Begin forwarded message:
From: bob logan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: October 5, 2007 12:26:46 PM EDT (CA)
To: Pedro Marijuan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Fis] info & meaning
Cher Colleagues - I am overwhelmed by all the responses in terms of
there number and their depth. This has been a very busy time as a
new school year just begun. I have just signed a contract for my
new book Understanding New Media: Extending Marshall McLuhan which
requires a manuscript by the end of Oct., my book The Extended
Mind: The Emergence of Langugae, the Human Mind and Culture is
released on Oct. 22 and I have to plan a book launch and publicity
for it and finally I hosted Katherine Hayles this week in Toronto
where she spoke at the Ont College of Art and Design. So this is
my excuse and hope you will forgive my long silence.
So here goes my comments in red as many as I can make with more to
follow. First of all let me share a wonderful quote of Claude
Shannon that supports my hypothesis that information is a relative
thing and is context dependent.
This paper appears in: Information Theory, IEEE Transactions on
Publication Date: Feb 1953
Volume: 1, Issue: 1
On page(s): 105- 107
ISSN: 0018-9448
Posted online: 2003-04-22 14:03:12.0
Abstract
The word "information" has been given many different meanings by
various writers in the general field of information theory. It is
likely that at least a number of these will prove sufficiently
useful in certain applications to deserve further study and
permanent recognition. It is hardly to be expected that a single
concept of information would satisfactorily account for the
numerous possible applications of this general field. The present
note outlines a new approach to information theory which is aimed
specifically at the analysis of certain communication problems in
which there exist a number of information sources simultaneously in
operation. A typical example is that of a simple communication
channel with a feedback path from the receiving point to the
transmitting point. The problem is to make use of the feedback
information for improving forward transmission, and to determine
the forward channel capacity when the best possible use is made of
this feedback information. Another more general problem is that of
a communication system consisting of a large number of transmitting
and receiving points with some type of interconnection network
between the various points. The problem here is to formulate the
best systems design whereby, in some sense, the best overall use of
the available facilities is made. While the analysis sketched here
has not yet proceeded to the point or a complete solution of these
problems, partial answers have been found and it is believed that a
complete solution may be possible.
On 24-Sep-07, at 11:56 AM, Pedro Marijuan wrote:
Dear Bob and colleagues,
Thanks for the scholarly work. It was nice reading the vast
landscape, historical and otherwise, you have covered around that
new biotic interpretation of information as "Propagating
Organization" or POE. Perhaps in this list we have already arrived
to a truce on Shannonian matters --notwithstanding a general
agreement with your criticisms on that respect, the problem may be
a lack of interesting alternative generalizations, inclusive
enough so that the Shannonian theory gets its proper place as a
great theory of communication and as a great theory of physical
structures (in the guise of "physical information theory") and
also as a great theory in data analysis.
I agree Shannon theory is powerful but I also agree with Shannon
that its scope is limited.
Thus I am sympathetic with integrative quests such as POE, but
given that disagreeements are usually the most valuable stuff for
discussions, I would raise the following points:
--1. Constraints and boundary conditions are conflated (see
below), with some more emphasis on the former. Thus, taking into
account that most chemical constraints are in the form of
"activation energies" and "free energies" which establish the
kinetics of the multitude of chemical reactions and molecular
transformations in the cell, How this heterogeneous collection of
variables and parameters may receive a form of global treatment as
POE seems to imply? I have seen no hints in the paper.
...we defined a new form of information, which we called
instructional or biotic information, not with Shannon, but with
constraints or boundary conditions. The amount of information
will be related to the diversity of constraints and the diversity
of processes that they can partially cause to occur.
As a result of my conversations with Hayle I believe I need to put
more emphsis on the processes that the constraints make possible.
So I plan to think more about the relationship of boundary
conditions, constraints and boundaries.
2. The statement below is ambiguous. E. Coli for instance may
contain in the order of 1 or 2 million molecules (different from
water) of 5,000 or 10,000 different classes. The amount of Shannon
info is far, far higher in the living soup than any inorganic soup.
...This contradicts Shannon’s definition of information and the
notion that a random set or soup of organic chemicals has more
Shannon information than a structured and organized set of
organic chemicals found in a living organism.
The point I am making is that organization is a form of
information which Shannon theory does not recognize.
3. The origins of life (implicit in the text below) must be
explained not just by means of some formal approach more or less
interesting, but by means of the highest power or upper hand in
science: the experimental. I remember during late 80's and early
90's how different approaches in artificial life were claiming
"explaining away" the "logical" part of the bio matter (Langton,
conspicuously) and being able to put it into the computer
cavalierly...
Kauffman (2000) has described how this organization emerges
through autocatalysis as an emergent phenomenon with properties
that cannot be derived from, predicted from or reduced to the
properties of the biomolecules of which the living organism is
composed and hence provides an explanation of where biotic
information comes from.
Agreed
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually, I have a lot of questions because of my researches are
related with some issues in the paper (although, I only put some of
them here):
(1) To understand adequately one of the main claims, mainly,
equaling information (biotic or instructional information) with
constraints I wondering if the notion “propagation organization”
adds something more to the notion of “reproduction”
Reproduction is a form of the propagation of organization
(2) In the same way: how can arise the “meaning” In naturalist
terms or imposed by us? If is the former, how the living beings
process the “meaning of ‘some’ information” in themselves?
They process the meaning by propagating their organization
One can therefore argue that since the meaning of
instructional information is propagating organization that we
finally understand the meaning of life – the “meaning of life” is
propagating organization.
(3) My last question, it is due that I have works in this issue:
the nature of biological information. And my main working thesis is
that I claim that it is still possible to construct in “Naturalized
Normative ways” notions like Information, Function and Autonomy.
Moreover, that these three properties are the most basic properties
of life.
Interesting hypothesis
Comments on Walter Riofrio Oct 3 posting re meaning.
I have encountered a great definition of the meaning by Ed Fredkin
pointed out to me by Kate Hayles
"The meaning of information is given by the processes that
interpret it." sorry I have no reference for it.
That is all for now more comments to follow
Bob
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
[email protected]
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
