Re: [Fis] cell signaling: COMMUNICATION

Dear Soeren,

Thanks for the comment. I largely agree with it. The informational
understanding of the cell is a big problem for a variety of disciplines and
approaches (though contemplated in a very different guise by each one). I
think that at the time being we cannot produce consistent 'molecularly
based' responses to those questions --info, signal, meaning, biosemantics,
etc.

For instance, we may agree that the 'phase' (running towards completion of
a 'cycle') is the time-binding-reference of the living for its
informational coupling to the boundary conditions --and not the 'state',
characteristic of the mechanical coupling. But, then, a fantastic
multiplicity of different enzyme pathways (e.g., metabolic ones) may be
used to transverse the phases (to arrive into what the cycle biologists
call the 'checkpoints')...

How could we formulate -- with some formal elegance-- the enormous
redundancy, robustness, and resilience that the informational coupling of
the living to its boundary conditions purports? The challenge of the neat
formulation of mechanics is in front of us. This formal problem is shared,
I think, by other disciplines leading with complex existentialities whose
survival also depends on a continuous communication with its environment
(eg, companies).

best

Pedro

At 10.18 30/9/03 +0200, you wrote:
>Dear Pedro
>
>You are getting closer and closer to Biosemiotics in your overall view.
>But we need to distinguish between information and meaning (bio-psyc and
>psyc.-social), signal, sign and language. To me the informational mostly
>starts with the chemical because here the pattern fitting becomes the
>most important form of interaction.

_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Thu Oct 2 20:29:37 2003