Solid and convincing defense of the expression for the Ur-equation. I agree that that trumps aesthetic/abstract consideration. (plus 1) We will not be able to find agreement regarding the gist of this matter. Your thoughts are sound as always given the axiomatic ground of reality. The very notion of "reversible process" betrays the prejudice of the arrow of time. I consider the idea of the arrow of time as the most fundamental superstition of the sentient. The situation is the same for the notion of the primacy of particle/energy vs information. I hold that information is more fundamental but /will/ grant that given current understanding such views are more accurately categorized as mysticism rather than scientific. Regarding the latter methodology, however, I could bring attention to the paradoxes of quantum mechanics and outline the sketch of the essential framework that does away with at least one such paradox -- wave/particle duality per 2-slit -- IFF one is ready to accept the notion of total system coherence (-∞<= t <= +∞) [1] without any recourse to mystic notions: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Feynmann_... [1][edit: read trans-taneous]
