Well, Karl, it still takes some reading of what I have written to find
important points of agreement as well as disagreement. In my 2008 book I noted
that /both/ commutativity and distributivity should not be required in
descriptions of real systems:
In LIR, since no individual term is an identity, that is, unconnected to other
terms, one has the same relation as that between a term and the context that
perturbs it. Both the commutative law of standard logic, (a + b) + c = a + (b
+ c) and the distributive law between conjunction and disjunction
do not hold. Any applicable formalism is, accordingly, non-Abelian and
non-Boolean respectively, and the resulting probability distributions are
non-Kolmogorovian. The detailed mathematics remain to be worked out for the LIR
description of reality values as ‘probability-like’[1].
[1] These values are like objective probabilities which do not indicate limits
of knowledge, but are about the properties that things objectively have.
I feel that no notion of real use can be clear and concise. The elements of
logic are not 'tokens', a term that conveys something inert, lacking its own
dynamics (ability to change). There are, as I hope we could agree, details of
reality also lost in the use of your 'sequencing' tool.
You could help to resolve the issue with one simple comment: to what complex
processes does your approach NOT apply?
Thank you.
Joseph
----- Original Message -----
From: Karl Javorszky
To: Joseph Brenner
Cc: Terrence Deacon ; fis ; John Collier ; Gyorgy Darvas ; Bob Logan ; Andrei
Khrennikov ; raf...@capurro.de
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 9:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Is quantum information the basis of spacetime?
Well, Joseph, you don't have to go far to get the desired definition of
information as an operator (produced quantity).
The only prerequisite is to be ready to discard the practice, ideas,
philosophy and ideology of the definitions relating to commutativity.
This is heresy, I understand. On the other hand, time may now have come to
face up the truth. We see that (a,b)->c is different to (b,a)->c. We have
learnt that this obvious difference is to be disregarded. We wish the clearly
visible difference away so we get a picture of the world which is easier to
work with. Of course, if I say that it makes no difference whether a or b has a
positional advantage /pace opinion research questionnaries/, I don't have to
worry about the endless complications arising from the question, which was
first, a or b.
The system simplified as it is in use presently is not versatile, detailed
and nuanced enough to allow for the introduction of words that describe the
ideas.
One cannot explain trigonometry as long as the definition is in power that
all triangles are to be seen in their unified variant and the proportion of the
sides to each other is by definition irrelevant.
Come the day you want to find a clear, concise, operator based tool to
measure information content (based on properties of natural numbers), please
look up my book Natürliche Ordnungen, available thru morawa or amazon etc.
It is a completely new world out there if one stops thinking in a world made
up by wishing away important details. There is power in them there sequences.
No wonder Nature uses them in perpetuating life. Let us no more pretend
commutativity is without alternatives. We have computers. We can keep track of
the problems arising from actually observing and using sequential properties of
logical tokens. That one can explain what the term "information" amounts to is
just one of the discoveries one makes while using the tool of sequencing.
Do look it up. It has been made for your use.
Respectfully
Karl
On 4 Nov 2016 18:06, "Joseph Brenner" <joe.bren...@bluewin.ch> wrote:
Dear All,
I agree with the consensus I see emerging. Andrei shows the problem of
trying to pin down a complex process with a single term - information. And I
agree with Rafael that information must have a valence. On the other hand, as
such, information cannot be completely defined mathematically, pace Karl, any
more than anything living can be.
It is discouraging to see how reductionist theories like 'It-from-Bit' get
reproduced and disseminated by Scientific American, which used to be a good
journal. One cannot simply ignore the reactionary sub-text of such 'science',
even if a product of the "Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics".
One could say rather that quanta, not quantum information, are the basis
for spacetime. At the sub-quantum level, I think we have already said that
whatever the way in which energy is exchanged, nothing is gained by calling it
information. (We may make an exception for the case of non-locality defined by
Bell inequalities.)
The only nuance I would add is that although we can speak of biotic and
Shannon information (better, today, Shannon-Boltzmann-Darwin as in Terry's
explication), the properties of information_as_process have not been completely
described. I would like to see the concept of information as an operator,
causally effective because of its being energy, explored further.
Thank you and best wishes,
Joseph
----- Original Message -----
From: Rafael Capurro
To: Bob Logan ; Andrei Khrennikov ; Gyorgy Darvas ; John Collier ; fis
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Is quantum information the basis of spacetime?
Andrei, maybe the concept of message as already used by Shannon and
Weaver in specific engineering contexts (this must not be always the case) is
more appropriate and also able to speak about 'information' as what is 'in' a
message 'for' a receiver. Best. Rafael
Hello Andrei - I am with you - sharing you sentiment. Information only
pertains to living organisms and entails some signals that help them make a
choice. A black hole makes no choices - it is ruled by the laws of physics.
Abiotic systems have no information. A book is a set of signals that a reader
can convert into information if they know the language which the book is
written. A book written in Urdu contains no information for me other than this
appears to be a set of signals that contains information for a reader in the
language in which this book was written. Who reads a black hole. How does it
contain information that makes a difference. When we launch a satellite to
orbit the earth we do not say that the sun is informing the satellite how to
behave. The satellite is just following the laws of physics. It has no choice
and so it is not being informed. There are many different forms of information
(biotic and Shannon as found in the 2007 paper Propagating Organization: An
Inquiry by Kauffman, Logan et al. in Biology and Philosophy 23: 27-45) so
we do not need to complicate things even more by ascribing the laws of physics
as the communication of information.
______________________
Robert K. Logan
Prof. Emeritus - Physics - U. of Toronto
Fellow University of St. Michael's College
Chief Scientist - sLab at OCAD
http://utoronto.academia.edu/RobertKLogan
www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan
www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications
On Nov 4, 2016, at 4:17 AM, Andrei Khrennikov
<andrei.khrenni...@lnu.se> wrote:
Dear all,
I want to comment so called information approach to physics, by
speaking with hundreds of leading experts
in quantum foundations, I found that nobody can define rigorously the
basic term "information" which is so widely
used in their theories and discussions, the answers are as "information
is the basic entity" which cannot be defined
in other terms. Well, my impression is that without novel understanding
and definition of information all these "theories"
are practically empty, well very good mathematical exercises. May be I
am too critical... But I spent so much time by trying
to understand what people are talking about. The output is ZERO.
all the best, andrei
Andrei Khrennikov, Professor of Applied Mathematics,
Int. Center Math Modeling: Physics, Engineering, Economics, and
Cognitive Sc.
Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden
My RECENT BOOKS:
http://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/p1036
http://www.springer.com/in/book/9789401798181
http://www.panstanford.com/books/9789814411738.html
http://www.cambridge.org/cr/academic/subjects/physics/econophysics-and-financial-physics/quantum-social-science
http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783642051005
________________________________________
From: Fis [fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] on behalf of Gyorgy Darvas
[darv...@iif.hu]
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 10:23 PM
To: John Collier; fis
Subject: Re: [Fis] Is quantum information the basis of spacetime?
John:
The article describes very really the conflicting attitudes.
Interesting to see the diverse arguments together.
I agree, some think so, some do not. I do the latter, but this does not
make any matter.
Gyuri
On 2016.11.03. 19:52, John Collier wrote:
Apparently some physicists think so.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tangled-up-in-spacetime/?WT.mc_id=SA_WR_20161102
John Collier
Emeritus Professor and Senior Research Associate
Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal
http://web.ncf.ca/collier
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es<mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es>
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
--
Prof.em. Dr. Rafael Capurro
Hochschule der Medien (HdM), Stuttgart, Germany
Capurro Fiek Foundation for Information Ethics
(http://www.capurro-fiek-foundation.org)
Distinguished Researcher at the African Centre of Excellence for Information
Ethics (ACEIE), Department of Information Science, University of Pretoria,
South Africa.
Chair, International Center for Information Ethics (ICIE) (http://icie.zkm.de)
Editor in Chief, International Review of Information Ethics (IRIE)
(http://www.i-r-i-e.net)
Postal Address: Redtenbacherstr. 9, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany
E-Mail: raf...@capurro.de
Voice: + 49 - 721 - 98 22 9 - 22 (Fax: -21)
Homepage: www.capurro.de
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
