I agree with Arturo. I understand information exclusively as matter and energy, and the diversity of their states through space/time. What else it there? The alternative would be to accept ‘information’ as merely an heuristic concept that helps us to communicate and make sense of our lives without the goal of identifying real phenomena. I think the freedom to create and use such heuristic concepts is essential for many reasons, but we are constantly challenged as scientists with distinguishing between these terms and those we think and hope approximate real phenomena. A grad student I worked with suggested the term “tool words” to label terms we recognize as mainly heuristic. As an evolutionary biologist, I would suggest the term “fitness” has been a very useful heuristic term, but that “fitness” does not actually exist. This statement might surprise or even put off many of my colleagues, which I think illustrates the problem caused by failing to make this distinction explicit. As I have argued before, I think clearly distinguishing between ‘information’ and ‘meaning’ would be a good first step in this direction.
Regards, Guy Guy Hoelzer, Associate Professor Department of Biology University of Nevada Reno Phone: 775-784-4860 Fax: 775-784-1302 On Sep 15, 2017, at 6:16 AM, tozziart...@libero.it<mailto:tozziart...@libero.it> wrote: Dear FISers, I'm sorry for bothering you, but I start not to agree from the very first principles. The only language able to describe and quantify scientific issues is mathematics. Without math, you do not have observables, and information is observable. Therefore, information IS energy or matter, and can be examined through entropies (such as., e.g., the Bekenstein-Hawking one). And, please, colleagues, do not start to write that information is subjective and it depends on the observer's mind. This issue has been already tackled by the math of physics: science already predicts that information can be "subjective", in the MATHEMATICAL frameworks of both relativity and quantum dynamics' Copenhagen interpretation. Therefore, the subjectivity of information is clearly framed in a TOTALLY physical context of matter and energy. Sorry for my polemic ideas, but, if you continue to define information on the basis of qualitative (and not quantitative) science, information becomes metaphysics, or sociology, or psychology (i.e., branches with doubtful possibility of achieving knowledge, due to their current lack of math). Arturo Tozzi AA Professor Physics, University North Texas Pediatrician ASL Na2Nord, Italy Comput Intell Lab, University Manitoba http://arturotozzi.webnode.it/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Farturotozzi.webnode.it%2F&data=01%7C01%7Choelzer%40unr.edu%7C97485102689b43316b2308d4fc3c1d76%7C523b4bfc0ebd4c03b2b96f6a17fd31d8%7C1&sdata=zC9isQ6gnnAJWc3ZKGqZh6YWPC4x7kiQ%2BAuKKa2WZ3g%3D&reserved=0> ----Messaggio originale---- Da: "Pedro C. Marijuan" <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es<mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>> Data: 15/09/2017 14.13 A: "fis"<fis@listas.unizar.es<mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>> Ogg: [Fis] PRINCIPLES OF IS Dear FIS Colleagues, As promised herewith the "10 principles of information science". A couple of previous comments may be in order. First, what is in general the role of principles in science? I was motivated by the unfinished work of philosopher Ortega y Gasset, "The idea of principle in Leibniz and the evolution of deductive theory" (posthumously published in 1958). Our tentative information science seems to be very different from other sciences, rather multifarious in appearance and concepts, and cavalierly moving from scale to scale. What could be the specific role of principles herein? Rather than opening homogeneous realms for conceptual development, these information principles would appear as a sort of "portals" that connect with essential topics of other disciplines in the different organization layers, but at the same time they should try to be consistent with each other and provide a coherent vision of the information world. And second, about organizing the present discussion, I bet I was too optimistic with the commentators scheme. In any case, for having a first glance on the whole scheme, the opinions of philosophers would be very interesting. In order to warm up the discussion, may I ask John Collier, Joseph Brenner and Rafael Capurro to send some initial comments / criticisms? Later on, if the commentators idea flies, Koichiro Matsuno and Wolfgang Hofkirchner would be very valuable voices to put a perspectival end to this info principles discussion (both attended the Madrid bygone FIS 1994 conference)... But this is FIS list, unpredictable in between the frozen states and the chaotic states! So, everybody is invited to get ahead at his own, with the only customary limitation of two messages per week. Best wishes, have a good weekend --Pedro 10 PRINCIPLES OF INFORMATION SCIENCE 1. Information is information, neither matter nor energy. 2. Information is comprehended into structures, patterns, messages, or flows. 3. Information can be recognized, can be measured, and can be processed (either computationally or non-computationally). 4. Information flows are essential organizers of life's self-production processes--anticipating, shaping, and mixing up with the accompanying energy flows. 5. Communication/information exchanges among adaptive life-cycles underlie the complexity of biological organizations at all scales. 6. It is symbolic language what conveys the essential communication exchanges of the human species--and constitutes the core of its "social nature." 7. Human information may be systematically converted into efficient knowledge, by following the "knowledge instinct" and further up by applying rigorous methodologies. 8. Human cognitive limitations on knowledge accumulation are partially overcome via the social organization of "knowledge ecologies." 9. Knowledge circulates and recombines socially, in a continuous actualization that involves "creative destruction" of fields and disciplines: the intellectual Ars Magna. 10. Information science proposes a new, radical vision on the information and knowledge flows that support individual lives, with profound consequences for scientific-philosophical practice and for social governance. -- ------------------------------------------------- Pedro C. Marijuán Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA) Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0 50009 Zaragoza, Spain Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es<mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fsite%2Fpedrocmarijuan%2F&data=01%7C01%7Choelzer%40unr.edu%7C97485102689b43316b2308d4fc3c1d76%7C523b4bfc0ebd4c03b2b96f6a17fd31d8%7C1&sdata=iqYYS%2BrJPswW3pbj5lbZ%2B%2F%2FAtG7hhdO%2BvM63f%2FmYDMo%3D&reserved=0> ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es<mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistas.unizar.es%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ffis&data=01%7C01%7Choelzer%40unr.edu%7C97485102689b43316b2308d4fc3c1d76%7C523b4bfc0ebd4c03b2b96f6a17fd31d8%7C1&sdata=KGyit9G9%2BFAxKiXZL4MJJskqdSMg8cKoT4zPLdXgGr8%3D&reserved=0
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
