Thank you, Pedro. Of course a complete analysis of all FIS message would be fantastic, but it is almost impossible (at least without AI) :-) But I certainly will do Bibliometric quantitative and qualitative measures on FIS list in my PhD Thesis. For that, a categorization is very important and the 5 momenta was a first step. I agree that Information Science is in constant evolution (or even in a paradigmatic change) and FIS discussions must take this into account.
About the 'The Information Universe' Conference, is very good to see a new Physics area (Physics of Information) growing. Marcus said: "tagging by the author would be preferred, and even better if tagging was part of the posting process (but not available with the software used)." Yes, the spreadsheet was blocked, I am sorry for that. But now the link to edit the spreadsheet is working fine: https://docs.google.com/a/moisesandre.com.br/spreadsheets/d/1u6uOsVMvpMUKxzzdufNXhv2vItHE3LtgF-O_zn9m2oI/edit?usp=sharing Um abraço Moisés. . 2015-11-06 9:42 GMT-02:00 Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>: > Dear Moises and FIS Colleagues, > > Thanks a lot for the curious exploration. On the one side, it is "normal" > finding such results in a session more or less devoted to the info locality > topic --what results would be obtained by peering into the whole discussion > sessions ( starting in 1998! See: > http://fis.sciforum.net/fis-discussion-sessions/ ). On the other side, I > do not know whether it is too early to try to reify the momentum term with > ad hoc measurements. But, yes, measurement should be used to clarify this > nebulous idea, as it was just a metaphor stemming in the middle of > something else. That there are strategic topics withing those fields below > that should be realigned from the perspective of a nascent or renewed > information science looks clear. Or stated otherwise, important > "communicational" and "compositional" items in quite different entities > might participate in a new info synthesis. The problem, and so the need of > an "itinerary" is that they influence mutually and a series of successive > visits or iterative attempts are needed for their coherent alignment. This > necessary change of directions seems to justify the momentum metaphor. For > instance, as an example in social science, it is curious that the > genotype-phenotype-sociotype triad has been proposed independently by two > authors (Elliot Berry and myself). Although with interesting differences, > the sociotype construct we propose, covering both the relational structure > of bonds and the communicative dynamics of each individual within the > social environment, is pregnant with informational contents. Other similar > topics in different fields would clearly surface as strategic info momenta. > > By the way, a highly interesting conference on information has taken place > recently. See: http://physics.aps.org/articles/v8/103 (courtesy of > Malcolm Dean.) *"Scientists Meet in the Information Universe: An > innovative conference in the Netherlands brought together scientists from > diverse backgrounds to reflect on the ways information shapes > communication, science, and perhaps even nature itself." *Big figures of > Physics (Hooft, Fredkin...), cosmology and other scientific branches have > participated. Quite interesting but, in the light of recent messages, allow > me please this closing statement: "when the emphasis in Instrumenta becomes > Impedimenta... " > > All the best--Pedro > > > > Moisés André Nisenbaum wrote: > > Hi, dear FISers. > I finished to classify and count the messages in last discussion topic. > It was 72 messages from sep/09 to oct/18. > I tagged each message in one or more momenta: > 1) Philosophy (PHIL) > 2) Biomolecular (primordials of life and cellular organization) (BIO) > 3) Organismic and the Neuronal (evolutionary outcomes) (ORG) > 4) Human Sociality (up to social complexity) (SOC) > 5) Communication and Information (IC) > > The results are the sum of tags below: > 1)PHIL 2)BIO 3)ORG 4)SOC 5)IC 6)Other 32 4 16 7 8 5 > > All the data and a graph are available at: > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1u6uOsVMvpMUKxzzdufNXhv2vItHE3LtgF-O_zn9m2oI/pubhtml > > Tagging was my interpretation. Of course authors tagging is better. If you > want to change your posts tagging, just access: > > https://docs.google.com/a/moisesandre.com.br/spreadsheets/d/1u6uOsVMvpMUKxzzdufNXhv2vItHE3LtgF-O_zn9m2oI/edit?usp=sharing > P.S. Be sure to change only YOUR posts tags. > > Um abraço! > > -- > Moisés André Nisenbaum > Doutorando IBICT/UFRJ. Professor. Msc. > Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro - IFRJ > Campus Maracanã > moises.nisenb...@ifrj.edu.br > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------- > Pedro C. Marijuán > Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group > Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud > Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA) > Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X > 50009 Zaragoza, Spain > Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& > 6818)pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ > ------------------------------------------------- > > > _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > Fis@listas.unizar.es > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > -- Moisés André Nisenbaum Doutorando IBICT/UFRJ. Professor. Msc. Instituto Federal do Rio de Janeiro - IFRJ Campus Maracanã moises.nisenb...@ifrj.edu.br
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
