Harry, Like most words, "information," is used differently by different people at different time.
It can be used to describe the extent to which a given communication between two computing entities conveys knowledge to the receiving entity. In this case, something only has information if the receiving entity can understand what information it is conveying. Information can often be conveyed efficiently, when the receiving entity has enough knowledge about whatever is being discussed to imply much more about it that what is literally said in the transmitted message. This fits with you description about the fact that the same pile of rocks can either convey or not convey information, and in that case the degree to which something conveys information is arguably orthogonal to what it is composed of in terms of matter or energy, and depends on the characteristics of the receiving entity. But, one can argue that all the particles of the physical world, can be viewed as transmitting or receiving entities, or communications between them. And the laws of physics tell the receiving particles what meanings the received communication are to have. Thus, in this sense all of physical reality, including matter, can be considered to have information, and information would not be orthogonal to matter. I am sure others on this list could describe this better. Ed Porter -----Original Message----- From: Harry Chesley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 10:17 PM To: agi@v2.listbox.com Subject: Re: [agi] To what extent can our minds experience the consciousness of external reality? Ben Goertzel wrote: > ...my own belief that consciousness is the underlying > reality, and physical and computational systems merely *focus* this > consciousness in particular ways, is also not something that can be > proven empirically or logically... For what it's worth, let me throw out a random thought I had some time ago regarding consciousness. It's half formed and barely alive, so be nice to it, but it resonates (for me at least) with what Ben has said: You can think of information as being orthogonal to matter. Matter is used to represent or embody information, but it is not information. A pile of rocks may represent some quantity -- say if you add one every time someone comes into the room -- or it may be just a random pile. In the same way, could consciousness be orthogonal to information? Without a lot more work, the idea seems just so much half-assed pseudo-science, and I haven't had time/energy to work it out further. But I thought people here might have ideas -- either to flesh it out or give a quick and merciful death. ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
