When RNA is on the move it is ticketed for destination and sometimes speed - but however we think of this what information brings about such a transport system? What does it mean for us to be aware of such processes and be able to change them? Even in philosophy origin seems endlessly deferred and we make it up in myth.
On Mar 18, 3:29 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > The aspiration of ants certainly bears comparison with that 'human > motivation' alleged necessary in our economic system Awori! I presume > ants don't read binary or anything else in our general sense, though > Carlos' point is on some other track. There was a time before ants, > though this presumably bore the information to create ants and their > chemical gardening abilities, and our meaning giving skills. Meaning > is generally within a form of life, so Carlos' binary is probably of > different meaning to an ant, or between me and my friend (though I > guess of it mattered he could bring me up to his speed). If Carlos > sends me a letter I can say, in some sense, where its information came > from, but this clearly leaves out history of a photon stuff. > We can speculate on the history of a photon, and no doubt on some > other "particle" if we lived off energy from dark matter and had > evolved in such circumstances. We might even be able to communicate > with such a society. Wittgenstein once described using language as > like climbing a ladder in the clouds! I wonder what our speculation > would be at a time when we've built an Alcubierre warp-drive, found a > way to protect its inner bubble from Hawking radiation and are off to > 'eat some dark food'? Information does not seem static, but to do > with a context being built. > > On Mar 18, 12:05 pm, einseele <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > If the code frame is for instance a conventional alphanumeric list, like > > ASCII, or UNICODE, or whatever, then any given sequence corresponds to one > > only binary number and viceversa. > > In other words if you have a binary sequence, or decimal, hex, or any > > numeric convention, and your reference is for instance the UNICODE set of > > characters, then a given number corresponds exclusively to a given sequence > > in its counterpart list > > Unless you change the reference list, you will only have an unique number > > and an unique sequence in the given list. > > That is an universal equivalence. Of course if you change the UNICODE by > > ASCII, or decide to express colours or music, then you are in a different > > context. > > > I refer to the address concept in this sense. There is one number only when > > you refer to an address. > > The address is that unique position referred by that number or any other > > conventional sequence. And that position is universal regardless the > > conventional list, numbers, or whatever you use in order to point its > > location in a given space > > > An URL serves as an example, it is the same concept by the way. A number > > limited by a reference frame. > > > Of course I'm not referring to 'meaning', since I agree then you have the > > human part, different languages or whatever you choose as the interpreter. > > I'm only saying that the address is universal and occupies an unique > > reference within certain space. In other words, that address cannot be > > elsewhere. It is an abstraction and as that a discrete element, there are > > not any continuum possibility in a conventional list. > > > There is no universal equivalence between binary data and any other form > > > > unless we say there is. It can be expressed in ASCII as well as it could > > > be > > > 24 bit color pixels, Hieroglyphics, dance moves, whatever. Any two > > > sequences could be mapped to the same number as easily as unique numbers. > > > Genetic codons work this way, with many redundant amino acid outcomes to > > > different binary sequences. . > > >http://lifeofplant.blogspot.com/2011/04/genetic-code.html > > > > Also, it's important to not that converting the string "Fungiculture in > > > the insect world is practiced by ants, termites, beetles and gall midges" > > > into an understandable concept requires a human being who can understand > > > English well enough to convert that alphanumeric string into something > > > meaningful. > > > > Craig > > > > On Saturday, March 17, 2012 1:44:46 PM UTC-4, einseele wrote: > > > >> Well, if I say this segment in a binary language that will be the same I > > >> pasted below > > >> In other words, this is a number, expressed as a binary string and means > > >> exactly the same interesting fungiculture idea. > > >> Want to try? visit any text to binary conversor and copy paste the binary > > >> below > > >> A binary number or any othe numeric base, or any natural language > > >> sequence expressed as a number is an address and as that is unique and > > >> universal, since not two identical sequences are expressed by a different > > >> number. > > >> I just included the sequence: > > >> "Fungiculture in the insect world is practiced by ants, termites, beetles > > >> and gall midges" > > >> ... just to save room > > > >> 010001100111010101101110011001110110100101100011 > > >> 011101010110110001110100011101010111001001100101 > > >> 001000000110100101101110001000000111010001101000 > > >> 011001010010000001101001011011100111001101100101 > > >> 011000110111010000100000011101110110111101110010 > > >> 011011000110010000100000011010010111001100100000 > > >> 011100000111001001100001011000110111010001101001 > > >> 011000110110010101100100001000000110001001111001 > > >> 001000000110000101101110011101000111001100101100 > > >> 001000000111010001100101011100100110110101101001 > > >> 011101000110010101110011001011000010000000001101 > > >> 000010100110001001100101011001010111010001101100 > > >> 011001010111001100100000011000010110111001100100 > > >> 001000000110011101100001011011000110110000100000 > > >> 011011010110100101100100011001110110010101110011 > > > >> On Saturday, March 10, 2012 8:53:55 AM UTC-3, archytas wrote: > > > >>> Consider this in terms of 'where information comes from?'. > > >>> Fungiculture in the insect world is practiced by ants, termites, > > >>> beetles and gall midges. Ants use the antibiotics to inhibit the > > >>> growth of unwanted fungi and bacteria in their fungus cultures which > > >>> they use to feed their larvae and queen. Ants not only evolved > > >>> agriculture before humans but also combination therapy with natural > > >>> antibiotics. Humans are just starting to realise that this is one way > > >>> to slow down the rise of drug resistant bacteria - the so called > > >>> superbugs. These antibiotics are produced by actinomycete bacteria > > >>> that live on the ants in a mutual symbiosis. > > > >>> As humans we often make much play of the idea that our rational minds > > >>> do the inventing - yet we are clearly borne in more than that and > > >>> 'science' in some senses is afoot without us. > > > >>> On Mar 8, 7:23 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> > The bit on why everything would not be information was more or less > > >>> > the point of many who taught me Craig - the position being 'everything > > >>> > is information exchange' which seemed to me as helpful as > > >>> > methodological solipsism. Data is always capta to some extent, but > > >>> > this is a distraction from really doing stuff and not very important > > >>> > in most contexts - philosophy so rarely is. If we wanted 'tortuous' > > >>> > I'd recommend dynamic semantics. I don't see modern realism as > > >>> > mechanistic and though I agree with your thrust, don't see our > > >>> > consciousness as necessarily much to do with anything that matters > > >>> > (though I retain the hope it might be and this may be the mental > > >>> > equivalent of 'warp technology'). It may be that there is no > > >>> > information world that we entangle in some analogue of sensing as we > > >>> > do what we more easily regard as real, but then this 'real' is less > > >>> > real than we once regarded it. So where does information come from? > > >>> > It seems to pre-date us as a species, and may be coming from Lord > > >>> > knows where in this universe or another. We carry the stuff in our > > >>> > genes and these are in interaction with the environment to the extent > > >>> > of massive activity in our DNA as a result of exercise, changing what > > >>> > gets switched on and off. I'm led to suspect another 'meta- > > >>> > information world' that somehow organises information's interactions > > >>> > in the environment it finds. > > > >>> > I don't do philosophy largely because I can't shake a stick at it, but > > >>> > sometimes I appreciate some of its products. I quite like Snell and > > >>> > Lugwig on such matters as there being no 'leap' from alleged > > >>> > mechanistic Newton to quantum ideas - however pedantic the explanation > > >>> > it seems to me deductive and painstaking in the good sense. Of > > >>> > course, lots of argument is really just people taking sides over what > > >>> > doesn't matter. One might consider the future of information and what > > >>> > it might be if we could experience both 'ends' of distant objects in a > > >>> > wave equation at once. > > > >>> > On Mar 7, 4:40 pm, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> > > On Mar 7, 10:42 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> > > > There are some fairly standard arguments on information in > > >>> semantics. > > >>> > > > How data can come to have an assigned meaning and function in a > > >>> > > > semiotic system in the first place is one of the hardest problems > > >>> in > > >>> > > > semantics. One can turn to whether data constituting information > > >>> as > > >>> > > > semantic content can be meaningful independently of an informee. > > >>> Data > > >>> > > > (as relata) can have a semantics independently of any informee. > > >>> > > > Before the discovery of the Rosetta Stone, Egyptian hieroglyphics > > >>> were > > >>> > > > already regarded as information, even if their semantics was > > >>> beyond > > >>> > > > the comprehension of any interpreter. The discovery of an > > >>> interface > > >>> > > > between Greek and Egyptian did not affect the semantics of the > > >>> > > > hieroglyphics but only its accessibility. That is, meaningful data > > >>> > > > being embedded in information-carriers informee-independently > > >>> supports > > >>> > > > the > > ... > > read more » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
