(message from Jamie Rose)
------------------------------------------------------
The "difference that makes a difference" puts the situation into a
larger context
that includes the observing system / encountering system. This is
irrespective of
the sentience or cybernetic (secondary/tertiery/etc)
awareness/interpretive/reapplication
capability of the sensoring system.
Gyorgy's question therefore is very important and needs clinical
answering in _new ways_.
(beyond Bateson, Shannon, Weaver, et al.
"Simplistic" action/reaction responsive systems are also worthy
of 'information analysis'.
A key characteristic is - is a system so constructed and organized that
it will recognize
(let lone be responsive to) energy/temporal/situational variances in its
environment ?
We humans are awash in radio signals, but don't have the
organs/organelles sensitive
to acknowledge their presence around us. "Information" is there -- but
so what?
In contrast, atoms/molecules EM fields are exquisitely sensitive to
fields variances
('information changes') all around them. We harness and use this in
human electronic
civilization -- but we design threshholds in the machinery we build.
This prevents un-wanted
information (otherwise labelled as 'noise') from corrupting the data and
effects desired.
We require that data-bit states be protected, until modified
('informationed') by choice and
with utility concerns involved (cybernetic tiered information
coordination, as it were).
A major change in appreciation of 'information systems' is needed. What
are they in regard to human information processing? Whay is an
information organelle in the natural world?
What is an information system/component - more fundamentally - in the
natural world?
But, most importantly -- what is a theoretical essense of an information
'mechanism/function' ?
To be so bold, I will place something into the ether here for your
consideration.
I made a presentation at the 1998 Univ Arizona, "Towards a Science of
Consciousness"
conference. While attending and listening to presentations during the
week long conference,
I began to ponder in the variety of 'information' definitions floated
about. Wondering about
the possibility of general shared criteria and characteristics - I
focussed on Shannon, and,
on Taylor's discussion of the fundamentals of The Calculus,
and characteristics of physical
'tuned sensitivity radio equipment'.
Taylor, Leibnitz and Newton were particularly aware of measuement limits
in regard to
mathemathics. The notion of measured partitioning - heading toward the
infinitely small/short -
required an important statement/disclaimer about the full domain of math
and dimensional
and spatial measuring/sizing. It was stated as an a priori axiom
than no matter what size
partitions were under a curve or distance consideration, there would
always be a distance
measure 'e', smaller/shorter than any partition size at any moment of
consideration.
This is a critically important assertion. It is tantamount to saying
that no matter how small
a partition (otherwise definable in current vernacular) as an
'information bit', the mathematical
"apparatus' would always be more sensitive than any partition-bit and
would always be able to
'recognize' the information values - individually and cummulatively.
An intangible always
sensitive mechanism cabale of encountering any and all information
varainces. (smaller than
any wave length; shorter than any limit (ala Planck).
They were designing an intangible/virtual 'information processing
mechanism', even if they didn't
express it in those terms; the Shannon-esque notion of 'defining
information'. What becomes humorous it the tautology this
presents. Shannon built his probability definition of 'information'
using the Calculus -- which was already an 'information processing
function/mechanism' -- built
on the Shannon-esque concept that there is such a thing as 'information'
(bit/variance/probability).
This extraordinary cognition of what information can be, what
mathematics and the Calculus
are as manulipators and processors of information datums -- already ;
opens new vistas
to appreciate plural simultaneous information processing.
Material/energy systems engage
and process 'information' -- sometimes in regard to human concerns, but
ongoing and self-pertinent and self functional according to the nature
and extent and capability of construction
themselves.
It is not incorrect to examine and evaluate any system as an
'information system', besides
whatever meaning, value or engagement (cybernetic translation or
accomodation) potential for
other systems or alternate tiers/orders of systems in the companion
environment(s).
Jamie Rose
---------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
