John: > Which does "this" refer to, Jerry?
My response was to the section of your post that I pasted / cited in my post. Your further assertion that: > Since the scientists involved are among the top in the respective fields, I > take that what they are doing with information concepts is reasonable. I > can't judge that as I am not a specialist in their fields. is really astounding to me! As you are well aware, numerous philosophies and metaphysical concepts of information exist in the published literature. Given your extensive list of publications in the information sciences over several decades, I find your stance with respect to your judgments to be remarkable. Finally, I do not feel that I have a quarrel with anyone. As a natural scientist, I merely asked a provocative question about your metaphysical position. I use the term "metaphysical" as I do not find a relationship with either mathematics or the sciences of information as I understand them. Does the tone of these posts suggest that you would like to change your position? Cheers Jerry On May 22, 2013, at 3:26 PM, John Collier wrote: > Which does "this" refer to, Jerry? My paper is about scientists who use > information concepts to explain things and make predictions. And then I > organized them into a nested hierarchy. Since the scientists involved are > among the top in the respective fields, I take that what they are doing with > information concepts is reasonable. I can't judge that as I am not a > specialist in their fields. If you are, then any quarrel you have is with > them, not me. I assume, prima facie, that scientists know what they are > doing. I have found Smolin, who uses the it-from-bit view to explain > conservation of information around a black hole, very approachable. > > John > > At 05:42 PM 2013/05/17, Jerry LR Chandler wrote: >> John: >> >> On May 17, 2013, at 5:26 AM, fis-requ...@listas.unizar.es wrote: >> >>> The vacuum background is random, and hence contains no information in the >>> negentropy sense (see my "kinds" at Kinds of Information in Scientific Use. >>> 2011. cognition, communication, co-operation. Vol 9, No 2 ). However "it >>> from bit" information appears and disappears. It can be magnified in >>> principle, but I know of no detected cases. >> >> How would a rational realist distinguish this metaphysical perspective from >> witchcraft or magic? >> >> Cheers >> >> Jerry >
_______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
