Fwd: [Fis] Re: What is information ?

From: Jerry LR Chandler
<<mailto:Jerry.LR.Chandler@Cox.net>Jerry.LR.Chandler@Cox.net>
Date: October 3, 2005 10:40:21 AM EDT
Subject: Re: [Fis] Re: What is information ?

Dear Kochiro:

Your post of September 29, 2005 leaves me in a state of wonder.

I really do not understand the potential relations between the semantics,
which appear to "unconceal" and the syntax, which appears to "re-conceal,"
that which was unconcealed. In view of the many issues that appear to
be glued together (with lose of identity) in your narrative, I will
address only the first parts of your post.

Koichiro writes:
On Sep 29, 2005, at 6:00 AM,
<mailto:fis-request@listas.unizar.es>fis-request@listas.unizar.es wrote:
>>Folks,
>> Apart from the definitional matter, energy and information are intimately
>>related to each other.

This is a wonderful sentence. May I assume that the reference is an
abstract meta language of types? For example, a bacterium, a fruit fly and
an elephant are all of he same type, the commonality being that the names
represent living organisms.

>>My only concern here will be to call some attention
>>to the issue of information in relation to energy, I would hope.

This suggests that the issue is not of types but of tokens.
Is this issue one of existence? If not of existence, what is the source of
the potential non-definitional relation?

>>Energy conceived in the first law of thermodynamics on energy
>>transformation is informational in precipitating a new type of energy
>>carrier through cohesive interactions acting among the pre-existing energy
>>carriers.

May I presume that an energy carrier is an existent energy?
(And, note that energy of the first law is of a definition type, or do I
misread your intent?)
If so, is the existent energy a generic energy?

>>Energy transformation is informational in making a new difference.

Is the "new difference" a non-definable variable?

>> A principal energy carrier met with in material processes is a Planck's
>>energy quantum.

Does the view of an existent energy restrict its manifestation to energy
quantum in the "apart from definitional" matter?

>>Nonetheless, a Planck's energy quantum does not transform
>>itself within linear quantum mechanics, though it can yield a macroscopic
>>coherence by way of a linear superposition of each microscopic quantum. If
>>the relative time interval for the occurrence of nonlinear quantum coherence
>>is limited, the likely quantum coherence to occur would be at most of a
>>linear type allowing only a linear superposition.

Why?
In the absence of definitions, what restricts the domain of interactions?

>>In contrast, appearance or
>>emergence of a new quantum of interest may be expected from nonlinear
>>quantum coherence of a lasting type.

Quantum or quanta?
Are "lasting type"s of quantum durable? If so, how does one see the
manifestation of the "lasting types?"

Could you post an experimental description of:

>"The citric acid cycle running in the presence of temperature gradients alone
>without recourse to enzymes of biological origin is internally coherent only
>nonlinearly, which Atsushi Nemoto and myself observed in my lab."

This experimental result should be of great interest to the individuals
interested in biological information.

Cheers

Jerry LR Chandler
Received on Wed Oct 5 10:14:08 2005