Hi Stan - thanks for commenting on my post. I really liked your
remark highlighted in pink. But I have a problem understanding the
remarks in blue. Perhaps you could clarify for me. Why is it also
true for any dissipative system and what exactly do you mean by a
dissipative system? Also I do not see how Shannon info can be used to
roughly assess relative configurations. Also why does a tornado have
more possible macroscopic conformations than does a bird, and this
has more than a snail. Finally. what is a conformation?
These questions are not posed to challenge your assertions but rather
to help me understand them.
Thanks - Bob L
On 29-Jun-08, at 10:03 PM, Stanley Salthe wrote:
Replying to Bob Logan, then to Pedro, then to Ted -
-snip-
Bob said:
The reader will find in this paper an argument that Shannon info
does not work for biological systems precisely because as has been
pointed out in the discussion evolution cannot be predicted. This
reinforces Bob U's remark In my judgement there are far too many
folks who want to use the Shannon entropy itself as the measure of
information, and I believe that doing so erects major impediments to
grasping what information truly is. Bob U remark is right on the
money according to POE.
The material reason that Shannon information cannot be used to
calculate information carrying capacity in biology (or for any
dissipative structures), is that there is no way way to find the
complete repertoire of any such system. Thus, it is not
technologically 'useful'. However, it does carry conceptual weight
nevertheless. It can be used to roughly assess relative
configurations. Thus, a tornado has more possible macroscopic
conformations than does a bird, and this has more than a snail.
-------------------------------
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
