Dear Stepen, I did not say ">information is only information to a "recognizer" of such. <..." but can you imagine an "unrecognized" information, just floating around? it would take a special definition of information (maybe even weirder than Shannon's bit, the meaningless dot/sign if not assigned into context. ) You also missed my explanatory remark in parentheses >>..."(by no specified acknowledger)" meaning person, particle, universe whatever absorbing a "difference" (which btw I equated with existence). I included the process (not the noun) information only up to its generation. Communiaction of informational stuff is a subsequent phase. Your question (how do we define such?) is valid, maybe someone smarter than me could help out.
About the "counterfactual "no information": right on, "no info" is*a* counterfactual (or 'is counterfactual') but to detect (establish) that a system is "no-informational" is a factual process, a characteristic established about the system. Lack of something assumable can be a positive addition to a description. I would love to read Hal's supposed opinion on the counterfactual. John M ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Paul King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 7:11 PM Subject: Re: The universe consists of patterns of arrangement of 0's and 1's? > Dear John, > > It seems that you are saying that information is only information to a > "recognizer" of such. If this is so, how do we define such? As to the notion > of "no information" as information, this seems to fall under the definition > of "counterfactuals". (Hal Ruhl might have a thought to add to this.) > I remember reading somewhere that the fact that no detection event > occurring in a QM situation is still an informative event. I believe that > the so-called "non-demolition" measurements are related. Any thoughts? > > Kindest regards, > > Stephen > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Stephen Paul King" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Eric Hawthorne" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "James N Rose" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 11:40 AM > Subject: Re: The universe consists of patterns of arrangement of 0's and > 1's? > > > > Dear Stephen, please see my note after the copy of your post > > snip > > > I defined information as "difference acknowledged" (by no specified > > acknowledger) because not all information DO make a difference, yet an > > unrecognized difference is no information. > > With the Plenitude (a version as the basis for my narrative leading to our > > universe) I have a question: Is "no information" not an information? > > (Or: is "no difference" an information about identicity?) > > JM > > > > > > >