Dear Colleagues,
I understand Landauer�s insight not as an analysis of the logical
structure of information, nor of its ubiquitous utility throughout human
endeavors, but rather as a more precise description of the mechanisms
for storage and transmission of information. According to Landauer, and
I think he was right about this, information is exclusively stored in
the configuration of physical objects,.and transmitted only by material
entities. So, for example, the energy configuration of a simple bi-level
atom would contain a single bit of information, represented by zero,
say, in its ground configuration, and by one in its excited level. Of
course the physical configuration of the atom�s nucleus, made up of
protons and neutrons, must also contain additional information, ignored
in this instance. And we know that protons and neutrons are themselves
composed of quarks, whose physical configuration must also contain more
information. And, as far as we know, those quarks may be constituted by
some structure of strings, with even more information, and so on.
I also understand Landauer to tell us that information is transmitted
from one thing to another only by physical objects, all of which are
composed of energetic quanta. As, for instance, sending information on a
telegraph line by a series of electrical impulses, each of which
contains many electrons. I know of no reason to suppose that the
information any person holds and exploits, even about mathematics, is
not stored and transmitted physically, as Landauer has said.
Jerry wrote that �mathematics is often deemed as abstraction, (so)
mathematical information is often deemed as abstract.� But, it is the
brain cells and synaptic connections, their chemical and electrical
configuration and signal processing, which alone permits us to employ
mathematics. Clearly, traumatic injury to the brain (or death, even) can
destroy a person�s mathematical facility. I suppose neuroscientists
today may even be able to locate those specific areas of the brain that
process mathematical thoughts.
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
observations in controlled experiments. That, I believe, distinguishes
the physical sciences from pure mathematics. I have yet to meet the
chemist, biologist, geologist, paleontologist, astronomer, or physicist
who seeks to treat matter itself as a disembodied abstract entity.
Landauer certainly didn�t do that, and the rest of us, also, I believe,
clearly see the difference between a mathematical model of the physical
world, and the world itself. Because we carefully observe that world in
our experiments.
Cordially,
Michael Devereux
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Tue Jul 25 04:39:47 2006
