Dear John and colleagues,
I would add a couple of motifs to your cogent reflections.
On causation, I do not quite see that the Aristotelian categories
adequately cover the "pristine" info causation we see for instance in
living beings-- as I have often argued they lack any stable form, always
engaged in creation / annihilation processes. At least, three types of info
are at work there molecularly (structural "dilute", generative
"sequential", communicational "signaling pathways"), together incessantly
handling and revamping and adapting the "form" to the environmental
demands. Perhaps as I have pointed out during recent discussions here, an
overall notion of information "as a distinction on the adjacent" might
apply to all of them. It would bring some easy-going thought about that.
About extending this vision on "info causation" towards neuronal and
social-economic realms, it does not look uncanny, particularly regarding
the adaptability of companies to the information received (and not
"forces"!) from markets. Unfortunately, staunch mechanistic visions prevail
in most of those quarters.
Thus, the strict separation of physical information from physical laws
themselves (or "informational laws" for Andrei-- which I prefer) may be
another stumbling block. I do not have any further hint about that, but I
see it as a serious problem for any information physics approach that
really attempts a renovation and a cohesion of ideas. My only guess is what
I already mentioned about elementary Planck cells in string theory and
Kalabi-Yau spaces, plus all those singularities about information recently
discussed on black holes by Hawkins, Penrose and others.
Igor's conceptual solution of information as a fundamental category is a
very interesting temptation... Maybe we should restrict our visions to
those strategic areas where un-satisfaction and unrest with
information-surrogates is a fact.
best regrds
Pedro
At 11:20 19/07/2006, you wrote:
>Quoting Michael Devereux <dbar_x@cybermesa.com>:
>
>Dear Michael,
>
>You wrote:
>
><So, according to Landauer, and many scientists who have read his work,
the
><correspondence of information with the experienced, physical world is
>definite.
>
>We had a brief side conversation about this last year.
>
>Landauer did define information (data)as a physical but also a 'slippery'
>experience and pretty convincingly set about proving it. That uncertain
>'slipperiness' takes us into QI and probability theory - information as
>unexpected variety within a constraint (in scientific and in aesthetic
>experience).
>
>Is the commodification of information not similar to the mechanisation of
>time as a physical clock in the eighteenth and nineteenth century -
>till Messieurs Heidegger and Einstein came along? Likewise before Humboldt
>the phenomenon of language was simply nominalist marks describing objects.
>
> From another perspective matter is form with an address (form-at) and
>form yields shape pattern and matter (in science and art). Lanadauer's
>in-format-ion corresponds to Aristotle's first - material - cause
"that o
>ut of
>which a thing comes to be, and which persists," and represents marked
dat
>a,
>documents, hardware/software etc. X is what Y is made out of.
>
>John Collier's recent attempts to base 'information' on formal causation
>and symmetry breaking tend to address the second - formal - cause the
>statement
>of essence (X is what it is to be Y). [in-form-ation]. Von Weiszacker and
L
>yre
>'s pragmatic school found information on the efficient cause
>(X produces Y) [in-formation] Paninformationists (like Norbert Wiener) who
>deny
>the materialist basis of information tend to describe the final cause
>(X is what Y is for) [in-for-mation].
>
>If we can ground our concepts of information on Aristotelian causation
>IS may no longer be the pseudo-science it is today.
>
>In this sense the 'difference that MAKES a difference' can be based on
>Aristotle's cause (aitos) (what makes information intrinsically
information
>)
>(AITOS = make).
>
>The relationship between the phenomenon information and the material world
>is what information science is yet to discover.
>
>That split between 'informatio sensis' and 'informatio intellectus
possibil
>is'
>(informationem de voluntate et meditationem de potestate nexu individuo
>commiscens et copulans) which occurred in Bacon's Novum Organum
>still continues today in rival material/nonmaterial or realist/antirealist
>information theories.
>
>In a quantum sense both are wrong and both are right at the same time.
>
>Sincerely
>
>John H
>
>
>>Dear Andrei, John, and colleagues,
>>
>>The relationship between information and the material world was
correctly
>>described, I believe, some ten years ago, by Rolf Landauer, the chief
>>scientist at the IBM Watson laboratory in New York. In several seminal
>>papers he insisted that all information is physical. In his words,
>>"Information is not a disembodied abstract entity; it is always
tied to a
>>physical representation. It is represented by engraving on a stone
>>tablet, a spin, a charge, a hole in a punched card, a mark on paper,
or
>>some other equivalent. This ties the handling of information to all
the
>>possibilities and restrictions of our real physical world, its laws of
>>physics, and its storehouse of available parts." (Physics Letters
A 217,
>>1996, p. 188.)
>>When information is exchanged between two objects, as in a
measurement,
>>there is, necessarily, a transfer of some physical thing. I would note
>>that all physical objects are composed of quanta and all quanta carry
>>energy. So, according to Landauer, and many scientists who have read
his
>>work, the correspondence of information with the experienced, physical
>>world is definite.
>>Cordially,
>>
>>Michael Devereux
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>fis mailing list
>>fis@listas.unizar.es
>>http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>This message was sent using MyMail
>
>_______________________________________________
>fis mailing list
>fis@listas.unizar.es
>http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Wed Jul 19 13:33:56 2006
