Dear Colleagues,

John's opening of a new topic gives the chance of commenting both on his and on 
my "Assymetry of Information", since both talk about symmetry and 
symmetry-breaking. John asks how one can make a principled coupling between 
intrinsic and extrinsic informational entities. I will say, quickly, that my 
logic in reality would look at these as processes involving mutually dependent 
variables. I don't wish to push this logic further here, but if we are talking, 
or trying to talk, about a physical interpretation of information, then 
something like my logic is needed to be able to make inferences about physical 
states and their evolution.

My definition of "positive" and "negative" information was very crude, but the 
issue I was trying to get at is how to describe information such that it has 
/at least/ this much causal "assymetry".

I will be very interested in further postings about getting beyond agreement on 
the physical interpretation.

Best regards,

Joseph   
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: John Collier 
  To: Pedro C. Marijuan ; fis 
  Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 12:06 PM
  Subject: Re: [Fis] Information states


  At 02:12 PM 2009/11/10, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:

    Dear FIS colleagues,

    The comments, days ago, by John H on "information states" were 
    intriguing. In my view, the differences he addresses between physical 
    states and informational states could be compacted as the "primacy of 
    the intrinsic" regarding informational entities. The physical state (in 
    my limited understanding) contraposes the extrinsic (boundary 
    conditions) and the intrinsic (state variables and "identity" 
    parameters), and reunites them by means of a set of dynamic equations 
    that express the laws of nature pertinent to the whole context. In the 
    information state, the intrinsic and the extrinsic cannot be separated 
    so easily (only some selected parts of the extrinsic become external 
    "information", those upon which the info entity will perform 
    distinctional operations), but the intrinsic is not really reducible to 
    a collection of variables and parameters, it is a life cycle in 
    progress. Then, how can we express a life cycle in a compact way so to 
    interact lawfully with the extrinsic? Socially we consider this new kind 
    of informational-subject-happenstances as "biographies", and refer to 
    their coupling with the extrinsic as "events."

    Echoing Koichiro Matsuno (as we wrote together in 1996, after the second 
    FIS event in Washington 1995, in Symmetry Culture and Science, 7,3, 
    229-30). "This mutual upholding between symmetry and information in 
    theoretical science suggests a unique perspective addressing how the 
    description of both 'states' and 'events' could be integrated in a 
    unified manner."

    Or in other words, the very need of a new abstraction procedure about 
    the social process of knowledge accretion and recombination...

  I could not agree more. For an excellent review and expansion of the
  notion of intrinsic information and how it is viewed extrinsically, see
  the published PhD thesis of my student Scott Muller, 
  Asymmetry: 
  The Foundation of Information. By Scott Muller. Springer: Berlin. 
  2007. VIII, 165 p. 33 illus., Hardcover. CHF 139.50. 
  ISBN: 978-3-540-69883-8 
  I do not agree with Lin's assessment, but there are questions of 
  priority here that are always difficult to resolve. Scott should have,
  and I told him this, be careful to be clear about what was original
  to his thesis. I claim the asymmetry principle from a 1996 paper
  Information Originates in Symmetry Breaking 
  http://www.ukzn.ac.za/undphil/collier/papers/infsym.pdf
  In the journal Symmetry. Scott added substantially to the
  justification of my basic idea. The ideas however are implicit
  in MacKay, Donald M., Information, Mechanism and Meaning. 
  Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1969. and Bateson, G. (1973), 
  Steps to an Ecology of Mind (Paladin. Frogmore, St. Albans). 
  The first calls information a distinction that makes a difference,
  and the second a difference that makes a difference. Both
  permit the physical interpretation. I really wish we could get 
  beyond this, and deal with more substantive issues. It has
  already been decided: information and interpretation of
  information are different from each other.

  Regards,
  John

    

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Professor John Collier                                     colli...@ukzn.ac.za
  Philosophy and Ethics, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041 South Africa
  T: +27 (31) 260 3248 / 260 2292       F: +27 (31) 260 3031
  http://www.ukzn.ac.za/undphil/collier/index.html 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  fis mailing list
  fis@listas.unizar.es
  https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Reply via email to