This programmatic article (zeroth in the series “Reformulating Key Concepts of Physics Without Informational Language”) outlines a systematic replacement of “informational language” by physical language. It shows that many paradoxes of modern physics — the collapsar information paradox, Landauer’s principle as “proof of the physicality of information”, the holographic principle as “the informational nature of reality”, and Wheeler’s thesis “It from Bit” (“Everything from the bit”) — arise from conflating three senses of the word “information”: configuration (physical state), observer’s knowledge (epistemic category), and pseudosubstance (metaphysical construct, to be rejected). The key distinction between the ontic (pertaining to reality itself) and the epistemic (pertaining to our knowledge) is introduced. Confusing these levels is the root of pseudo‑paradoxes. On this basis, the article proposes to reformulate eight key concepts (each covered in a separate article of the series): the collapsar pseudo‑paradox, Landauer’s principle, the holographic principle, Wheeler’s thesis, entropy as “missing information”, as well as to compile a correspondence dictionary, analyse the firewall paradox, and address the technical problem of quantum state recovery. The aim of the reformulation is to eliminate pseudo‑problems, return physics to describing matter, fields, and space‑time, and provide a practical tool (dictionary) for switching to clear physical language. The article invites the scientific community to discussion. Keywords: informational language, reformulation, ontic, epistemic, collapsar, programmatic article.
This programmatic article (zeroth in the series “Reformulating Key Concepts of Physics Without Informational Language”) outlines a systematic replacement of “informational language” by physical language. It shows that many paradoxes of modern physics — the collapsar information paradox, Landauer’s principle as “proof of the physicality of information”, the holographic principle as “the informational nature of reality”, and Wheeler’s thesis “It from Bit” (“Everything from the bit”) — arise from conflating three senses of the word “information”: configuration (physical state), observer’s knowledge (epistemic category), and pseudosubstance (metaphysical construct, to be rejected). The key distinction between the ontic (pertaining to reality itself) and the epistemic (pertaining to our knowledge) is introduced. Confusing these levels is the root of pseudo‑paradoxes. On this basis, the article proposes to reformulate eight key concepts (each covered in a separate article of the series): the collapsar pseudo‑paradox, Landauer’s principle, the holographic principle, Wheeler’s thesis, entropy as “missing information”, as well as to compile a correspondence dictionary, analyse the firewall paradox, and address the technical problem of quantum state recovery. The aim of the reformulation is to eliminate pseudo‑problems, return physics to describing matter, fields, and space‑time, and provide a practical tool (dictionary) for switching to clear physical language. The article invites the scientific community to discussion. Keywords: informational language, reformulation, ontic, epistemic, collapsar, programmatic article.
This article presents a correspondence dictionary — a practical tool for transitioning from the tangled “informational language” to clear physical language in fundamental physics. The dictionary is based on the distinction of three senses of the word “information” introduced in Article 1 of the series: (1) configuration of a physical system (ontological), (2) observer’s knowledge (epistemic), (3) information as an independent entity (a metaphysical construct to be rejected). The dictionary covers key concepts reformulated in the previous articles of the series: the “collapsar information paradox”, Landauer’s principle, the holographic principle, Wheeler’s “Everything is information” thesis, entropy as “missing information”, and collapsar entropy. For each concept, tables are provided that replace informational formulations with physical ones. The extended dictionary includes additional terms: amount of information, quantum information, transmission, storage, processing and erasure of information, bit, and qubit. In the transitional period, it is recommended to use constructions with explanatory parentheses, for example: “configuration (information in the sense of the physical state of a system)”. The dictionary is addressed to authors of scientific articles, lecturers, students, and journal editors. Its goal is not to abolish the use of the word “information” in communication theory or quantum computing, but to offer a clear alternative where confusion of meanings creates pseudo‑problems. Keywords: dictionary, informational language, physical language, configuration, observer’s knowledge, reformulation.
This article analyses the so‑called “black hole information paradox” — one of the most discussed problems in modern theoretical physics. It is shown that the paradox arises only within the framework of “informational language”, where the word “information” is used in three different senses that become conflated. A distinction is introduced between the ontic (the physical configuration of the system, existing independently of any observer) and the epistemic (the observer’s knowledge about the system). A simple description of Hawking radiation is given: quantum fluctuations near the horizon of a collapsar produce pairs of particles; one falls inward, the other escapes, creating the appearance of evaporation. Based on this distinction, a reformulation of the problem is proposed in terms of physical objects without the ontologised concept of “information”. In this reformulation, a collapsar (so‑called “black hole”) is a compact massive object into whose gravitational capture zone physical systems are drawn. Crossing the event horizon means an epistemic loss (the observer ceases to know the configuration), not an ontological destruction. The unitarity of quantum mechanics is not violated because the total quantum state of the system evolves reversibly. The main counter‑arguments (the firewall paradox, the unproven status of correlations in Hawking radiation) are examined and answered. It is shown that the “information paradox” disappears, leaving a technical problem of describing quantum correlations. This article is the first in the series “Reformulating Key Concepts of Physics Without Informational Language”. Keywords: collapsar, information paradox, ontic, epistemic, configuration, observer’s knowledge.
This article analyses the firewall paradox (wall‑of‑fire paradox, AMPS) — one of the most discussed challenges to modern quantum gravity. The paradox arises from an apparent contradiction between three postulates: the unitarity of quantum mechanics, the semiclassical description of Hawking radiation, and Einstein’s equivalence principle. Proponents of “informational language” argue that to save information, one must abandon the equivalence principle and accept the existence of a high‑energy “firewall” at the event horizon of a collapsar. It is shown that the firewall paradox is a problem of “informational language” , not a physical contradiction. The paradox is rooted in the conflation of the three senses of “information” (configuration, observer’s knowledge, pseudosubstance) introduced in Article 1. When reformulated in physical language (configuration, quantum correlations, unitary evolution), the need for a “firewall” disappears. Monogamy of entanglement is a property of quantum correlations, not an “informational principle”. The change in correlation structure after Page time is a technical problem, not a fundamental contradiction. Alternative approaches (Susskind’s complementarity) that do not require a firewall are considered. Responses to possible objections are given. The reformulation preserves the equivalence principle, eliminates the pseudo‑paradox, and turns the problem into a technical description of quantum correlations. The article is the seventh in the series “Reformulating Key Concepts of Physics Without Informational Language”. Keywords: firewall paradox, wall of fire, AMPS, collapsar, information, quantum correlations, monogamy of entanglement.
In contemporary physical discourse, the term “information” is used in at least three different senses, which are often conflated, creating pseudo‑problems — the most striking example being the “black hole information paradox”. This article identifies these three phenomena and proposes separate, correct terms for each. The first phenomenon is information as the configuration of a physical system (the microscopic state of fields and particles). This is an ontic phenomenon, existing independently of any observer. The author proposes calling it “configuration” (information in the sense of the physical state of a system). The second phenomenon is information as the observer’s knowledge about the system. This is an epistemic phenomenon, existing only relative to an observer. The proposed term is “observer’s knowledge” (information in the sense of the description accessible to an observer). The third phenomenon is information as an independent physical entity (Wheeler’s “It from Bit” thesis). This is a metaphysical construct lacking a rigorous physical definition. The author proposes calling it “pseudosubstance” (information in the sense of an independent ontological entity) and notes that in serious physical discourse this term should not be used as a working concept. The proposed terminology eliminates ambiguity, makes pseudo‑problems disappear, and returns physics to its foundations — the description of physical objects, not of “information” as a separate entity. During a transitional period, it is recommended to use constructions with parenthetical explanations: “configuration (information in the sense of the physical state of a system)”. The author invites the scientific community to discuss these proposals. Keywords: information, terminology, configuration, observer’s knowledge, pseudosubstance, information paradox.
Information is treated by classical physics, relativity theory, and quantum mechanics as an epistemic variable, with no significance in their mathematical models. All currently accepted conceptions of information and entropy are subjective, observer-related. We have proposed (Ospino 2026) considering information as an ontic category with energy equivalence and energetic meaningfulness, and making it part of the complete balance of physical evolution. The history of science is the history of useful but incomplete models derived under the reliance of approximations and simplifications. Every such model was contemporarily considered complete until the contrary fact was demonstrated. Unitarity and determinism are generally regarded as a complete understanding of physical evolution. The empirical success and practical usefulness of such assumptions is undeniable, as every model before was also for a certain time, until it was not. Motivated by the information-energy equivalence (Landauer, Vopson), and by the possibility of resolving some open questions not explainable under the current understanding, we introduced ontic information into consideration, and we are presenting here some derived conclusions for further analysis and discussion. We emphasize that the epistemic nature of information and entropy as per Shannon and von Neumann (and related approaches) needs to be consequently updated with the ontic understanding, or else the analysis will be flawed when using epistemic approaches. Also, since unitarity is the concept in question here, we rely on acceptance, for the purpose of the discussion, that unitarity could be incomplete.
It is broadly believed that everything in the universe is found to be made from a few basic building blocks called fundamental particles, governed by four fundamental forces. However, physicists such as John Archibald Wheeler suggested that information is fundamental to the physics of the universe. According to this it from bit doctrine, all things physical are information-theoretic in origin. This doctrine is based in the old Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics; an interpretation which is internally inconsistent and no applicable to the cosmos as a whole. Modern consistent interpretations of quantum mechanics eliminate the old myths about measurement processes and observers' consciousness and reintroduce the idea of a wholly physical reality, invalidating the it from bit doctrine. Utilizing a new phase space formulation of quantum mechanics developed recently by the author, the concepts of bit and it are reconsidered. We introduce the new states D as quantum bits and the new Hamiltonians H as quantum its. The new concepts of it and bit introduced in this work have a well-defined and rigorous definition, unlike Wheeler's concepts. Moreover, the new concepts apply on situations where the traditional wavefunction theory does not work. The it H is not derivable from the bit D and, as a consequence, the old it from bit doctrine gets substituted by the new it and bit. After showing why the physical entropy used in the science of thermodynamics is not a measure of the ignorance of human observers, the final part of this Essay is devoted to emphasize the importance that the bit acquires in modern science when confronted to the delicious multiplicity of the far-from-equilibrium regimes, where the certainty of Newtonian and Schrodinger motion begin to fade in favour of a complex non-geometrical, 'living', conception of Nature: an it and bit conception.