x-axis by looking in a mirror
or we could make time run backwards.
Symmetry in that last one, time-reversal symmetry
isn't covered by Noether's theorem, but it's still tied to a conservation law:
the conservation of information.
We say that a system is time-reversal symmetric if its equations of motion
allow us to perfectly predict the starting point simply by knowing the state of the system at any later time.
If they allow us to rewind the clock and figure out a single unique history.
The entire universe would be time-reversal symmetric
if knowing the exact state of every particle in the universe at one point in time
allowed us to calculate its exact past history at all times.
That would mean that the exact configuration of the universe at any point in time
defines the exact configuration at any other point.
For one thing,
this time-reversal symmetry means complete information about the configuration at all prior times
still exists, and always will, even if we can't practically access it.
That's what I mean about conservation of information.
A related idea is causal determinism.
The idea that perfectly knowing the current state perfectly predicts all future states.
But this sort of future determinism doesn't have to be time-reversal symmetric.
It's possible for the future to be perfectly predictable by the laws of physics while the past is not.
For example, what if many different configurations of particles in the present
could converge on a single configuration of particles in the future?
If a multitude of states can all evolve into the same state,
then knowing the later state isn't enough for us to figure out what past states led to it.
For example, imagine you have two states, A and B,
and the laws of motion say that A becomes C and B becomes D.
If we look at the later state and see state C, we know A came first,
but if we see state D, we know B came first
But what if both A and B lead to state C?
That future direction is deterministic,
but now, if we look at the final state, we see state C
But we don't know which of A or B led to it.
The information about those past states would be lost.
Okay.
So it should be simple enough to erase information, right?
We just set things up so our laws of motion force two possible initial states into the same exact final state.
Then we wouldn't know what the original state was and information would be destroyed.
Actually, quantum mechanics forbids this.
It ensures conservation of information and time-reversal symmetry because of an even more fundamental rule:
The conservation of probability.
To get at this,
let's think about the basic equation of motion of quantum mechanics.
That's the Schrödinger equation.
The time dependent Schrödinger equation describes the time evolution of this thing called The Wave Function.
The wavefunction of a system fully describes all of its properties
and in quantum mechanics that means the probability distribution of all those properties,
which you can get by taking the square of the wave function.
For example, the wave function of a particle encapsulates the probability that it'll be found in
this or that location if we were to try to measure its position.
The Schrodinger equation perfectly predicts both the past and future evolution of a given wave function
in any given environment, or in quantum speak, in any given potential.
In that sense, it's deterministic and time-reversal symmetric and so conserves information.
In principle, "a given wave function in a given potential"
could mean the wave function of an electron moving in an atom's electric field
or it could mean the wave function of the entire universe in its own impossibly complex and changing potential.
So the Schrödinger equation guarantees time reversibility and so the conservation of information,
as do the more advanced formulations of quantum mechanics, like the Dirac equation and quantum field theories.
That guarantee arises from a really fundamental foundational quality of these theories.
It comes from what we call Unitarity.
Remember that the wave function encapsulates the distribution of probabilities for a given property.
By definition, those probabilities should add up to 1.
That just means there's a 100% probability that any given property will have some possible value,
even if that value is zero.
In the case of particle position, probability of adding to one just means that the particle is definitely somewhere.
And, as time goes on, a particle's properties will continue to have possible values.
The probability should continue to sum to 1.
If this is true, and it must be,
we say that the time evolution of the wave function is unitary.
And this unitarity is a foundational assumption in all formulations of quantum mechanics and quantum field theories.
Unitarity is a non-negotiable statement about how probability works,
but the condition also ensures time-reversal symmetry and conservation of information.
It's not straightforward to explain without getting into some hairy math
but the upshot is that quantum states must remain independent of each other in order to preserve probability.
Two independent quantum states can't evolve into the exact same quantum state.
If they did, then the probabilities for the initial states or for the final state can't both sum to 1.
Back to our first example, quantum states A and B
can't both become quantum states C,
the sum of the probabilities prior to the merger would not equal the sum of the probabilities after the merger
and unitarity would be broken.
The only type of evolution that preserves probability and unitarity is the evolution that also preserves the number of quantum states,
and the preservation of quantum states means preservation of information
because you can trace a quantum state indefinitely forwards and backwards in time.
But all of this talk of quantum mechanics being deterministic seems a bit at odds with the idea of quantum randomness and the uncertainty principle.
After all, doesn't the act of measurement pick a single value of some quantity from the range of possible values?
That value seems to be chosen randomly based on the probability distribution encoded in the wave function
and the precision of the knowability of that value is defined by the uncertainty principle.
It sure seems like information can be lost.
But that's not really what we mean by quantum information.
Quantum information refers to the full information content of the wave function,
not just what we measure, and in principle,
make enough measurements and you can extract all of the information from a wave function.
It's worth mentioning that the collapse of the wave function in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics
actually does mess with conservation of information.
According to that interpretation, the act of measurement actually alters the entire wave function,
causing it to shrink down to the narrow range of possible values implied by the result of the measurement.
But that measured wave function can't then be tracked backwards to recover the past wave function.
So this interpretation is neither deterministic nor time-reversal symmetric.
Other interpretations of quantum mechanics, for example,
Everett's many-worlds or the de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory preserve this time reversibility.
In the case of many-worlds, the entire wave function continues to exist even after measurement.
That measurement itself is just a thing that happens in one part of the possibility space.
No information is really lost.
And in the case of pilot wave theory,
the wave function contains hidden information that is carried with the final measured particle.
There is one situation where time reversibility appears to be broken regardless of your favorite interpretation of quantum mechanics.
That's the case of black holes and Hawking radiation.
Stephen Hawking's eponymous radiation appears to destroy quantum information,
leading to the famous black hole information paradox.
In an upcoming episode, we'll see whether quantum information really can be deleted
from the otherwise perfect memory of spacetime.
Thank you to CuriosityStream for supporting PBS Digital Studios.
CuriosityStream is a subscription streaming service that offers documentaries and nonfiction titles
from a variety of filmmakers including CuriosityStream Originals.
You can get the first 60 days free if you sign up at curiositystream.com/spacetime
and use the code "spacetime" during the signup process.
Hey everyone, so it's springtime (at least on this half of the planet) and you know what that means.
Spring Break. Actually no, that means spring cleaning.
Space Time is going to go quiet for the next couple of weeks to get our house in order.
What that means is we'll be doubling down and doing some serious writing
in preparation for the next great series we have in mind.
I'm talking black hole thermodynamics and some pretty deep particle physics.
We're gonna miss you, but it's gonna be really worth it.
Noether's theorem predicts the conservation laws of physics from the symmetries of nature.
You guys had some excellent questions in the comments.
merinsan has plans to use the loss of energy and cosmological redshift
as a refutation of conservation of energy arguments.
Ok, that's fine, but a word of caution.
Conservation of energy is completely valid and always applies on the scales of systems that humans deal with.
In a related question, AFastidiousCuber asks why free energy and perpetual motion machines are impossible.
The key is that, on the scales of these systems, the universe is time translation symmetric.
Space is not globally expanding or contracting on those scales and so energy is absolutely conserved.
Perhaps you could extract some free energy if you could build a device that spans several million light years
or, I don't know, install some solar panels.
A few of you asked this great question:
"Could the energy loss to cosmological redshift actually become dark energy?"
The answer is no.
The energy density of photons is much much lower than the energy density of dark energy.
Dark energy now comprises 70% of the energy density of the universe and is getting larger.
Radiation including photons and neutrinos
dominated the energy density until around 50 thousand years after the Big Bang
But it's dropped off since then due to cosmological redshift.
Today, their contribution is minuscule, and they can't be powering the increase in dark energy.
Orthochronicity dropped some knowledge with a deeper insight into the history of Emmy Noether's contribution.
Actually, let me just read the comment:
"It's worth noting that she didn't really step in to tackle the energy problem that was dogging early general relativity.
Klein asked her for her input after being prompted by a colleague.
When he did, he was surprised to learn that she had already worked out most of the solution,
but had put it by the wayside for more important mathematics.
When she did publish it, Einstein supposedly remarked that he had no idea that anyone could think about gravity in such general ways.
In true mathematical fashion, her work was far more general than anything we deal with in physics.
The universe was basically just a special case.
It's hard to understate just how amazing of a mathematician she was"
A lot of you criticized our use of HTML as an example of source code.
Guys, you really think the universe uses assembly language or Haskell or, hell, even Java?
It doesn't make anywhere near that much sense.
Black hole memory leaks, quantum rounding errors and it took 10 billion years to compile the first lifeform.