Page 1 of 2

how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:10 am
by r3d4
https://www.raspberrypi.org/downloads/raspbian/
Raspbian comes pre-installed with plenty of software for education, programming and general use.
It has Python, Scratch, Sonic Pi, Java and more.
:roll:


Apparently a-kindle-loaded-with-e-books-is-heavier-than-an-empty-one ... so how heavy is raspbian ?

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:18 am
by mikerr
There is a bare desktop download if you don't want all the apps preinstalled,
or even raspbian lite if you don't even want the desktop.

Raspbian stretch full desktop & all apps:
2GB download, 5.6GB installed
Raspbian stretch desktop:
1GB download, 3.4GB installed
Raspbian Lite:
400MB download, 1.9GB installed

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:47 am
by gordon77
r3d4 wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:10 am
https://www.raspberrypi.org/downloads/raspbian/
Raspbian comes pre-installed with plenty of software for education, programming and general use.
It has Python, Scratch, Sonic Pi, Java and more.
:roll:


Apparently a-kindle-loaded-with-e-books-is-heavier-than-an-empty-one ... so how heavy is raspbian ?
Which are heaviest 0 or 1's? 😀

Is memory heavier if filled with all 0's or 1's, eg empty, rather than random data?

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:56 am
by mahjongg
never knew that electrons have mass (have weight) but apparently they do.
Mass of electron is 9.1×10^-31 kg while proton and neutron weighs almost similar ( 1.67×10^-27 kg).
so if a flash cell with a "1" weighs more or less than one with a "0" depends on whether a "charged cell" (with more electrons stored in it) represents a "1" or a "0"... :mrgreen:

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 12:17 pm
by LTolledo
I dont know if anybody can quantify the weight of computer program in terms of grams (or pounds)....

or we go with mahjongg's value and convert megabytes to grams?

....then we might know how "heavy" is raspbian :mrgreen:

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 2:48 pm
by HawaiianPi
Raspbian has been optimized nicely and is very lightweight for a full desktop OS. As mikerr said, you can download different versions to suit your needs in terms of additional software.

The full version with desktop and recommended software has a lot of extras, and people often complained about how long the update/upgrade process took as a result. For that reason a less bloated desktop version was created, and the Lite version is command line only with no graphical user interface. If you don't need a desktop, then Lite is the smallest and least resource hungry version of Raspbian.

There are other lightweight alternatives, such as Tiny Core Linux.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 3:06 pm
by pcmanbob
Well if you are talking about weight the layer of dust that will eventually form on your pi will have more affect upon its weight that the software loaded on it and we are probably not even talking about a layer of dust your could see.

:lol: :lol:

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 3:13 pm
by B.Goode
Can you measure the state of charge of a rechargeable cell by measuring its weight?

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 3:35 pm
by mahjongg
B.Goode wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 3:13 pm
Can you measure the state of charge of a rechargeable cell by measuring its weight?
no, its unmeasurably small.

at a zero point then 32 zero's then 91 kilogram per electron, (that is 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000091 Kg) even with a billion electrons it would still weigh nothing at all, just one dust particle would weigh trillions times trillions more.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 3:41 pm
by jahboater
For each instruction count the set bits with __builtin_popcount() or use Brian Kernighan’s algorithm.
Set bits have more electrons in the memory cells.

On the Pi,
a particular add insn opcode is 0x030080E0 (6 set bits)
and sub is 0x034054E0 (9 set bits)
so subtract is heavier than add.
:)

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 3:56 pm
by gkaiseril
The installation is only the start of the amount of secondary storage occupied by the OS. Each update to the OS or installed applications consumes more SD card memory. The memory load on the system memory depends upon what services you are running. The full updated system can easily fit on an 8 gigabyte SD card. This does not include all the junk mail in your e-mail.

Like the kindle you may never feel this added weight.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:03 pm
by Heater
Whilst electrons have mass and our Raspbian is stored as a pattern of charges on the gates of transistors in the FLASH memory of SD cards, we cannot weigh the operating system.

Given that the Pi and it's SD card will be electrically neutral no matter if the SD is programmed on blank, it will always have the same mass. The charges on those gates are balanced elsewhere.

On the other hand, according to recent physics theory information itself has mass. Squeeze enough information into a small enough space and you create a black hole!

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:50 pm
by davidcoton
Heater wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:03 pm
Squeeze enough information into a small enough space and you create a black hole!
Is that why too much learning gives you a headache? :twisted:

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 10:21 am
by Burngate
Heater wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:03 pm
Squeeze enough information into a small enough space and you create a black hole!
I understood that the information stayes on the surface of the black hole - more information, larger area, so bigger and heavier black hole.
If that's so, then you can't squeeze information into a 3D space.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 11:47 am
by Heater
Burgate,
I understood that the information stayes on the surface of the black hole - more information, larger area, so bigger and heavier black hole
I know next to nothing about this. But...

1) There is a simple equation that relates the mass of a black hole to it's radius. And hence it's surface area.

2) We have the equivalence E = mc^2 from Einstein so we can relate mass to energy.

3) Photons have energy E = hf, where E is the energy of the photon in Joules; h is Planck's constant and f is the frequency of the light in hertz.

4) We can relate (some how..) units of information to photons.

5) From 4) 3) and 2) we find that information has mass. And hence gravity.

6) If we drop information, in the form of photons, into a black hole, it gets more massive by 2) and 3).

7) From 6) and 1) we can calculate the increase in a black holes surface area per unit of information dropped in.

From this we find that the amount of information in a black hole is proportional to its surface area.

This is really weird because normally one would expect the amount of information in a volume to be proportional to the volume not the surface area of the volume. For example 2 SD cards take twice the volume of one.

Further, we can deduce from all the above that if you do try to put too much information into any normal volume of space it will acquire so much mass that it will collapse into a black hole under it's own self gravity. And that the amount of energy required to do this is proportional to the surface area of the volume of space.

Phew... Some where on the YouTube there is a vid. of a lecture by Prof. Leonard Susskind explaining all this. Of course he does it way better. I was amazed that the maths he used along the way very simple and totally understandable by a high school student.
If that's so, then you can't squeeze information into a 3D space.
Well, of course you can. If you have a volume of space that is a vacuum you can put an SD card in it! Or you can pass information through it in the form of signals formed from radio waves or light, photons that is.

What the above argument says is that there is a limit to the amount of information you can squeeze in to that volume. Beyond which it collapses into a black hole. At which point the surface area of your volume of space is proportional to the amount of information you put in.

Where that information actually is, is another matter in my mind...

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 12:24 pm
by PhatFil
it aint heavy its my brother,

oh, thats the printer scrub that..

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 12:25 pm
by Heater
Given that Raspbian is information, in the form of a pattern of bits stored on some media, then one might like to read this:

Does Information Have Mass? - https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1309/1309.7889.pdf

"Experiments devised to compare the weight of information storage media before and after recording/erasure have
been carried out to 10−8 kg accuracy by use of a precision balance, and significant differences—the order of
10−6 kg —have been found [8,9], as discussed below.
The original goal of these experiments was not to compare weights, because the considerations in the section above
make it evident that the expected differences are too small to be measurable. Instead the weight transients were
discovered during tests ... "

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 1:53 pm
by jojopi
Heater wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 6:03 pm
Given that the Pi and it's SD card will be electrically neutral no matter if the SD is programmed on blank, it will always have the same mass. The charges on those gates are balanced elsewhere.
Certainly in a regular capacitor we would expect the electrons added to the negative plate to be closely balanced by those removed from the positive. In fact it is hard to see how we could avoid that, even if we wanted to. Electric current flows in circuits. (And static electricity requires voltages well above those typical in modern electronics.)

However, a charged capacitor stores energy, E=½CV². Assuming it is at rest, we also have E=mc². So the mass must increase in a charged capacitor, even if the total number of electrons remains constant. Furthermore the increase in mass is proportional to the square of the voltage, whereas the amount of charge moved was in linear proportion (Q=CV).

Re-reading the article from the original post, it is the correct argument that is being made. It is not that there are more electrons because some are trapped, but rather that the electrons that are trapped in an electric field have more mass because they are storing energy.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 3:28 pm
by Heater
jojopi,

Yes.

Notice that between my first and second post here I switched from the Newtonian world view to the Relativistic.

In the Newtonian world when we move an electron from one plate to another of a capacitor, which is what a FLASH memory cell is, we have moved it's mass from one place to another and the total mass of the device is the same.

In the Relativistic world we have increased the energy stored in the system. Energy is mass, as you say, so the device got heavier.

As minimum we have used on photon to move that electron by one quantum state of something. The photon had an energy of hf so the mass we put in is hf/c^2

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 3:37 pm
by Douglas6
I don't know if it's due to electrons, but it has been said that the weight of a human soul is 21 grams. I would expect Raspbian to be something less than that.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 1:45 am
by Imperf3kt
What's the weight of your conscience for so thoroughly derailing a thread by taking the topic title out of context by reading it a bit too literally?
"your" being directed at nobody in particular, I just wanted to mention that everybody is ignoring the original question.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:08 am
by rpdom
Imperf3kt wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 1:45 am
What's the weight of your conscience for so thoroughly derailing a thread by taking the topic title out of context by reading it a bit too literally?
"your" being directed at nobody in particular, I just wanted to mention that everybody is ignoring the original question.
Ok, so what is your understanding of the original question?

I can see some people have interpreted it as meaning "How much software is installed in Raspbian?", while others have taken it to be the literal meaning of weight.

The latter is more likely, considering the
r3d4 wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:10 am
Apparently a-kindle-loaded-with-e-books-is-heavier-than-an-empty-one ... so how heavy is raspbian ?
line and link to an article that discusses the mass of electrons used in storage when a "1" is stored in a memory cell.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:27 am
by drgeoff
jojopi wrote:
Mon Jun 17, 2019 1:53 pm
However, a charged capacitor stores energy, E=½CV². Assuming it is at rest, we also have E=mc². So the mass must increase in a charged capacitor, even if the total number of electrons remains constant.
I need more persuasion about that. Yes the mass and energy relationship applies when mass is changed and energy released/created (or vice-versa) but is that applicable here? The energy in the capacitor is not being created. It is being transferred from one place to another.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:48 am
by Heater
drgeoff,
I need more persuasion about that. Yes the mass and energy relationship applies when mass is changed and energy released/created (or vice-versa) but is that applicable here?
You the General Theory of Relativity. It's been out for over 100 years now :)

You may have heard that relativity predicts that light will be bent from it's straight path by the gravity of stars and galaxies. This has been observed many times since 1918 or so.

But photons of light have no mass, how can gravity effect them? Because they have energy, by E=hf, and energy has mass (or gravity) according to E=Mc^2.

You may have heard that in atomic decay processes the masses of the final particles is less than the mass of the atom one started with. Because during the decay a photon was emitted that carried off some mass in it's energy.

The upshot is that you can call it mass or you can call it energy, they both have the same gravity (hence weight), an amount of gravity equivalent to the mass in E=mc^2.

Arguably there are no "particles" with mass. Everything is electromagnetic and other fields and their energy.
The energy in the capacitor is not being created. It is being transferred from one place to another.
Not quite sure what you mean there.

When you charge a capacitor you are moving electrons from one plate to another. Against the force of an electric field.

To do that you have to do work, you have to put energy into the capacitor. That energy gets stored in the electric field between the plates. When you discharge a capacitor the energy leaves it and is dissipated in the load.

The energy is not being created, but you are having to put it in there. As surely as you put energy into charging a battery or lifting a rock against gravity.

Energy is equivalent to mass so the capacitor gets heavier when charged.

Re: how heavy is raspbian ?

Posted: Tue Jun 18, 2019 7:41 am
by Imperf3kt
rpdom wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 6:08 am
Imperf3kt wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 1:45 am
What's the weight of your conscience for so thoroughly derailing a thread by taking the topic title out of context by reading it a bit too literally?
"your" being directed at nobody in particular, I just wanted to mention that everybody is ignoring the original question.
Ok, so what is your understanding of the original question?

I can see some people have interpreted it as meaning "How much software is installed in Raspbian?", while others have taken it to be the literal meaning of weight.

The latter is more likely, considering the
r3d4 wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 11:10 am
Apparently a-kindle-loaded-with-e-books-is-heavier-than-an-empty-one ... so how heavy is raspbian ?
line and link to an article that discusses the mass of electrons used in storage when a "1" is stored in a memory cell.
I could have sworn that was one of the replies and not the opening post.

Perhaps I misread? My interpretation was a question about how much space the software packages occupied, and possibly the loads on the processor, but rereading the thread makes it look like I made a mistake.

The thread does appear to have been truncated, however.