Dear FISers, Thanks to Kevin and Joseph for their excellent texts --and to the many other responding parties. For my own argumentation purposes I find very useful the comments from Stan, Kevin Clark, Koichiro. There are three different aspects I would like to deal with. Given my burden of nasty complicate tasks, I have to leave them as open questions to try to formulate better in the future, or maybe to be kindly dealt with by other parties.
About the formalism to deal with entropies: How does the treatment of entropies by Michael in his Adaptability Theory --extended by the fluctuon model into the microphysical realm-- relate with the contemporary quantum information theory, and the qubits stuff? Given that it was initially conceived from the ecological perspective, can it be connected with Bob Ulanowicz's conceptualization of energy flow and diversity (and his tentative variational principle?) The paper by Kevin on "Biological adaptibilities and quantum entyropies" (BioSystems 64, 2002, 33-41) is an excellent portal for this question. Gravitation and the quantum--and information. There are plenty of theories on quantum gravitation to compare with the ideas in the fluctuon model, and to try to link with the information discussion. Given the curious biological penchant of Lee Smolin ("The Life of the Cosmos",1997, "Three roads to Quantum Gravity", 2000) and the relative clarity of his discussions on string theory and other approaches, I am very tempted to take some of his ideas on Calabi-Yau (manifolds) spaces as an ultimate Planckian scenario where energy and information collide and only elementary "distinctions" survive. They are communicable in some "open" dimensions, but not in the other "closed" ones... the idea of information as "distinction on the adjacent" is realized there; also in Smolin's discussions on information in black holes, birth of "baby universes, etc. Could this frame of thought be put in agreement with the formal underpinnings of the fluctuon model --as far as I know, inspired by Josephson "fluxons" or electron solitons in quantum tunneling? It goes beyond my reach. Percolation --and the all pervasive and reverberating circulation of the "perpetual disequilibrium" as Koichiro as put. This aspect of Michael's thought was fascinating for me, a "vertical" but terribly heterogeneous scenario of information flows. Given that Joseph and Stan have made neat statements from different angles about a "hierarchical" structure of levels, I contend in favor of the general predominance of the heterarchical scheme. When we leave the narrow confines of a discipline, or the boundaries of an experimental setting, "everything comes together again"... Given the limitations of our individual cognition, those vagaries in the environment are not accidental, but fundamental--and they percolate in our collective cognition and in our social use of the sciences. I agree with Joseph (I think) in the need of a more cogent logic "for the real" and not only for the formal-theoretical. Part of the problem is that this artificial "contention of percolation" has been treated differently in each major discipline. See for instance Peter Denning views on Computational Science-versus Information Science. Echoing McLuhan centennial, couldn't we call this problem as the irrenunciable "mosaic" structure of information percolation? Thanking the patience, Pedro -- ------------------------------------------------- Pedro C. Marijuán Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud Avda. Gómez Laguna, 25, Pl. 11ª 50009 Zaragoza, Spain Telf: 34 976 71 3526 (& 6818) Fax: 34 976 71 5554 pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/ ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ fis mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis