In hmolscience, entropy inversion is a science fiction version of "entropy" (Clausius, 1865), devised by Christopher Nolan, as described in his 2020 film Tenet, a seeming subconscious rescript of the various "entropy reversal" models of the 20th century, in particular those of John Wheeler.
Entropy and time
In 1927, Arthur Eddington, in his On the Nature of the Physical World, defined entropy as the basic property of "time's arrow"; in short:
- “So far as physics is concerned, time’s arrow is a property of entropy alone.”
- — Arthur Eddington (1928), The Nature of the Physical World (pg. 80)
Not everyone, however, agreed with this:
- “Time is not one of the variables of pure thermodynamics.”
- — Gilbert Lewis (1930), “The Symmetry of Time in Physics” (pg. #)
In 1939 to 1989, John Wheeler, being fond of ontic openings, attempted to expunge and or invalidate the operation of second law (and entropy increase) of thermodynamics, in areas like electrons transforming into positrons (1949), black holes (1971), individual "molecules" asked about the second law (c.1980), and the universe as a whole (1989), so to justify some type of peculiar Parmenidean-like model of "being continuity", in Wheeler' mind, wherein "disorder" inverts back to "order", i.e. "death" reverts back "life", or something to this effect, in a fictional universe where the thermodynamic arrow of time can be reversed, and time thereby traveled.
In Aug 2020, Christopher Nolan, in his film Tenet, intermixes the mysterious “Sator square”, a five-word palindrome square, dozens of versions of which made around Rome (79 AD), with the John Wheeler's 1989 theory of how the thermodynamic arrow of time, aka the second law, or tendency for entropy to increase, does not exist, or can be "reversed" at the subatomic level, as a basis for a time travel based story to save the world from so-called "entropy inversion" implosion, or something along these lines.
The script was peer-reviewed by Kip Thorne, a theoretical physicist, astrophysicist, and semi-ranked greatest astronomer ever:
- “I did have Kip Thorne read the script and he helped me out with some of the concepts, though we’re not going to make any case for this being scientifically accurate. But, it is based roughly on actual science.”
- — Christopher Nolan (2020), "Press Release for Tenet" 
Thorne, to note, was also the scientific consultant of Nolan's 2014 Interstellar. This is about as much as we are directly told about Nolan's so-called "entropy inversion" concept based film.
In Sep 2020, the LA Times had Claudia Rham, a theoretical physicist at Imperial College London, who specializes in cosmological gravity and dark energy topics, review Tenet; some of her Q&A comments, with corrections, are as follows:
- “Compared to previous movies, like Interstellar (2014), the gap is maybe bigger. It’s far less grounded into physics. There are a lot of times where they use science jargon and it’s just jargon with no content. If you look at “Interstellar” and other movies like that, there’s a little bit more depth. … Not everything is completely wrong. It is true that you think your clock is ticking, that the way you feel time is evolving. This is related to the notion of entropy and it’s not necessarily incorrect to say that if you could reverse or invert your entropy maybe you could think of things going backwards in time. That element you can accept. But the consequences were not at all explored in a way that made sense.”
- — Claudia Rham (2020), “Review of Tenet” (Q: Overall, how does the science hold up?), Sep 4 
Rham, here, being marginalized in her education, to the niche topic of cosmological physics, is not seeing the big picture. Correctly, if we are not mistaken, in our attempted read of Nolan's mindset, he is attempting to address the once-vexing subject of "entropy reversal", such as Johnstone digresses on:
- “We are convinced that an evolutionary process that has occurred. We cannot think of a time in the past when the universe did not exist. To account for the existence of “human and animal minds”, which is associated with a retardation in the increase of entropy, we are compelled to postulate that somewhere or other, or some time or other, the second law of thermodynamics must reverse itself, that is, some time or somewhere entropy must decrease, or have decreased, otherwise we shall be compelled (as Sir William Thomson was) to postulate a beginning, or creation.”
- — James Johnstone (1921), The Mechanism of Life in Relation to Modern Physical Theory (pgs. 192-203)
Here, to digress quickly, all of this "entropy must decrease", "entropy retardation", "entropy reversal", as struggled with in the mind of Johnstone (1921), or what seems to be the mind of Nolan (2020) and Rham (2020), is usurped in 1975 when Norman Dolloff published his Heat Death and the Phoenix, wherein he explained that it is not "entropy inversion" (Nolan, 2020) or "entropy reversal" (Johnstone, 1921), that we need to be concerned about, but rather "free energy of formation", which subsumes all the previous entropy confusions. Nolan and Rham, like most, have never gotten this memo. To continue:
- “Entropy is the measure of the level of order or the level of information. There’s a really fundamental law in physics telling us that entropy always increases. On average, things get more and more disorganized. That’s why we grow older — our body gets slowly more and more disorganized. That’s why it’s much easier to destroy something than to construct something. At the physical level, if you have a box and you put some gas in it, the gas will start taking up the whole space. It will spread and get more and more disorganized. When entropy increases, it means things are becoming less and less organized.”
- — Claudia Rham (2020), “Review of Tenet” (Q: What is entropy?), Sep 4 
This last quote, wherein in Rham states that "entropy is a measure of the level of information" is incorrect, by a long shot.
Equivalence values (1854)
- “That’s mostly true. For most laws of physics, there’s a time symmetry. Anything that can move forwards, you can think of it moving backwards. Entropy is the only thing we experience — so we associate it with the way we experience time — in one direction. As a whole, entropy always increases as opposed to decreasing. So you can imagine an alternate world where entropy always decreases and everything goes the other way as opposed to us. People in the alternate world would be living the other way. That’s fine by itself, but when you start making the interaction and making contact with that world then it doesn’t make sense from a physical point of view.”
- — Claudia Rham (2020), “Review of Tenet” (Q: Nolan says that all laws of physics are symmetrical except for entropy. Is that true?), Sep 4
The statement "entropy always increases", in the original "correct" formulation, read: the "equivalence values [entropy] of all uncompensated transformations [entropy change at the end of a Carnot cycle] always tends to a maximum [value of "N" at the end of the given process or transformation]" (Clausius, 1856). Much of Clausius, however, we note, has yet to be distilled to the lay public, or lay theoretical physics professors (e.g. Rham or Thorne). The original Clausius formulation has been garbled, in efforts to simplify things, to the point confusion. Entropy, but its pure self, was defined by citation-combined effort of William Thomson (May 1854), followed by Clausius (Dec 1854), simply as a quantity Q of heat entering or leaving the boundary of a system, with an absolute temperature T, as follows:
Named the "equivalence-value" from the German Aequivalenzwerth, "equal worth". Maxwell later referred to these as "transformation equivalents", in English; about which he postulated that it will be several generations, before people come to understand "entropy" correctly:
- “By the introduction of the expression, “without compensation” (verses “of itself”), combined with a full interpretation of this phrase, the statement of the second principle (“that heat cannot without compensation pass from a colder to a warmer body”) becomes complete and exact; but in order to understand it we must have a previous knowledge of the theory of transformation-equivalents, or in other words entropy, and it is to be feared that we shall have to be taught thermodynamics for several generations before we can expect beginners to receive as axiomatic the theory of entropy.”
- — James Maxwell (1878), “Tait’s Thermodynamics” 
Here, accordingly, we understand the evident ignorance seen in Nolan, Thorpe, and Rham, who are representative of the average top end intellect, presently. Rham continues:
- “Every time you make a decision or anything happens, like you wake up in the morning and you decide if you’re going to have tea or coffee, you can imagine that there’s a continuum of parallel worlds. In each one of them a particular reality takes place. You decide here to take a coffee this morning, but in another world you decide to take a tea, and in another world you decide to wake up five minutes late. With every single physical process and interaction, whatever can happen happens, and there’s a multiple of worlds with every possible realization that enters. When he’s talking about multiple worlds that’s what he has in mind — that the reality we are in has something happen here, but there’s another reality where something else may have happened. And maybe there’s a connection between the two if you go back in time or invert time. If you change the decision you made, maybe you shift into a different parallel reality. At some point in the movie they want to explore this possibility, but at the end their conclusion is “What happened, happened.” That there’s just one reality and there’s no way to change it: “This is the reality we are in and it’s fixed.”
- — Claudia Rham (2020), “Review of Tenet” (Q: When his character mentions the “parallel worlds” theory what does he mean?), Sep 4
This last review quote, at least makes some cogent sense.
The Sator square (SS), "Sator Arepo" cypher, "tenet cross", or solar square, etc., is a 25-letter, 5-word, square palindrome, supposedly filled with anagrams, isopsephy cyphers, and astro-theology data, the oldest versions of which dating to ruins in Pomeii (79 AD), which shows the words "Tenet", in two-directions, in the form of a cross. The following is pre-12th century Latin manuscript depiction of the Sator square, showing what seems to be a cross inside of a solar circle:
The Sator square is thought to have been an apotropaic charm, the most-famous of a number of so-called "magic" squares, of various sizes, 3-sided to 7-sided, as shown below, that began to be made in the early Roman recension period (c.100BC to 100AD); the following are examples of "magic squares" (below left is the Sator square):
The full meaning of the Sator Square has never been solved. Attempts have been made since at least the 14th century to decode it, including attempts by: Albertus Magnus (c.1260), Cornelius Agrippa (c.1520), Athanasius Kircher (1665), Adolf Erman (1934), Walter Moeller (1973), and Miroslav Marcovich (1988).
In c.1260, Albertus Magnus, in his Egyptian Secrets, to give some context in which the Sator square was employed, namely as a sort of magic charm, or Egyptian magic spell, associates the words: sator, arepo, and tenet, supposedly, with a variation of Christ, e.g. "tenet = cross of Christ mesepos" (whatever that means), as shown below:
and says you have to do the following with the word square to make "witches" go away:
- “An excellent way to prove whether a person is a witch or not: First, try to obtain St. John's roots and one ounce of herb of the same plant called moto. Write the [Sator square] letters upon a scrap of paper and put to the root and herbs. This must be sewed up in a piece of leather, and if you wish to see the witch, only carry the paper with you, but it must be taken in the hour when the first quarter of the moon occurs. You will then perceive that no witch can remain in the same room with you.”
In 1531, Cornelius Agrippa discussed seven of these "magic squares", in respect to their hidden astro-theological, in respect to the five planets, sun and moon:
- “It is affirmed by magicians, that there are certain sacred tables of the planets endowed with many and very great virtues of the heavens, inasmuch as they represent that divine order of celestial numbers which can no other way be expressed than by the marks of numbers and characters.”
In 1665, Kircher, in his Arithmologia (1665), shows Sator square, above (left), in a Solomon seal, in side of a circle; he does some speculative decoding.
AΩ | Pater Noster cross
In 1000AD, the Greek alphabet was formed. The alpha (Α) and omega (Ω) are the first and last letters, respectively, of the classical (Ionic) Greek alphabet. The New Testament, of the Bible, says that the "lord god" is the alpha and the omega:
- “I am alpha and omega, the beginning and the end, saith the lord god, that is, and that was, and that is to coming, almighty.”
- — Anon (300AD), Bible, New Testament (Revelations, 1.8)
In 400AD, pictures of Jesus, began to appear with the alpha and omega symbols, as shown adjacent.
Walter Moeller, in his The Mythraic Origin and the Meanings of the Rotas-Sator Square (1973), discusses how the 25-letters of the square can be reordered into the so-called "Pater Noster Alpha-Omega cross", above (right). The following, e.g. shows a 1952 sketch of a "Pater Noster AO cross", with other symbolism, associated with the work of Cyrus Gordon:
The phrase "Pater Noster" is Latin for "Our Father", and is the start of the famous Lord's prayer, which ends with the words "Amen", the supreme god of Egyptian during the Theban recension (1550-720BC). The Christianity version of the Lord's prayer, to note, is the Roman recension rescript of spell 125 of the Egyptian Book of the Dead. This connects things back to the Horus, or Horus the child (Harpo-crates), aka "morning sun", who is shown above being born out of a lotus, the stem of which dips into the water of the Nun (letter "N"), who is shown flanked by the letters Alpha (A) and Omega (Ω). Jesus, likewise, is pictured above (right), with the same Horus-based AΩ symbolism (AO cross) associated with him.
The supreme gods during this period, e.g. in 69AD, the oldest known Sator square, were Osiris and Horus, as evidenced by the art work on Dendera Temple. During the Roman recension, 100BC to 800AD, Osiris and Horus were merged into the character of Jesus, and Osiris became god the father.
N | Nun
The Sator square, firstly, we note, is a five-word sentence palindrome, meaning that the same words form if the sentence is read forward or backwards:
- Sator arepo teNet opera rotas
It seems also to be of significance that the letter ‘N’ is at the center of the sentence palindrome, the ‘tenet cross’, and the Sator square. This would seem to be symbolic of the ‘Nun’, which also is a palindrome, and in Egyptian astro-mythology, is the origin of all things, aka the void or vacuum of the Greek chaos origin of all things rescript of the former. The Nun or "N" etymology, to note, is also found in words such as: new, nil, neo, naught, negative, noosphere, etc.
Arepo | Horus and magnetism
In modern post-Rossetta Stone era terms, Adolf Erman (1934), to give a more realistic conjecture, argued that "Arepo" is code for Harpocrates (Horus the child), aka "Horus" as the morning sun, or Hor-Hap (Serapis or Osiris-Apis), the father of Horus. We can see a glimpse of this Erman "Arepo = Horus" conjecture, in the Mithras solar cross, below left, Mithras being the Persian equivalent (or rescript) of the Horus solar myth:
This can be compared to Walter Moeller (1973), above right, who used isopsephy (or gematria) to argue that the letters are coding of the procession of the equinoxes, below right, or something along these lines. There seems to be no doubt that isopsephy of some sort is behind this "Tenet cross", "Rotas Opera", or "Sator square", as nearly all words from the invention of the Greek alphabet (1,000BC up to 400AD) had some type of numerical equivalence coding or meaning behind them.
Whatever the case, the "tenet cross", seems to indicated the sun (or sun god) with a cross "+" over it, the ancient Egyptian symbol for the sun, as found in the Greek Theta "Θ" symbol, wherein, as we known, the cross part of Theta, as said to be representative of Horus "the magnet", aka the "bone of Horus", as the Greeks called it, and Set "the iron" (Set or Satan being found in other "magic squares" of this period):
- “The loadstone is called, by the Egyptians, the ‘bone of Horus’, as iron is the ‘bone of Typho [Set].”
Also, we know how, as constellations, Horus as Orion, Set as the Bear, they provided North-South direction to the ancients. This north/south magnetic nature of tenet cross, according, seems to have been played out in the film, in respect to the character Sator, saying how "entropy inverts the same way the magnetic poles have switched", as discussed below.
We arrive as the following decoding of the Tenet cross:
The Sator square, seems to be, in short, is a cypher for the Egyptian myth of the morning sun "born", i.e. the alpha [α] point, out of the waters of the Nun [N], via a rising out-of-the-water lotus, which culminates in the omega [ω] point, with Osiris, shown above in the form of the djed pillar (backbone of Osiris), being the "Our Father" (Pater Noster), which explains why the letter "N" is found prominently in the Tenet cross or Sator square, as this is the origin of all things, in all variants of the Egyptian creation myths, the Heliopolis creation myth being the most dominate version.
Although, there seems to be some missing or unsolved cyphers in the Sator square cypher, e.g. isopsephy coding, this seems to be the gist of the decoding, namely a solar birth mythos, coded into a isopsephy-based, palindrome-devised, anagram-loaded geometric cypher, so to say. Much of this is found in the ordering of the letters of the Greek alphabet, Hebrew alphabet, Latin alphabet, and hence in the modern English alphabet.
Entropy inversion | Etymology
Etymologically, the concept of “inverting” or an “inverse” of entropy, seems to have originated the publications of Edwin Jaynes and his so-called “MaxEnt school” (or Jayne's school), which ran from 1957 to early 1990s, as found used in the terms: “entropic inverse” (Jaynes, 1984), Bayesian inversion, MaxEnt inversion (1989), or “maximum entropy inversion” (Doyen, 1987). The Jaynes' school, however, is categorized as a "Roegen cul-de-sac", alongside one of the many manifold avenues on the highway of thermodynamics, per reason that the entire school is a result of Myron Tribus (1948) being asked, during his UCLA PhD exam, to explain the relation between Clausius entropy and Shannon entropy, which is trick question, being that there is no relation (it was a joke invented by John Neumann). A decade later, Tribus connected with Jaynes, and their school was born.
The Jaynes school, and its inversion term use, accordingly, to clarify, seemingly, has no direct etymological relation to Nolan's use of inverting "physical" entropy. Nolan's derived his term usage from from the so-called Wheeler model; the gist of which being the following view, developed by John Wheeler, fueled by a NSF grant, about which gave four lectures on world-wide in 1989:
- “Every it-every particle, every field of force, even the spacetime continuum itself-derives its function, its meaning, its very existence entirely-even if in some contexts indirectly-from the apparatus-elicited answers to ‘yes-or-no’ questions, binary choices. Bits.”
In this article, Wheeler cites Chauncey wright, Josiah Royce, and Charles Peirce as his intellectual confidants, along with the following quote by Parmenides:
- “What is, is identical with the ‘thought’ that recognizes it.”
- — Parmenides (c.460BC), Fragment #
Wheeler's model, here, although very subtle, accordingly, is an attempt to do a "sokal affair" style, "ontic opening" based, remake "being", in a non-deterministic, seeming closeted-theology sense of the matter. The Jayne's school, conversely, nothing but a pure ride on the Shannon bandwagon, and has no grand cosmic synthesis in mind; it was just an attempt to rewrite "Boltzmann entropy", via the help of the c.1750 probability theories of Thomas Bayes, in the new communication theory language (1s and 0s) of Claude Shannon (1949), aka "Shannon entropy". Granted, to note, both Jaynes and Wheeler cite Bayes. Wheeler, however, only does so in the foot notes; and he never cites Shannon directly, whereas Shannon is the focal point of Jaynes theory. The long and the short of this, is that Nolan seems to have invented his "entropy inversion" term on his own, albeit themed on his readings of the works of Wheeler.
Entropy | Inverted | Film use
- Barbara (pg. 13) [holds the round towards him so he can expect it]: “It’s inverted—its entropy runs backwards. So, to our eyes, its movement is reversed. We think it’s a type of inverse radiation, triggered by nuclear fusion?
This line from the film seems to be based on the following 1989 passage from John Wheeler's Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam, wherein we not that term "invert" (or inversion) may have arisen in Nolan's mind from the word "convert", as shown below, and how, in Wheeler's mind scientists and "convert time-symmetric laws that govern simple events into time asymmetric laws":
- “The second law [entropy] of thermodynamics relates probabilities to to time's arrow [Eddington, 1928; Hawking, 1996].
- It says that any system left to itself (free of outside influences) will tend toward greater disorder. Back when Dick Feynman and I were talking about electrons moving with equal ease backward and forward in time, we realized that such a way of thinking made sense because of the extreme simplicity of the electron. You can tell by looking into a person's face something about what that person has been through. You cannot tell anything about an electron's history by looking at it. Every electron is exactly like every other electron, unscarred by its past, not blessed with a memory—of either the human or computer variety. The electron pays for its freedom to move forward and backward in time by remembering neither future nor past. We remember the past and are trapped in one-way motion through time.
- In speaking of nineteenth-century physics, I am speaking really of the sciences of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics. Developments in those fields showed how the statistics of large numbers can convert [invert?] the time-symmetric laws that govern simple events into the time-asymmetric laws that we see governing complex events. For more than half of the twentieth century, it appeared that time symmetry in the small remained the rule, with time asymmetry being an artifact of complexity. As particles were discovered, as nuclei were explored, as quantum electrodynamics evolved, at first nothing marred this picture of perfect time symmetry for all basic laws. In the work that Feynman and I did on action at a distance, for instance, we found that the apparent one-way flow of radiation— forward in time, not backward— could be entirely accounted for by the large-scale distribution of absorbing mass in the universe, lots of it. It required no time asymmetry in the fundamental laws of electrodynamics. Then in 1964, James Cronin and Val Fitch, with their colleagues James Christenson and Rene Turlay, discovered that time-reversal invariance fails for the decay of the K meson, or kaon. Here, for the first time, was an example of time asymmetry at the elementary level of single particles, not the level of complex systems.”
- — John Wheeler (1989), Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam (pgs. 347-48)
We see Barbara's comment about entropy, inversion, in respect to radiation, nearly mirrored verbatim in Wheeler's passage.
Feynman | Wheeler
|A video of John Wheeler talking about his c.1949 work with Richard Feynman, on electrons, positrons, and arrow of time reversal.|
Next, Nolan cited the so-called Feynman-Wheeler theory:
- Neil (skeptical) (pg. 49): Time travel?
- Protagonist: No. Technology that can invert an objects entropy?
- Neil: you mean reverse chronology? Like Feynman and Wheeler’s notion that a positron is an electron moving backwards in time.
- Protagonist: Sure, that’s exactly what I meant.
- Neil: I’ve a master’s in physics.
- Protagonist: Well, try to keep up.
In 1939, Richard Feynman entered Princeton, and began to work with his PhD advisor John Wheeler, receiving PhD, in 1942, with a thesis on the "The Principle of Least Action in Quantum Mechanics", which attempted to apply the the principle of stationary action to problems of quantum mechanics, inspired by a desire to quantize the Wheeler–Feynman absorber theory of electrodynamics, and laid the groundwork for the path integral formulation and Feynman diagrams, such as pictured above, in respect to electron-positron annihilation.
In interview, Wheeler (c.2000) talks about how in early 1940s he was PhD advisor of Feynman; the two of them, while Feynman was grading the paper's of Wheeler's undergraduates, talked about the awareness of particles, electrons flouting entropy or something along these lines. To continue, we see one of the characters, named "Wheeler" saying the following:
- Wheeler (pg. 94): I can’t vouch for the handling, friction and wind resistance are reversed. You’re inverted, the world is not. You can’t fight the prevailing wind of entropy. Don’t try flying a plane – it’d fall out of the sky. Once again, you’re inverted, the world is not – and those forces will be pushing back on you continuously.
Stream of entropy
Next, Nolan talks about humans, when inverted, being like swimming up the stream of entropy:
- Kat (pg. 99): Who are you?
- Neil: Let me start with the simple stuff. Every law of physics operates the same forwards and backwards, except one. entropy …
- Protagonist: What’s the ‘algorithm’, Neil?
- Neil: The 241 is one section of it. One out of nine, It’s a formula rendered into physical form so it can’t be copied or communicated. A black box with one function.
- Protagonist: Which is?
- Neil: Inversion. But not objects or people. The world around us.
- Kat: I don’t understand.
- Neil: As they invert the entropy of more and more object … [Neil holds his hands, fingers spread, pointing at each other] The two directions of time are becoming more intertwined … [he slowly brings his fingers together, into the ‘Tenet’ gesture] But because of the environment’s entropy flows in our direction … [he pushes one hand back with the other] … we dominate. They’re always swimming upstream. It’s what saved your life—the inverted explosion was pushing against the environment.
- Protagonist (pg. 100): Pissing in the wind.
This "stream of entropy" logic first arose in Sherrington's Man on His Nature" lecture:
- “The living energy-system, in commerce with its surround, tends to increase itself. If we think of it as an eddy in the stream of energy it is an eddy which tends to grow; as part of this growth we have to reckon with its starting other eddies from its own resembling its own. This propensity it is which furnishes opportunity under the factors of evolution for a continual production of modified patterns of eddy. It is as though they progress toward something. But philosophy reflects that the motion for the eddy is in all cases drawn from the stream, and the stream is destined, so the second law of thermodynamics says, irrevocably to cease. The head driving it will, in accordance with the ascertained law of dynamics, run down. A state of static equilibrium will then replace the stream. And yet they will have been evolved. There purpose then was temporary? It would seem so.
- The cell is a dynamic equilibrium. It is so constituted as to maintain itself for a time—a time which is very brief as compared with the persistence of many inanimate things. From and to the world around it takes and gives energy. It is an eddy in a stream of energy. It has the power of throwing off from itself other eddies specifically like itself. In that way, though its personal eddy is brief, its specific eddy is as a species lasts immensely longer. But that eddy has inherent in its tendencies toward change, so that, where we are able to look back far enough, we find great numbers of its specific forms have vanished, and a multitude of modifications taken their places. These too are all on their way to change. It remains at present largely beyond our forecasting.”
- — Charles Sherrington (1938), Man on His Nature (pg. #)
Likewise, in 1950, Norbert Wiener, in The Human Use of Human Beings, elaborates on the same idea:
- “Certain analogies of behavior are observed between the machine and the living organism, the problem as to whether the machine is alive or not is, for our purposes, semantic … if we use the word ‘life’ to cover all phenomena which locally swim upstream against the current of entropy, we are at liberty to do so; however, we shall then include many astronomical phenomena … it is my opinion, therefore, best to avoid all question-begging epithets such as ‘life’, ‘soul’, ‘vitalism’, and the like, and say merely that machines [and] human beings [are] pockets of decreasing entropy in a framework in which the large entropy tends to increase.”
- — Norbert Weiner (1950), The Human Use of Human Beings (§2: Progress and Entropy, pgs. 28-47)
End of play
Next, Nolan talks about how if someone can invert (or convert?) the entropy of the world, then it is the end of the game:
- Neil: But the algorithm can change the direction of the wind. It can invert the entropy of the world.
- Kat: And if that happens?
- Neil: Oh, end of play.
- Protagonist: ‘End of Play’? Can you be a little more precise?
- Neil: Our present wiped out, our past obliterated. Everyone and everything whoever lived destroyed instantly. Precise enough?
The term "end of play", seems to be a reference to Gilbert Lewis' 1925 "game version of thermodynamics", and his thought that humans "apparently" are able to breast the great stream of irreversible processes:
- “Living creatures are cheats in the game of entropy, [which] alone seem able to breast the great stream of apparently irreversible processes. These processes tear down, living things build up. While the rest of the world seems to move towards a dead level of uniformity, the living organism is evolving new substances and more and more intricate forms.”
Entropy inversion | Magnetic pole switching
Nolan then tries to connect the earth's magnetic pole direction switching with his entropy inversion theory:
- Kat: What’s more fanatical than trying to destroy the world?
- [Kat moves towards Sator, but he raises a finger …]
- Sator (pg. 133): I’m not. I’m creating a new one. Somewhere, sometime, a man in a crystalline tower throws a switch and Armageddon is both triggered and avoided. Entropy inverts the same way the magnetic poles have switched 183 times over the millennia. Now time itself switches direction.
- [Sator looks towards the lowering sun …]
- Sator: The same sunshine we’ve basked in will warm the faces of our descendants generations from now.
- Protagonist: How can they want to destroy us?
- Sator: Because their oceans rose and their rivers ran dry. Don’t you see? Their world shriveled because of us. They have no choice but to turn back, there’s no life ahead of them. And we’re responsible. Knowing this, do you still want me to stop?
- Protagonist: Yes. Each generation looks out for it’s own survival.
Although difficult to say what exactly he is digging at here, it seems to be a science fiction jab at "inverting" the tentative future "heat death" model of entropy, or something to this effect?
Jesus | Christ
The film script reads has three "Jesus" said three times. In the film, the script is augmented by at least one "Jesus Christ" exclamation, by the protagonist. People name "Christopher", such as Christopher Nolan, in hmolscience, have a 75 percent probability of being religious, in belief system, with Christianity as their belief. These would seem to be characterized as "Freudian slips" in a film titled via a Horus magic puzzle cypher?
The following are quotes:
- “Inversion is a process whereby an object (or person) has its entropy reversed, essentially flipping its chronology so that from that point on it travels backwards in time instead of forwards. The process is achieved via a turnstile: a temporal reversal engine that has a distinct entrance and exit, ensuring the object/person doesn't accidentally come into contact with its past/future self and cause the universe to implode.”
- Entropy reversal – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Entropy antonyms – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Wheeler, John. (1998). Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam (spacetime, pg. 235; second law, pg. 347-48). W.W. Norton & Co, 2010.
- Marcovich, Miroslav. (1988). Studies in Graeco-Roman Religions and Gnosticism (§4: SATOR AREPO = Georgos Harpon, pgs. 28-48+). Publisher.
- Eddington, Arthur. (1928). The Nature of the Physical World (pg. 80). MacMillan.
- Thims, Libb. (2009). “Laplace’s demon meets Maxwell’s demon” (YT), Human Chemistry 101, Jun 10.
- Kip Thorne – Wikipedia.
- Zemler, Emily. (2020). “How Real is the Science of Christopher Nolan’s ‘Tenet’? We asked an Expert” (Ѻ), Los Angeles Times, Sep 4.
- Claudia de Rham – Wikipedia.
- Heat death – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Re-establishment of equilibrium in the caloric – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Equivalence value – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Equivalence-value of all uncompensated transformations – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Free energy of formation – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Thims, Libb. (2012). “Thermodynamics ≠ Information Theory: Science’s Greatest Sokal Affair” (pdf), Journal of Human Thermodynamics, 8(1): 1-120, Dec 19.
- Equivalence value of all uncompensated transformations – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Thims, Libb. (2020). Human Chemical Thermodynamics — Chemical Thermodynamics Applied to the Humanities: Meaning, Morality, Purpose; Sociology, Economics, Ecology; History, Philosophy, Government, Anthropology, Politics, Business, Jurisprudence; Religion, Relationships, Warfare, and Love (§15: Clausius) (pdf). Publisher.
- Equivalence value – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Transformation equivalents – Hmolpedia 2020.
- (a) Maxwell, James C. (1878). “Tait’s Thermodynamics: Part One”, (pgs. 257-59). Nature, Jan. 31.
(b) Maxwell, James C. (1878). “Tait’s Thermodynamics: Part Two”, (pgs. 278-81). Nature, Feb. 07.
- (a) Kircher, Athanasius. (1665). Arithmologia (pg. 220). Publisher.
(b) Arithmologia – Wikipedia.
(c) Stirling, William. (1897). The Canon: an Exposition of Pagan Mystery Perpetuated in the Cabala as the Rule of All the Arts (pg. 271). Matthews.
- Moeller, Walter. (1973). The Mythraic Origin and the Meanings of the Rotas-Sator Square (pdf). Brill.
- Sator Square – Wikipedia.
- Thomas, Kate. (2018). “Tweet”, Sep 13.
- Roman recension – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Magnus, Albertus. (c.1260). Egyptian Secrets (txt) (Tenet, 7+ pgs). Laurence, 1919.
- Stirling, William. (1897). The Canon: an Exposition of Pagan Mystery Perpetuated in the Cabala as the Rule of All the Arts (pg. 271). Matthews.
- Fideler, David. (1993). Jesus Christ, Sun of God: Ancient Cosmology and Early Christian Symbolism (magical gem, pg. 272. Quest Books.
- Alpha and Omega – Wikipedia.
- Pater Noster AO – Museum of Witchcraft and Magic.
- Cyrus Gordon – Wikipedia.
- Amen – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Recension theory – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Lord’s prayer (subdomain) – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Morning sun – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Supreme god timeline – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Dendera Temple – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Henkle, William. (1879). Educational Notes and Queries (pg. 143). Henkle.
- Astro-theology – BiblioTecaplyeyades.net.
- God character rescripts (subdomain) – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Budge, Wallis. (1904). The Gods of the Egyptians, Volume Two (pg. 246). Dover, 1969.
- Sun bulbs (Dendera temple) – Photo.
- Edwin Jaynes – Hmolpedia 2020.
- MaxEnt school – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Author. (1989). “Article” (inversion, pgs. 134, 136, 274); in: Maximum Entropy and Bayesian Method (editor: P.F. Fougere). Springer.
- Ulrych, T.J.: Sacchi, M.D. (2005). Information-Based Inversion and Processing with Applications (§4.3: Probabilistic Inversion, pgs. 181-). Elsevier.
- Doyen, Philippe. (1987). “Crack Geometry in Igneous Rocks: a Maximum Entropy Inversion of Elastic and Transport Properties” (abs), Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 92(B8):8169-81, Jul 10.
- Wheeler, John. (1989). “Information, Physics, Quantum: the Search for Links – Can We Ever Expect to Understand Existence?” (pdf); paper evolved from four presentations: Santa Fe Institute Conferences, 29 May to 2 Jun and 4-8 Jun 1989; Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on the Foundations of Quantum Mechanics in the Light of New Technology (pgs. 354-68), Tokyo; and Penrose Lecture, 20-22 Apr 1989 at annual meeting at Benjamin Franklin’s American Philosophical Society, held at Philadelphia for Promoting Useful Knowledge; and the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei Conference on La Verita nella Scienza, Rome 12 Oct 1989; Publication assisted in part by NSF Grant PHY 245-6243 to Princeton University.
- Sokal affair – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Ontic opening – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Shannon bandwagon – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Boltzmann entropy – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Thomas Bayes – Wikipedia.
- Shannon entropy – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Nolan, Christopher. (2020). Tenet (pdf) (entropy, 5+ pgs). Faber.
- Otap, Lenka. (2020). “The Science of Tenet Time-Inversion: Entropy and the Arrow of Time”, Medium.
- Time’s arrow – Hmolpedia 2020.
- arrow – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Wheeler, John. (c.2000), “Work with Richard Feynman” (YT), Web of Stories, Oct 9.
- Wheeler-Feynman absorber theory – Wikipedia.
- Charles Sherrington – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Soul – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Lewis, Gilbert N. (1925). The Anatomy of Science (cheats, pgs. 160, 178). Silliman Lectures; Yale University Press, 1926.
- Christopher etymology – Hmolpedia 2020.
- Dyer, James. (2020). “Tenet Explained: Understand Inversion, Temporal Pincer Movements, and the Timeline”, Empire, Sep 6.
- Anon. (2015). “The SATOR ROTAS Magic Square (with TENET in the Middle)” (YT), LatinTutorial, Nov 9.