While entropy was introduced in the second half of the 19th century in the international vocabulary as a scientific term, in the 20th century it became common in colloquial use. Popular imagination has loaded “entropy” with almost every negative quality in the universe, in life and in society, with a dominant meaning of disorder and disorganization. Exploring the history of the term and many different approaches on it, we show that entropy has a universal stochastic definition which is not disorder. The accompanying principle of maximum entropy, which lies behind the Second Law, gives explanatory and inferential power to the concept and promotes entropy as the mother of creativity and evolution. As social sciences are often contaminated by subjectivity and ideological influences, we try to explore whether the maximum entropy, applied to the distribution of wealth quantified by annual income, can give an objective description. Using publicly available income data, we show that the income distribution is consistent with the principle of the maximum entropy. The increase of entropy is associated to increase of society’s wealth yet a standardized form of entropy can be used to quantify inequality. Historically, technology has played a major role in development and increase of the entropy of income. Such findings are contrary to the theories of ecological economics and other theories which use the term entropy in a Malthusian perspective.

When phenomena in quantum mechanics are interpreted from the perspective of bio-psychology, wave function collapse from several to a single eigenstate must be plausibly explained. Quantum mechanics requires a context, yet the context of an observer is rarely considered. On the other hand, in bio-psychology, the observer context is examined to explain superposition and collapse by different mental functions used in everyday life. Three mental functions are described, one of which is responsible for observation, and the others for conservation and treatment of information in mental representation. Whereas observation produces information with certainty, the subsequent processes result in uncertain potentiality. In order to encompass uncertainty, multiple possibilities are simultaneously considered in mental superposition, one of which should represent the unknown future outcome. During observation, all suggested potentialities necessarily collapse to one real outcome. The collapse of superposition does not occur in observable physical reality, but in its mental representation. Some physical principles—such as superposition, infinity and nothingness before the Big Bang—are pure phenomena of mental representation, which will always remain unverifiable by observation. This argument proves that mental representation brought about by the observer context participates in the production of mental models for the best approximation of physical reality.