Re: Definitation of Observers
pattern | physical pattern (constraint on the arrangement of matter and energy in space and time) | physical process (physical pattern with characteristics like that some regular and often localized, and yet complex form of change is of its essence. Can be described as comprised of states, events, and subprocesses) | | physical computational process physical sensing process | mind-of-intelligent-observer The | relation is "is-a" inheritance. Does that help successfully communicate what I mean by a pattern that computes and stores information about its surroundings? Eric Brent Meeker wrote: Eric Hawthorne wrote An observer is a pattern in space-time (a physical process) which engages in the processing and storage of information about its surroundings in space-time. This seems like a failure to communicate because of mixing levels of description. If you're going to define "observer" as a pattern you need to say what kind of pattern it is. If you skip to a functional, "processing and storage" or intentional "engages in" level of description then you introduce terms with no definite relation to patterns. Brent Meeker
Re: Definitation of Observers
An observer is a pattern in space-time (a physical process) which engages in the processing and storage of information about its surroundings in space-time. Its information processing is such that the observer creates abstracted, isomorphic, representative symbolic models of the structures and processes surrounding it, as well as other, purely abstract informational model structures. The observer has subprocesses of itself which process its representative models in such a way as to model, simulate, or calculate relations between informationally connected local parts of the space-time surroundings of the observer. These cognitive subprocesses also model, simulate, or calculate relations between the observer process itself and its surrounding structures and processes in space-time. An observer is constrained to exist as a substructure of an informationally self-consistent medium, and a medium in which notions of change, locality, and metric space and time can be defined. Further, an observer is constrained to exist in a locale which has a thermodynamic range of variation, and a fine-grained structural variety suitable for the random coalescence of structures (slow localized processes) which can attain auto-poietic (pattern-self-sustaining) properties relative to alternative patterns of organization of matter and energy. As a restatement and refinement of that constraint; the locale of the observer must be suitable for the emergence of and growth of stable, organized complex systems with adequate degrees of freedom to explore many possibilities for their form and function. Only in such a constrained environment could an observer general-information-processing-and-epresenting-and-abstracting process arise spontaneously and maintain itself long enough to do meaningful observation of its surroundings. An observer is constrained to perceive only informationally self-consistent states (with respect perhaps to some notion of locality and metric space-time) that its medium exhibits. It is conceivable that the medium exhibits other, informationally mutually inconsistent states, but any aspect of the extent of these other pseudo-states of the medium can in principle not be perceived by any information receiver and processor such as the observer. Hal Ruhl wrote: I would like to explore just exactly what the various members of the list mean by observer as in the following from Wei Dai's post. Hal
Re: Definitation of Observers
Hi Eric: At 03:40 AM 4/26/2004, you wrote: An observer is a pattern in space-time (a physical process) which engages in the processing and storage of information about its surroundings in space-time. In my opinion the most such a pattern can do is contain current features that may in part be the result of past collisions with other patterns - assuming a History of some sort exists for this universe. Its information processing is such that the observer creates abstracted, isomorphic, representative symbolic models of the structures and processes surrounding it, as well as other, purely abstract informational model structures. The current features of a pattern are either the result of deterministic rules or the rules are at least partly random. Either way I do not see how the pattern creates any part of its current features. The observer has subprocesses of itself which process its representative models in such a way as to model, simulate, or calculate relations between informationally connected local parts of the space-time surroundings of the observer. These cognitive subprocesses also model, simulate, or calculate relations between the observer process itself and its surrounding structures and processes in space-time. Same comment. An observer is constrained to exist as a substructure of an informationally self-consistent medium, and a medium in which notions of change, locality, and metric space and time can be defined. This seems a bit circular re what you said above. Further I seems to me that a universe whose rule of state succession reads Completely Random is informationally self consistent with that rule. Snip I would like to resolve the above first. Hal
RE: Definitation of Observers
-Original Message- From: Hal Ruhl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 11:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Definitation of Observers Hi Eric: At 03:40 AM 4/26/2004, you wrote: An observer is a pattern in space-time (a physical process) which engages in the processing and storage of information about its surroundings in space-time. In my opinion the most such a pattern can do is contain current features that may in part be the result of past collisions with other patterns - assuming a History of some sort exists for this universe. This seems like a failure to communicate because of mixing levels of description. If you're going to define observer as a pattern you need to say what kind of pattern it is. If you skip to a functional, processing and storage or intentional engages in level of description then you introduce terms with no definite relation to patterns. Brent Meeker
