问HN：语言能否承载物理能量？用语义挑战E=Mc²
我一直在探索一个想法：语言——特别是有意义的信息——可能对生物系统产生可测量的物理影响。受到信息理论和量子生物学的启发，我最近撰写了一篇论文，扩展了爱因斯坦的经典方程：
<p>E_total = mc² + λS</p>
其中 S 代表语义信息的可量化度量（使用自然语言处理模型和声学特征）。
<p>我对HN社区的核心问题是：</p>
语义内容——我们所说的话，或意义的编码方式——是否真的能够携带能量，并在物理世界中产生可测量的影响？
<p>例如，我对暴露于不同类型语言的植物进行了双盲实验。结果表明，积极且有意义的语言增加了植物的ATP生产和热输出（与对照组和混乱语言相比）。</p>
<pre><code> 有没有人见过类似的研究或进行过关于信息/意义作为物理变量的实验？
有没有其他方法可以测试或反驳这个想法？
在哪里可以找到最有力的论据来支持或反对将“意义”视为能量方程中的一个真实因素？
</code></pre>
我并不是在推广任何产品或服务——只是对如何验证或挑战这种“语义场”真诚感兴趣。如果有人想查看技术细节或数据，我很乐意在评论中分享更多。
<p>期待热烈的讨论！</p>
查看原文
I’ve been exploring the idea that language—specifically, meaningful information—might have a measurable physical effect on biological systems. Inspired by both information theory and quantum biology, I recently wrote a paper extending Einstein’s classic equation:<p>E_total = mc² + λS<p>where S represents a quantifiable measure of semantic information (using NLP models and acoustic features).<p>My core question for the HN community:
Could semantic content—what we say, or how meaning is encoded—actually carry energy that has a measurable impact in the physical world?<p>For example, I ran double-blind experiments on plants exposed to different types of speech. Results suggest that positive, meaningful language increased ATP production and thermal output in plants (compared to controls and scrambled speech).<p><pre><code> Has anyone seen similar research or run experiments on information/meaning as a physical variable?
Are there alternative ways to test or falsify this idea?
Where would you look for the strongest arguments for or against treating “meaning” as a real factor in energy equations?
</code></pre>
I’m not promoting any product or service—just genuinely interested in how this kind of “semantic field” could be validated or challenged.
If anyone wants to see the technical details or data, I’m happy to share more in the comments.<p>Looking forward to a spirited discussion!