> However, most of Loet's text is discursive, with ample freedom of construction, and the parts associated to scientific conceptualizations do not become very relevant --in my opinion they provide a loan of apparent rigor. Besides the topic of discussion in his message is slightly twisted: the initial "communication" and "life" becomes "scientific communication" and "biology"... I do not want to be negative, rather pointing that there is a different communication strategy at work. Well, finally the respective rigor is in the eye of the beholder.
Dear Pedro, I take the liberty to react shortly to your message: I agree that we use different paradigms, but for those of you who are interested in the rigorous math I gave a reference to The Communication of Expectations and Individual Understanding: Redundancy as Reduction of Uncertainty, and the Processing of Meaning <http://ssrn.com/abstract=2358791> where the derivation is both in terms of the entropy statistics and in terms of the computation of anticipatory systems. (I consider email exchanges as less codified, but more explanatory.) Best, Loet _____ Loet Leydesdorff Professor, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR) <mailto:l...@leydesdorff.net> l...@leydesdorff.net ; <http://www.leydesdorff.net/> http://www.leydesdorff.net/ Honorary Professor, <http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/> SPRU, University of Sussex; Visiting Professor, <http://www.istic.ac.cn/Eng/brief_en.html> ISTIC, Beijing; Visiting Professor, <http://www.bbk.ac.uk/> Birkbeck, University of London. <http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en> http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en
_______________________________________________ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
