RE: [Fis] Information and communication

Dear colleagues,

Maybe the question by Michel on entropy and relativity can be answered
along the following lines (from Atkins, 2002, p. 134). "... A remarkable
fact emerges when we start to think about the structure of spacetime in
terms of entropy. In 1995, Ted Jacobson (http://xxx.lanl.gov and the
subdirectory gr-qc) showed that if we combine the Clausius expression for
the change of entropy when heat enters a region with an assertion about the
relation of entropy to the area of the surface bounding the region (in
fact, the two are proportional, as they are known to be for the surface
surrounding a black hole), then the local structure of spacetime is
distorted in exactly the way predicted by Einstein's equations for general
relativity. In other words, in a rather refined sense, the Second Law
implies the existence of Einstein's equations of general relativity! So,
maybe the steam engine is not just inside us, it is everywhere..."

In part, I had that very quotation in mind when I suggested weeks ago the
interest of attempting an axiomatization of information physics, so that
relativity, 'transformability' (Second Law) and uncertainty be put under a
common limitation on the information available to be potentially picked up
through the motor/perception happenstances of an observer in spacetime (in
this list, Igor has already tried some of this axiomatics a couple of times
in recent years--why not a third time?).

If have understood properly, some parties are implying that information
science should be irreducibly tied to the outcome of a particular formula
--or a very successful formalism. Like a 'magic bullet' putting it in a
molecular medicine metaphor. Conversely, the approach vindicated at fis
from its very beginnings in 1992, is that of "life stories". It does not
contradict the former per se, but it integrates it within a larger scheme
where the 'natural history of information' may be contemplated:
interrelating info phenomena at multiple scales, connecting different
formalisms, making interdisciplinary bridges, entering and speculating on
obscure regions... right now in information physics, later on who knows in
what other social, biological, or neuronal avenues. In sum, promoting the
(rather difficult) advancement of a new interdisciplinary /
multidisciplinary tradition. (The story of the "only one true formalism"
isn't sort of the bread and butter of complexity gurus Santa Style and
their changing fashions: Boolean nets, genetic algorithms, cellular
automata, SOC and power laws, random Networks, etc.? "Premature closure" at
its best!).

Jerry made weeks ago a very elegant approach to mathematical-chemical
conceptions of order. He concluded with 'bonds' (enthalpy), which I see as
the crucial aspect to build biological order --'polimerization', 'folding',
protein complexes, 'tactilizing processing', enzyme function. Months ago we
had already argued about this (and I promised not to repeat the Oknos
mythology about the wonders of his molecular recognition sacred 'fingers').
My central question would be about the capability of statistical mechanics
to meaningfully contemplate one of the most repeated and wondrous
biological events: protein folding, protein-protein complexing.

best regards

Pedro

_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Wed Jun 2 14:23:55 2004