Re: [Fis] Information states

2009-11-14 Thread John Collier


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


Re: [Fis] Information states

2009-11-14 Thread Joseph Brenner
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

Re: [Fis] Information states

2009-11-14 Thread ssalthe
While not suggesting a discussion on this, I note that

John says -- information and the interpretation of information are different 
from 
each other

I think this is not as clear cut as that.  Beginning all the way back to von 
Uexkull's 
Theoretical Biology, the constructivist perspective takes a different view.  
The 
'epistemic cut' is created by the observer.

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


Re: [Fis] Information states

2009-11-14 Thread John Collier
At 05:33 PM 2009/11/14, you wrote:
While not suggesting a discussion on this, I note that

John says -- information and the interpretation of information are 
different from
each other

I think this is not as clear cut as that.  Beginning all the way 
back to von Uexkull's
Theoretical Biology, the constructivist perspective takes a 
different view.  The
'epistemic cut' is created by the observer.

The observer is part of the universe and deserves no special status 
except as a representer. That must be understood in terms of the 
basic conditions of the universe. This sort of dualism of epistemic 
cuts is doomed to self-destruction as it removes the observer from 
the universe.

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