I note something salient in Rafael's posting -- his insistence upon
returning to the notion of informational constraint as it relates to
"blocking development". As someone who senses that development around the
world has gotten altogether 'out of hand', I wonder why he feels that this
is so crucia
;usual' concept of economy. More on this
>(Aristotle, A. Smith, K. Marx) at
>http://www.webcom.com/artefact/untpltcl/exchvljs.html
>Rafael
>
>Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro
>Hochschule der Medien (HdM) University of Applied Sciences, Wolframstr. 32,
>70191 Stuttgart, Germany
>Priv
Commenting upon Michael's: A term that has been widely used (after Sartre)
to stand for "integrity" was 'authenticity'. I feel that this is deeply
important, but I would not exaggerate its connection to 'aloneness' so
much. As one who is much (by choice) alone, I realize that I am not REALLY
alo
Reacting to Carl's complex contribution, I wish only to comment upon the
nature of "identity". One approach is to construct uniqueness as the
nexus, or intersection, of many properties. For example, in my case we
would have: elderly, Caucasian, male, intellectual, academic, naturalist,
birder, bi
Replying to Pedro's query below, we can have:
{physical / chemical affordances {biological behaviors {cultural norms
{social guidance {personal past learnings {{{...{continuing process of
individuation...}. Some of us would place ethics somewhere between
social guidance and personal past
Steven said:
>Dear Pedro,
>
>I think we set our sights too low and we give up too soon if the best we
>can do is treat ethics as "the art of moral problem solving." The
>conflict and horrors in the social orders of our species follows
>directly from such ambiguity. Earlier attempts may be incomp
Reacting to Michael's posting: I find the continued loose use of 'fascism'
obfuscating. In , e.g., Mussolini's writings, we find that fascism refers
to a system of political organization based on the notion that the social
system is more important than the individual (which for people is quite
se
Launching from Pedro's question:
>Philosophical:
>
>Could we say that the entanglement of two particles reduces to the fact
>that a measure done on the first particle indicates something on the
>second particle just because they are interacting ?
SS: Could we say, alternatively, that entangl
(1) A question for Richard: Would it not be the gene pool, rather than the
(which one?) genome that would be the site of genetic variability? Thus
the population would be the generator, and owner, of genetic informational
entropy. Each realized genome would be one informational selection
(locali
Ted said:
>
> Any number of such ontological layers are possible and I suppose as
>system scale increases (physical, chemical, biological and so on...) new
>ones are added, possibly with constant semantic distance.
As a reminder of the complexities here, note that going from physical ->
chemical -
John said:
> Hmm. You should read Barwise and Seligman, Information Flow: the logic of
>distributed Systems. Very important for understanding Quantum Information.
>Also, I assume that you are familiar with algorithmic complexity theory,
>which is certainly rigourous, Minimum Description Length (Ri
Recently I replied to Pedro thusly:
>>Pedro -- OK, I think I see your basic point. If so, then we do agree
>>because I have concluded (tentatively) that, >>in the context of
>>Universal disequibilibrium, the principle of least action can be
>>explained by the maximum >>entropy production principle
A brief reply to Michael -- The postmodern position on science is not that
it is all a just a somehow useful construction, but that a particular class
in a particular society / culture has chosen to confront the world in a
particular style. The point is that, however useful this has turned out to
Responding to Igor -- I don't see how information can be a fundamental
category along with space, time, matter -- because it is a triadic concept,
requiring a system of interpretance that considers certain configurations
of matter in space and/or time to be significant. So, a complixated
configura
On the issue of the relation between Aristotle's causal categories and
information, here is how I would make it out:
Suppose we have a physical event that has signifiance to a system of
interpretance. Then:
formal cause determines WHAT HAS HAPPENED and therefore HOW IT WAS
BROUGHT ABOUT
materi
Michael said:
>I would say that those who might claim that physics is merely applied
>mathematics, that it lacks any self standing domain, are certainly
>mistaken. Those of us who are physical scientists recognize that our
>models of the physical world must always be validated by tangible
>observat
Commenting on Karl's statement below: Not quite --
>I will also take the opportunity to say that my point with formulating the
>realist's dilemma was to point out that a human being in principle is
>unable to produce a model of human perception on the basis of
>observation/experimentation.
t;From: "Stanley N. Salthe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [FIS] Re: Concluding replies
>
>Commenting on Arne's posting, with which I substantially agree. I find it
>useful to construct a specification hierarchy of 'realms of nature' (each
>of whi
Richard -- A good question! Note first that my statement is minimalist in
order just to note its large difference from the other two common
conceptions of information.
Now, in order to see that the genetic system would come under this general
usage of information as carrying meaning, we need to s
Pedro -- Pleas post this for me. Thanks.
STAN
for ; Sun, 5 Nov 2006 15:15:37 -0500 (EST)
>X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain
>Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 17:21:35 -0500
>To: fis@listas.unizar.es
&
Attempting an understanding of John Collier's posting given below --
He mapped systems with Atlan's "infinite sophistication" (which cannot be
modeled solely from the properties of their components) to computational
systems that do not halt given all relevant inputs, and so are not, in his
term
I interleave comments upon Joe's text --
> 11th FIS Discussion Session:
> INTRODUCING SOCIAL AND CULTURAL COMPLEXITY
> Joseph A. Tainter
> Global Institute of Sustainability and School of >Human Evolution and
>Social Change,
> Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
>
>
Steven's criticisms of of Joseph's text are good ones. I would like to
address one question he raises:
>I feel a clear definition of complexity is missing from Tainter's
>discussion and I see distinct concepts being >confused. I find myself, for
>example, wanting a clear specification of complexi
Using my last posting for the week, I will support Guy's posting below: As
I pointed out in my 1985 book on scale/compositional hierarchically
organized systems, the fact that different levels cannot dynamically
interact (must be separated by order of magnitude differences if they ARE
to be separa
Reacting to both Igor's, Pedro's & Ted's communications: The many
complexities facing us as society can be parsed as follows, using a
specification hierarcy:
{physical constraints (material/chemical constraints {biological
constraints {sociocultural constraints.
Here we an apply Ted's: "My und
This is my reply to Jerry (acknowledging that John's reply to Jerry below
says it as well as -- probably better than -- I can), who said:
>Stan's comment deserves to be attended to.
>
>> "The many complexities facing us as society can be parsed as follows,
>>using a
>> specification hierarcy:
>>
Replying to LOET, who said:
>Dear colleagues,I agree with most of what is said, but it does not
>apply to social systems because these -- and to a lesser extent also
>psychological ones -- operate differently from the hierarchical
>formations that are generated "naturally". That is why
Replying to Pedro, who said:
>Those hierarchical schemes that with a few categories cover realms and
>realms of knowledge have an undeniable allure --but are they useful?
S: This depends upon the meaning of "useful". As my work is in
Natural Philosophy, they are useful there in the sense of
Pedro said:
>Dear Igor and Stan,
>
-snip-
>
>The realm of economy is almost pure information. Rather than planning,
>markets are very clever ways to handle informational complexity. They
>partake a number of formal properties (eg, power laws) indicating that they
>work as info conveyors on global,
't it?
>
>Regards,
>
>Guy
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Stanley N. Salthe
>Sent: Sat 2/24/2007 2:51 PM
>To: fis@listas.unizar.es
>Subject: Re: [Fis] Continuing Discussion of Social and Cultural Complexity
>
>Pe
Pedro notes :
>Thanks, Stan and others.
>
>Very briefly, I was thinking on the economy (together with most of social
>structure) as the "arrows" or bonds that connect the "nodes" of
>individuals. Take away the arrows, the bonds, and you are left with a mere
>swarm of structureless, gregarious indi
Commenting on Robin's text, he said:
>In this paper I combine and extend some ideas of Daniel Dennett with
>one from Wittgenstein and another from physics. Dennett introduced the
>concepts of the physical, design and intentional stances (1987), and
>has suggested (with John Haugeland) that â*some
Continuing with Robin --
>Thursday, March 15, 2007, 7:46:47 PM, Stanley wrote:
>
>> Commenting on Robin's text, he said:
>
>>>In this paper I combine and extend some ideas of Daniel Dennett with
>>>one from Wittgenstein and another from physics. Dennett introduced the
>>>concepts of the physical,
Replying to Pedro's query about intellectual tourism, I guess I have done
some touring myself. After a few years on this list, I guess this is a
good opportunity to introduce myself.
I began by studying art, and have episodially pursued painting, sculpture,
pottery, and most recently, rug weaving
Pedro said --
>Dear FIS colleagues,
>
>It was nice seeing these artistic oriented presentations (including Stan's!
>--I sort of remember having read a few years ago an elegant poem of him on
>entropy... am I right?).
et puis,
je hésite --
je refuse
d'av
First I comment on Pedro's:
>The "information overload" theme (in the evolution of social modes of
>communication), is really intriguing. >Should we take it, say, in its
>prima facie? I am inclined to put it into question, at least to have an
>excuse and try to >unturn that pretty stone...
The qu
Interleaving comments in Bob's introduction --
-snip-
>We next review the work of Propagating Organization: An Enquiry (POE)
>(Kauffman, Logan et al. 2007) in which it is shown that Shannon
>information cannot describe a biotic system. The core argument of POE was
>that Shannon information "does
I comment on Walter's remark concerning my posting
>Dear FIS colleagues,
-snip-
>
>I cant see the appropriateness to reinsert the teleological language.
>Moreover, it seems to me that with these reinsertions we could lose, at
>certain degrees, the rational and scientific >enterprise.
>
>Also, indi
Here I react to Guy's
> Greetings All,
>
> In my view meaning exists (or not) exclusively within systems. It
>exists to the extent that inputs (incoming information) resonate within
>the structure of the system. The resonance can either reinforce the
>existing architecture (confirmation)
Reacting to Christophe's statement:
>But I'm afraid I disagree with your point regarding first person
>consciousness as not representing anything real, >as just being a
>bio-cultural artefact as you say. I take human consciousness as being a
>reality resulting from an >evolution of representations
Bob said:
>Hi Stan - interesting ideas - I resonate with the thought that the
>meaning of info is associated with Aritostle's final cause - cheers Bob
Here I follow up with an extract from a text I am working on at present,
just to amplify this a bit more:
Finally, what is the justification fo
Bob --
>Hi Stan - once again I enjoyed your remarks amplifying your original
>comment. I would like to add that science only deals with formal cause and
>not final cause. Final cause is for philosophers, social critics and
>theologians.
S: Well, Bob, I will disagree with this. I think final
Referring to Bob's, John's, Loet's, Guy's, Beth's and Marcin's
Bob Logan said:
>>>BL: The Relativity of Information
>>>In POE we associated biotic or instructional information with the
>>>organization that a biotic agent is able to propagate. This contradicts
>>>Shannon's definition of information
Commenting upon Pedro's"
>Dear FIS colleagues,
>
>Sorry that I could barely follow and participate in the recent exchanges
>(bureaucratic work overload). I was very interested in all the exchanges,
>particularly in the early stages of the discussion. Notwithstanding the
>high quality of the postin
Commenting first on Bob's and then on Karl's:
Bob said--
>Dear colleagues - please forgive my lapse in communications. I have been
>studying the question of Shannon info and have come up with the following
>thoughts I want to share with you. As always comments are solicited.
>Rather than answerin
Pedro said --
> Dear FIS colleagues,
>
> Adding to Bob's and Karl's on Shannonian info, I am still under the
>influence of Seth Lloyd (one of the founders of quantum computation)
>insights about inf physics. For him, the second law is but a statement
>about information processing, how the underly
Replying to Loet, Rafael
Loet said:
>The analogy with the Shannon entropy is strictly formal. Shannon's is a
>mathematical theory; bits of information are dimensionless. The
>Boltzman-constant (k(B)) provides dimensionality to S. Thermodynamic
>entropy can be considered as a special case of Sha
Repsonding to John --
> At 10:01 PM 2007/11/14, Stanley N. Salthe wrote:
>Replying to Loet, Rafael
> Loet said:
>
> >LL: The analogy with the Shannon entropy is strictly formal. Shannon's is a
> >mathematical theory; bits of information are dimensionless.
> >Th
Steven --
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Steven Ericsson Zenith
> Date: Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 2:56 PM
> Subject: [Fis] On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton
> To: Foundations of Information Science Information Science <
> fis@listas.unizar.es>
>
> Dear List,
>
> I
Has anyone suggested the function of contact sports to be the 'moral
equivalent' of war. Many young men requires this kind of excitement because
of their hormone mix.
STAN
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan <
pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> wrote:
> Dear FISers,
>
> Looking for an
Pedro -- This sentiment seems odd to me. This is because I have retired to
an out-of-the-way rural area and no longer travel to conferences, and so my
only contact with other than family members is through e-mail, including
lists. And my wife does all our communications with the locals. I do NOT
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Stanley N Salthe wrote:
> Regarding the question: What is your
>
> opinion about Leroy E. Hood' words: "Biology Is an
> Informational Science"?
>
> In a general sense the meaning is that, although every locale in the world
>
Folks --
Comments upon Kirby’s & Brenner’s ‘Opening Remarks’
(1) I used Conrad’s early information-based work in developing my conception
of the scale/compositional hierarchy as applied to material systems. As a
materialist, I may have ‘mis-read’ his work. I think this now, upon
glimpsing thi
JOSEPH: If the principle of scale hierarchy says that information flows are
not possible across scales, perhaps we need to take another look at that
principle ;-).
S: Let me be more specific; no information flows UNMEDIATED across
levels whose changes occur at different scales. Example: mol
Replying to Kevin --
On Tuesday, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Kevin Kirby wrote:
-snip-
On flows across scales, this itself need not be mysterious. Take a single
photon hitting a rhodopsin molecule in the retina of a vertebrate then
[...long chain here...] triggering a fight-or-flight response.
on. What do you mean by mediation, and what difference does it
> make in the current context? Isn’t the important thing that information
> often does percolate across levels?
>
> Regards,
>
> Guy
>
>
> On 10/1/10 1:23 PM, "Stanley N. Salthe" wrote:
>
> Reply
Replying to Guy --
You are right. My favorite examples of signals moving across scales
(e.g.,direct interactions) are (a) lightning, where a signal from the planet
scale system directly contacts an organism at a lower scale, and (b) cancer,
where a single cell can destroy a multicellular organis
I am glad to find that Koichiro's statement here corroborates my suspicion
as to what fluctuons were intended to do. I see the framework here to be
'internalism'. On the fluctuon idea, supposed material operations from
moment to moment at the fermion/boson level in one locale, which cannot be
obs
I would like to comment upon Conrad's statement:
"When we look at a biological system we are looking at the face of the
> underlying physics of the universe... The picture is not one of
> simple upscale percolation. The higher levels act down scale on the
> lower levels to redefine their fundament
>
> Loet
>
>
> --
>
> Loet Leydesdorff
>
> Professor, University of Amsterdam
> Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR),
> Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam.
> Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-842239111
> l...@leyde
Loet --
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Loet Leydesdorff
wrote:
Dear Stan,
Wasn’t it Tycho Brahe’s suscipio descipiendo, descipio suscipiendo? Nothing
but uncertainty; if order emerges, selection mechanisms must have been
specified.
S: If uncertainty emerges, particular choices must h
Jorge -- Then, it is hard to get away from the model where, in 'downward
causation', large scale signals impact simultaneously many small scale
processes, while in upward causation, small scale signals need to accumulate
into some kind of ensemble message. But Conrad 'fluctuons' seem to be
trying
Bob --
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Robert Ulanowicz wrote
>
>
> Subject: Re: [Fis] Tactilizing processing
> To: Stanley N Salthe
> Cc: u...@cbl.umces.edu
>
>
> Quoting Stanley N Salthe :
>
> I suggested that a single small scale fluctuation nea
thus
increasing the precision or definiteness of the lower scale 'messages',
which are still a kind of 'mass action', but with clearer, more reliable and
less muddy, 'colors'.
STAN
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Robert Ulanowicz wrote:
> Quoting Stanley N Salt
-- Forwarded message --
From: Stanley N Salthe
Date: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Fis] [Fwd: Discussion Colophon] From J.Brenner
To: "Pedro C. Marijuan"
A comment on Joseph's concluding statement: It seems clear to me that there
is a world of qu
20- 525 6598; fax: +31-842239111
> l...@leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/
>
>
>
> *From:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es]
> *On Behalf Of *Stanley N Salthe
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 04, 2010 3:05 PM
> *To:* fis@listas.u
Concerning:
>The minimal claim would be that there is no intelligence without
information. For an agent, intelligence is the ability to face the >world in
a meaningful way and it increases with the number of different ways an agent
is able to respond with.
It seems to me that this implies, in a
ssing.
>
> Gordana
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es]
> *On Behalf Of *Stanley N Salthe
> *Sent:* den 13 november 2010 23:03
>
> *To:* fis@listas.unizar.es
> *Subject:* Re: [Fis] INTELLIGENCE & INFORMATION (by Y.X.Zh
Folks -- This cut is Figure 1 from
Sejnowsky, T., 2006. The computational self. * Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences* 1001: 262-271.
Note that the levels are found to be orders of magnitude different in size.
No change in any single unit at any level can have an effect at the next
up
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
As my second posting for the week:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Stanley N Salthe
Date: Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Doctrine of Limitation
To: "Pedro C. Marijuan"
Replying to Pedro, who asked:
>Optimality principles can be discussed now, but l
Replying to Walter --
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:41 PM, wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
It seems that a good start point is to look at the “dissipative structures
world”.
And we could ask if in every dissipative structure it is possible to find
information
and/or computations and/or intelligenc
*Replying to Karl, who said:*
one can use a stable model used by neurology and psychology to come closer
to understanding how our brain works. This can help to formulate the
thoughts Pedro mentioned being obscure.
One pictures the brain as a quasi-meteorological model of an extended world
contai
> The best to all,
> Bob
>
> -
> Robert E. Ulanowicz| Tel: +1-352-378-7355
> Arthur R. Marshall Laboratory | FAX: +1-352-392-3704
> Department of Biology | Emeritus, Chesa
at least in Nature (cells, nervous systems, people), one has
> to re-enter populational thinking, optimality guidance, and the doctrine of
> limitation. The hierarchy/heterarchy theme is also of importance in the
> populational aspect (as what we see often is "nested agencies"), etc.
>
As my last for this week:
Replying to Walter -- The dark matter and dark energy examples are not very
strong as examples of demonstrating discoveries rather than invention!
These are stand-ins, just names, for disparities between predictions and
observations. They are provisionally (I hope!) ac
Replying to Loet --
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 1:59 AM, Loet Leydesdorff wrote:
> Replying to Loet --
>
>
>
> Your distinction between the backward looking institutional viewpoint
> and the forward looking evolutionary perspective is cogent, but it plays
> down the fact that the evolutionary one
One of the most special properties of science -- indeed its core that
differentiates it from natural philosophy -- is the practice of testing
hypotheses. Leaving aside the 'human' weaknesses involved here, there is,
however, the 'Duhem-Quine thesis' to be faced. In order to test an
hypothesis, on
Tagging on after Joseph --
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:19 PM, joe.bren...@bluewin.ch <
joe.bren...@bluewin.ch> wrote:
> Dear Pedro and All,
>
> Thank you for your note and the ambitious program. My brief comments by
> theme:
>
> --Theme 1: Historical Foundations of Modern Science.
>
> So
It is interesting that you raise the power law in connection with
information. Info theory presumably applies to everything and anything. So
do power laws like Zipf's, WHEN data are examined as ranking by size or
importance. How can this be? Or, rather, 'what is this?' The power law
is 'infor
Gavin -- I send this reply to you, but, since we on this list are allowed
only two messages per week, I will reserve sending it to the list until
later in the week.
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Gavin Ritz wrote:
Hi there Stan
SS: Info theory presumably applies to everything and anythin
Robin --
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Robin Faichney wrote:
> Saturday, January 29, 2011, 9:39:09 PM, Stanley wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Gavin Ritz wrote:
>
> > SS: Info theory presumably applies to everything and anything.
>
> > GR: It was never intended to apply to anyth
As u first for the week:
On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Gavin Ritz wrote:
Hi Stan
Using my last message for the week,
Reacting to the below(s): As a materialist, I see the deformations
initiated by Guy's propagated waves (e.g., as sensations) as forming the
basis for information, but,
-- Forwarded message --
From: Stanley N Salthe
Date: Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Fis] [ Re: please correct]--From Karl Javorszky
To: "Pedro C. Marijuan"
Regarding:
1) Your basic - axiomatic - set of different facts, which you describe as
"... prope
Replying to Jerry (with implications for the postings of our Chinese
members) --
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Jerry LR Chandler
wrote:
(Pedro: Please Post to FIS)
James Hannam, Stan, Pedro, List:
Thank you for taking the time to express your point of view. For several
years now, I hav
As my second posting for the week:
Replying to Steven and James --
On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Steven Ericsson-Zenith
wrote:
Dear Stan,
You wrote:
On Mar 6, 2011, at 12:42 PM, Stanley N Salthe wrote:
>
> ... There can be no 'objective' knowledge of properties outs
As my first posting for this week --
Replying to Steven --
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Steven Ericsson-Zenith <
ste...@semeiosis.org> wrote:
On Mar 12, 2011, at 5:52 AM, Stanley N Salthe wrote:
> ...
>
>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Steven Ericsson-Zenith <
Replying to Joseph --
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 7:18 PM, joe.bren...@bluewin.ch <
joe.bren...@bluewin.ch> wrote:
Dear John, Pedro, Jerry and All,
-snip-
In my view, this simply displaces the problem further, since the Peircean
categories themselves are derivative, epistemological constructions
As my last posting for this week:
reacting to James' fine summary --
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:02 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan <
pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> wrote:
-snip-
A second, smaller camp of historians of science where I have pitched my own
tent want to know what caused modern science. They
It seems obvious to me that any property held by a very complex entity
(e.g., human being), IF it can be modeled, then that model can be used to
generalize that property ANYWHERE we wish to. On these grounds I have been
busy working on 'physiosemiosis' using the triadic formulation of semiosis
of
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic <
gordana.dodig-crnko...@mdh.se> wrote:
Dear Stan,
Ø The key is whether the trait involved can be modeled; on these grounds it
has not yet been shown that 'qualia' can be generalized beyond the human
experience, yet even > a child can se
Replying to Gavin -- I think you make the 'error of misplaced concreteness'.
Information theory -- and all theories and laws are modeling tools, not
actual phenomena. So, it is also true that when an apple falls it is not
being pulled by gravitation. Gravitation is our way of understanding the
f
-- Forwarded message --
From: Stanley N Salthe
Date: Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] ON INFORMATION THEORY--Mark Burgin
To: Loet Leydesdorff
Here I paste in a diagram I made some years ago illustrating the point made
by Loet in his second paragraph. (The
s my last or the week:
Replying to Gavin -- I think you make the 'error of misplaced concreteness'.
Information theory -- and all theories and laws are modeling tools, not
actual phenomena. So, it is also true that when an apple falls it is not
being pulled by gravitation Gravitation is our way
Igor said --
IG: I suggested this definition (Gurevich, 1989). “Information is
heterogeneity, stable for some definite time”. Regardless of the nature of
heterogeneity, would be it letters, words, phrases or - elementary
particles, atoms, molecules, or - people, groups, societies, etc.
Gurevi
(1) Replying Quiao --
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 7:15 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan <
pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> wrote:
Message from Qiao Tian-qing
--
Dear FISers
There is another general theory of information (GTIA).
I consider,
The customari
Replying to Raphael, Joseph, and Loet -
**
*Rafael Capurro* to Robert, fis
show details 10:13 AM (4 hours ago)
well... not exactly. This is the way Hegel (and others) looked at it,
discarding the 'singulars' or including them into the particulars and so
creating a dialectics of the universal
I am having problems communicating with lists, So I am trying to see if this
gets through.
STAN
___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Michel -- Organic chemistry was known to be the most difficult course in
Columbia University. But I got interested in it, worked very hard
constantly, and I achieved an 'A'. But what you say here indicates several
orders of magnitude more difficulty than what I played with in university.
For me
Michel -- Regarding:
Now, I ask you the following: please can you provide an extremely
simple example (the most simple you could imagine) of situation in
which you can say: << in this situation, information is ... >>.
Chemical information is welcome, but an example from physics would be
great, too
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo
