Re: [Fis] About FIS 2005
Dear colleagues, It seems to me that a difference that makes a difference (or a distinction) generates another option in the system of reference and thus adds to the redundancy instead of the Shannon-type information. The information is not in the DNA strings, but in the distribution of the bases in the DNA strings. The confusion is generated because informing us introduces us implicitly as a system of reference. However, we provide meaning to the information and thus generate redundancies (other and possibly new options). The channels are then changed, but not the information. The information is contained in a series of differences or, in other words, a probability distribution. If one considers a difference which makes a difference directly as information instead of a redundancy, one can no longer measure in terms of bits of information and thus one loses the operationalization and the possibility of measurement in information theory. In other words, information theory then becomes only philosophy. Best, Loet _ Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam mailto:l...@leydesdorff.net l...@leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/ http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, SPRU, http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/ University of Sussex; Visiting Professor, ISTIC, http://www.istic.ac.cn/Eng/brief_en.html Beijing; http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJhl=en hl=en From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of John Collier Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 4:37 PM To: Bob Logan; y...@pku.edu.cn Cc: fis Subject: Re: [Fis] About FIS 2005 Bob, Xueshan, others, This is an issue that I think more terminological than anything else, and I think that there is no correct answer. The problem is more to find the relations between different uses of information that are current in science ( Kinds of Information in Scientific Use http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/278/269 . 2011. cognition, communication, co-operation. Vol 9, No 2 http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/issue/view/22 ). For example in astrophysics and cosmology it is useful to speak of information as a conserved quantity that is related to energy but is not the same (not two sides of the same coin as some would have it). Tom Schneider has done a lot of work on molecular machines ( http://schneider.ncifcrf.gov/ http://schneider.ncifcrf.gov/ ) in which he sees a computational model using information to keep track of computations as useful. Sure it al is grounded in energy, but this is not the most perspicacious way to view what happens in these macromolecular interactions. I have argued in Information in biological systems http://web.ncf.ca/collier/papers/Information%20in%20Biological%20Systems.pd f (Handbook of Philosophy of Science, vol 8, Philosophy of Information http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookdescription.cws_home/716648/descriptio n#description , 2008, Chapter 5f) that we should distinguish between the instrumental use of information in biology and a substantive use, in which information is treated as such by the system. This is a stronger requirement than in the astrophysical and cosmological uses of information (in a different substantive way, and also stronger than Schneider's use). This is a useful distinction in biology, or so I argue. However, in an earlier paper, Intrinsic Information http://web.ncf.ca/collier/papers/intrinfo.pdf (1990) I argued that in order to understand what it is to mean that we get information about the world, we must understand what it is that makes the world capable of providing us with information. This leads to a natural description of the world as containing information (see also Dretske, knowledge and the flow of information, and Barwise and Perry, Situations and Attitudes and following work of theirs) that flows into our minds, given the right coordination. See also Barwise and Seligman, Information Flow for a general account not mind dependent. What you want to treat as information depends very much on what you are considering and how. I would argue that a unified theory of information should recognize all of these usages, and put them in their place relative to each other. Some usages, I believe, are dispensable in some context, and some may be dispensable in all contexts. But I doubt that information talk can be dispensed with entirely in favour of energy talk when boundary conditions are important to system behaviour. This happens especially with complex systems, but physicists have found it useful in talking about boundary conditions of black holes, among other things, that aren't obviously complexly organized. John At 02:43 PM 2013/04/15, Bob Logan wrote: Dear Xueshan - re Nalewajski's conjecture that molecular systems have
[Fis] Informatics vs. Mathematics
Dear FIS Colleagues, It is really pleasure to read your posts in this exciting mail list. During the time I am subscribed in (Thanks to Pedro for inviting me!) I have read interesting and very useful ideas. Now I think is the right time to put one very important question: What is the main difference between Informatics and Mathematics? In other words: What is the main difference between “Information object” and “Mathematical one” ? Well, I nave answer (of course, from my point of view): The main difference is the Subject! Mathematical theories totally avoid the subject and subjective interpretation of mathematical structures and operations. It doesn’t mater who will interpret the mathematical constructions ( like y=f(x) ) – now and after 1000 years the interpretation MUST be the same. In Informatics it is just the opposite – it is of crucial importance who will interpret the information structures and operations. Let remember the Turing Machine, the basic Subject of Informatics with which all interpretations of algorithms have to be compared. The philosophical conclusion is simple – the information phenomena (as reflections) exist in the reality but may be interpreted ONLY by the Subjects. In other words, the information is kind of reflection for which the CONCRETE Subject have appropriate interpretation (an evidence what is reflected). Subject may be a human, an animal, an electronic device, etc. i.e. natural or artificial entity. In all cases, the “reflection” (or “pattern”, if you prefer) has to be recognized by the Subject to became “information”. Friendly regards Krassimir___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] fis Digest, Vol 570, Issue 2
Dear Xueshan, Another interesting source for Bateson's DTMD is in 'Angels Fear: towards an epistemiology of the sacred' (1988): 'That which gets from territory to map is news of difference, and at that point I recognized that news of difference was a synonym for information' (http://www.oikos.org/angelsfear.htm#introduction [1] ) Reading from James Gleik's book 'The Information' recently and his description of the seminal Macy's Conferencesof 1941 it would seem that Shannon Wiener and Bateson were coming from the same new idea of 'information' but with different formulations. Mackay's formal approach (in-form-ation) is closer to the historical/philosophical concept inherited from Plato and Aristotle. I think 'news of information' (cf Shannon's 'surprise') is related to the symmetry-breaking phenomenon that Pedro and John Collier identified back in 1996 as an essential feature of in-formation at work (where the in- prefix implies the deconstructive force of the Greek 'ana' (as in the verb _anamorpheoin_, to transform by breaking down the shape). Without the antisymmetric force of 'news' difference does not become a dynamic phenomenon (as in differentiation) but remains a speculative abstraction (like 'drawing a distinction'). The key question for IS is - to what , for whom and how is the difference made. John H - Original Message - From:y...@pku.edu.cn To: Cc: Sent:Sun, 14 Apr 2013 16:52:40 +0800 Subject:Re: [Fis] fis Digest, Vol 570, Issue 2 Dear Pedro, Dear Joseph, About the Milton Keynes Conference, i.e., about DTMD definition, we saw this quote long long ago, but there two different sayings: One is Information is a distinction that makes a difference from Donald M. MacKay in his Information, Mechanism and Meaning (1969), and another is Information is a difference that makes a difference from Gregory Bateson in his Steps to an Ecology of Mind (1972). Although I have checked it page by page in Donald M. MacKay's book but can't found it, whereas it is easy to find Information is a difference that makes a difference in Gregory Bateson's Steps to an Ecology of Mind at page 230, 361, 339, etc., who can tell the accurate priority about DTMD? Best wishes, Xueshan 16:49, April 14, 2013 Peking University -Original Message- From: fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of fis-requ...@listas.unizar.es Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2013 12:00 AM To: fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: fis Digest, Vol 570, Issue 2 Send fis mailing list submissions to fis@listas.unizar.es To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to fis-requ...@listas.unizar.es You can reach the person managing the list at fis-ow...@listas.unizar.es When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of fis digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: FIS News (Moscow 2013) (joe.bren...@bluewin.ch) 2. Re: FIS News (Moscow 2013) (PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ) 3. Re: FIS News (Moscow 2013) (Gyorgy Darvas) -- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:11:58 + (GMT+00:00) From: joe.bren...@bluewin.ch Subject: Re: [Fis] FIS News (Moscow 2013) To: , Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Dear Pedro, Glad to hear from you. Your silence was, of course, expressive, containing much information . . . Now all of us will be waiting impatiently to learn about the the new, exciting themes that were discussed at the Milton Keynes Conference. Best wishes, Joseph Message d'origine De: pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es Date: 12.04.2013 11:02 À: Objet: [Fis] FIS News (Moscow 2013) Dear FIS Friends, Apologies for my long silence. As I have already said several times, my science management duties are killing not only my time but also my nerve (well, not completely!). Imagine what is happening with the financing and organization of Spanish science these years... Anyhow, a couple of good news about our common Information Science endeavor. First, there has been an excellent conference in Milton Keynes, organized by the Open University, about Information (the difference that makes a difference). Quite exciting discussions on our most dear themes, and some new ones that we have rarely addressed here. The organizers, a very active team indeed, are cordially invited to lead a discussion session in our FIS list to continue with the conceptual explorations addressed in their conference. And the second news is about an imminent FIS CONFERENCE, MOSCOW 2013, the Sixth FIS, and the 1st of the ISIS organization. It will be held this May, from 21 to 24 in Moscow. This time the Russian organizers have followed a
[Fis] FIS Information and the Eye of the Beholder
As Krassimir has pointed out, the term information is inseparable from the human utilising (communicating, sending/receiving/evaluating) the information. To say Information is that difference that makes a difference is like saying Cookies are what produce an excellent sensation in the mouth or Music is what enchants by fascinating. The anthropomorphic thinking is characteristic of the so-called magical-mythical way of thinking that children learn at the age of about 4-5 years. No abstract entity can make or generate or produce anything, least of all differences. The differences are either there or not. They are definitely not made or produced by a wizard or sorcerer or aliens or green mutant informators. For someone who is too dumb, nothing ever makes a difference; for hysterics, everything is incessantly over-the-top, incomparable, unique, never-heard-of, significant, a signal of a conspiracy. The proposal was made in Step 12 of Learn to Count in Twelve Easy Steps to use the term information like the terms beauty, satisfaction, desire etc. Being informed is a property of the spectator, not of the spectaculum. ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] fis Digest, Vol 570, Issue 10
Dear FISers, In the past edition of DTMD Workshop (in 2011), Professor Zimmermann and myself defended an approach in which information can be conceived from the outset and starting from the most fundamental level of reality. We rely on the physical approaches to conceal relativity and quantum theories in order to explain how information and meaning can be understood from the most elemental level, though qualitatively evolving through the hierarchy of complexity. As we argue in our articles: energy and matter can be distinguished in terms of potentiality and actuality respectively (by the way a valuable distinction advanced by Weizsäcker), as well as Information and Structure. The former set concerns the possibility/actuality of change; the second the possibility/actuality to select changes. This set of concepts together with a generalised concept of autonomous agency (in the sense of Stuart Kauffman) enable us to consider the evolution of meaning throughout the ladder of complexity and to devise the regressive path in which reality is acknowledged (with significant difference at each level complexity). In the articles published in Information we propose a review of Floridi's General Definition of Information (GDI) as to conceal it with our (always evolving and fallible) scientific knowledge about the structure of the world. The first part we delve in the progressive perspective: http://www.mdpi.com/2078-2489/3/3/472 The second part (which deals with the regressive perspective and related to the eventual synergies of our approach with respect to other approaches in the converging fields of information, meaning, computation and communication) is to be published in the coming weeks. In the article recently published in the special issue of TripleC devoted to DTMD2011 we deploy both perspectives -in a more condensed manner-: http://triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/334 More contributions done delving in different aspects of the same approach can be accessed in BITrum's blog of contributions in English: http://bitrumcontributions.wordpress.com/ BITrum's blog of contributions in Spanish: http://bitrum.wordpress.com/ Best wishes, J.M. 2013/4/16 fis-requ...@listas.unizar.es Send fis mailing list submissions to fis@listas.unizar.es To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to fis-requ...@listas.unizar.es You can reach the person managing the list at fis-ow...@listas.unizar.es When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of fis digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: fis Digest, Vol 570, Issue 2 (John Collier) 2. Re: fis Digest, Vol 570, Issue 2 (john.holg...@ozemail.com.au) -- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 08:20:38 +0200 From: John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za Subject: Re: [Fis] fis Digest, Vol 570, Issue 2 To: Bob Logan lo...@physics.utoronto.ca, Wolfgang Hofkirchner wolfgang.hofkirch...@tuwien.ac.at Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es fis@listas.unizar.es, y...@pku.edu.cn y...@pku.edu.cn Message-ID: 201304160620.r3g6kq23010...@huecha.unizar.es Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://webmail.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20130416/2076c551/attachment-0002.htm -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 9a9781e.gif Type: image/gif Size: 164 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://webmail.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20130416/2076c551/attachment-0001.gif -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://webmail.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20130416/2076c551/attachment-0003.htm -- Message: 2 Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 17:48:34 +0800 From: john.holg...@ozemail.com.au Subject: Re: [Fis] fis Digest, Vol 570, Issue 2 To: y...@pku.edu.cn, fis@listas.unizar.es Message-ID: c9579eb6ec7b16aff32b936f920e01a5e0beb...@webmail.iinet.net.au Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Dear Xueshan, Another interesting source for Bateson's DTMD is in 'Angels Fear: towards an epistemiology of the sacred' (1988): 'That which gets from territory to map is news of difference, and at that point I recognized that news of difference was a synonym for information' (http://www.oikos.org/angelsfear.htm#introduction [1] ) Reading from James Gleik's book 'The Information' recently and his description of the seminal Macy's Conferencesof 1941 it would seem that Shannon Wiener and Bateson were coming from the same new idea of 'information' but with different formulations. Mackay's formal approach (in-form-ation) is closer to the historical/philosophical concept inherited from Plato
Re: [Fis] the intelligent agents
Dear Gordana and colleagues, You are right, the concept ‘agent’ is just the abstraction of our understanding about the active entities which has possibility to be ‘intelligent’. Below I remember a short text about it: The definition of the concept intelligence was given in [1]. It follows from the “General Information Theory” [2] and especially from the “Theory of Infos” [3]. The intelligence is a synergetic combination of: – (primary) activity for external interaction. This characteristic is basic for all open systems. Activity for external interaction means possibility to reflect the influences from environment and to realize impact on the environment; – information reflection and information memory, i.e. possibility for collecting the information. It is clear; memory is basic characteristic of intelligence for “the ability to learn”; – information self-reflection, i.e. possibility for generating secondary information. The generalization (creating abstractions) is well known characteristic of intelligence. Sometimes, we concentrate our investigations only to this very important possibility, which is a base for learning and recognition. The same is pointed for the intelligent system: “To reach its objective it chooses an action based on its experiences. It can learn by generalizing the experiences it has stored in its memories”; – information expectation i.e. the (secondary) information activity for internal or external contact. This characteristic means that the prognostic knowledge needs to be generated in advance and during the interaction with the environment the received information is collected and compared with one generated in advance. This not exists in usual definitions but it is the foundation-stone for definition of the concept intelligence; – resolving the information expectation. This correspond to that the intelligence is the ability to reach ones objectives. The target is a model of a future state (of the system) which needs to be achieved and corresponding to it prognostic knowledge needs to be resolved by incoming information. In summary, the intelligence is creating and resolving the information expectation [1]. The concept intelligence is a common approach for investigating the natural and artificial intelligent agents. It is clear; the reality is more complex than one definition. Presented understanding of intelligence is important for realizations of the intelligent computer systems. The core element of such systems needs to be possibility for creating the information expectation as well as the one for resolving it. The variety of real implementations causes corresponded diversity in the software but the common principles will exist in all systems. Summarizing, the artificial system is intelligent if it has: – Activity for external interaction; – Information reflection and information memory; – Possibility for generalization (creating abstractions); – Information expectation; – Resolving the information expectation. At the end, the five main problems of the science “Artificial Intelligence” are to develop more and more “smart”: – sensors and actuators - to realize external interaction; – memory structures - to learn; – generalization algorithms - to make abstractions; – prognostic knowledge generation - to create information expectation; – resolving the information expectation - to reach objectives. Bibliography 1. I. Mitov, Kr. Markov, Kr. Ivanova. The Intelligence. Plenary paper. Third International Scientific Conference “Informatics in the Scientific Knowledge”. University Publishing House, VFU “Chernorizets Hrabar”, 2010. ISSN: 1313-4345. pp. 7-13 2. Kr. Markov, Kr. Ivanova, I. Mitov. Basic Structure of the General Information Theory. Int. Journal “Information Theories and Applications”, Vol.14/2007, No.:1, pp.5-19. 3. Kr. Markov, Kr. Ivanova, I. Mitov. Theory of Infos. Int. Book Series Information Science Computing – Book No: 13. Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems, Sofia, 2009, pp.9-16. Friendly regards Krassimir From: Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 4:06 PM To: karl.javors...@gmail.com Cc: Pedro C. Marijuan ; Krassimir Markov ; Joseph Brenner ; Loet Leydesdorff ; bob logan ; fis Subject: RE: FIS Information and the Eye of the Beholder My interpretation of Krassimir’s words: “In other words, the information is kind of reflection for which the CONCRETE Subject have appropriate interpretation (an evidence what is reflected). Subject may be a human, an animal, an electronic device, etc. i.e. natural or artificial entity.“ is that by “subject” Krassimir refers to an agent, animate or inanimate. And an agent is anything with ability to act (on its own behalf). It can be a neutron. For a neutron electric field makes no difference. But nuclear force can make a
[Fis] Meaning and mind
As Loet, Krassimir and Karl (at least) have all said (or as I take them to have said), meaning is inherently subjective, or at best intersubjective, but certainly not objective. That is why an understanding of information has to be tightly integrated with an understanding of mind. See my paper “Mind, Matter, Meaning and Information” http://triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/323/437 -- Robin Faichney http://www.robinfaichney.org/ ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] Informatics vs. Mathematics
This view is fundamentally flawed. The introduction of subjectivity confusing the matter. The distinction is not about objects but operations. In mathematics, taken as the science that draws necessary conclusions, operations suffer no causal loss. Whereas, information is the means to reason about the causal integrity of interaction. Turing machines conduct mathematical operations, not informational operations. Communication of one machine to another, OTOH, is an informational operation. Regards, Steven On Apr 15, 2013, at 4:10 PM, Krassimir Markov mar...@foibg.com wrote: Dear FIS Colleagues, It is really pleasure to read your posts in this exciting mail list. During the time I am subscribed in (Thanks to Pedro for inviting me!) I have read interesting and very useful ideas. Now I think is the right time to put one very important question: What is the main difference between Informatics and Mathematics? In other words: What is the main difference between “Information object” and “Mathematical one” ? Well, I nave answer (of course, from my point of view): The main difference is the Subject! Mathematical theories totally avoid the subject and subjective interpretation of mathematical structures and operations. It doesn’t mater who will interpret the mathematical constructions ( like y=f(x) ) – now and after 1000 years the interpretation MUST be the same. In Informatics it is just the opposite – it is of crucial importance who will interpret the information structures and operations. Let remember the Turing Machine, the basic Subject of Informatics with which all interpretations of algorithms have to be compared. The philosophical conclusion is simple – the information phenomena (as reflections) exist in the reality but may be interpreted ONLY by the Subjects. In other words, the information is kind of reflection for which the CONCRETE Subject have appropriate interpretation (an evidence what is reflected). Subject may be a human, an animal, an electronic device, etc. i.e. natural or artificial entity. In all cases, the “reflection” (or “pattern”, if you prefer) has to be recognized by the Subject to became “information”. Friendly regards Krassimir___ 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
