Dear Pedro, dear Arturo and dear FISers,

Thank you Pedro for these 10 principles of information science.
Even if it happens that somebody could disagree with some of these
principles, at least these 10 principles exist and they constitute a
suitable basis (if not a reference) for further discussions and

I agree with the principle 1, in the sense that, in my opinion
information is not physical: it is in our heads, either as a
mathematical model of some physical situation, or as a concept we need
to deal with some real situation.
An observed physical phenomenon should not be confused with any
mathematical model produced by scientists to get a more or less
simplified description of this phenomenon.
E.g., the thermodynamical entropy can be modeled by an equation
formally identical to the well-known one used in communication
Does it mean the informational entropy and the thermodynamical entropy
are the same thing because both lead to a common equation?
I do not believe so: one word, two meanings.
Then, the possibility to measure information in communication science
does not mean that information becomes a physical quantity in other
contexts, such as matter (the case of energy is more complex, I skip
Finally, why not try to define information in metaphysics, sociology
or psychology?
Dictionnaries contain thousands of words defined without the help of
mathematics, and fortunately these definitions are of great help in
most situations.
However, finding a unifying definition of information is still a challenge.
But is it feasible? Is it desirable?
I don't know...

Best regards,


Michel Petitjean
MTi, INSERM UMR-S 973, University Paris 7,
35 rue Helene Brion, 75205 Paris Cedex 13, France.
Phone: +331 5727 8434; Fax: +331 5727 8372
E-mail: (preferred),


Unifying symmetry definition in maths:

Recent highlight: chirality can be defined without the help of any
orientation concept:

Chirality in metric spaces. In memoriam Michel Deza.
Optim. Letters, 2017


2017-09-15 15:16 GMT+02:00 <>:
> Dear FISers,
> I'm sorry for bothering you,
> but I start not to agree from the very first principles.
> The only language able to describe and quantify scientific issues is 
> mathematics.
> Without math, you do not have observables, and information is observable.
> Therefore, information IS energy or matter, and can be examined through 
> entropies (such as., e.g., the Bekenstein-Hawking one).
> And, please, colleagues, do not start to write that information is subjective 
> and it depends on the observer's mind. This issue has been already tackled by 
> the math of physics: science already predicts that information can be 
> "subjective", in the MATHEMATICAL frameworks of both relativity and quantum 
> dynamics' Copenhagen interpretation.
> Therefore, the subjectivity of information is clearly framed in a TOTALLY 
> physical context of matter and energy.
> Sorry for my polemic ideas, but, if you continue to define information on the 
> basis of qualitative (and not quantitative) science, information becomes 
> metaphysics, or sociology, or psychology (i.e., branches with doubtful 
> possibility of achieving knowledge, due to their current lack of math).
> Arturo Tozzi
> AA Professor Physics, University North Texas
> Pediatrician ASL Na2Nord, Italy
> Comput Intell Lab, University Manitoba
> ----Messaggio originale----
> Da: "Pedro C. Marijuan" <>
> Data: 15/09/2017 14.13
> A: "fis"<>
> Dear FIS Colleagues,
> As promised herewith the "10 principles of information science". A couple of 
> previous comments may be in order.
> First, what is in general the role of principles in science? I was motivated 
> by the unfinished work of philosopher Ortega y Gasset, "The idea of principle 
> in Leibniz and the evolution of deductive theory" (posthumously published in 
> 1958). Our tentative information science seems to be very different from 
> other sciences, rather multifarious in appearance and concepts, and 
> cavalierly moving from scale to scale. What could be the specific role of 
> principles herein? Rather than opening homogeneous realms for conceptual 
> development, these information principles would appear as a sort of "portals" 
> that connect with essential topics of other disciplines in the different 
> organization layers, but at the same time they should try to be consistent 
> with each other and provide a coherent vision of the information world.
> And second, about organizing the present discussion, I bet I was too 
> optimistic with the commentators scheme. In any case, for having a first 
> glance on the whole scheme, the opinions of philosophers would be very
 interesting. In order to warm up the discussion, may I ask John
Collier, Joseph Brenner and Rafael Capurro to send some initial
comments / criticisms? Later on, if the commentators idea flies,
Koichiro Matsuno and
> Wolfgang Hofkirchner would be very valuable voices to put a perspectival end 
> to this info principles discussion (both attended the Madrid bygone FIS 1994 
> conference)...
> But this is FIS list, unpredictable in between the frozen states and the 
> chaotic states! So, everybody is invited to get ahead at his own, with the 
> only customary limitation of two messages per week.
> Best wishes, have a good weekend --Pedro
> 1. Information is information, neither matter nor energy.
> 2. Information is comprehended into structures, patterns, messages, or flows.
> 3. Information can be recognized, can be measured, and can be  processed 
> (either computationally or non-computationally).
> 4. Information flows are essential organizers of life's self-production 
> processes--anticipating, shaping, and mixing up with the accompanying energy 
> flows.
> 5. Communication/information exchanges among adaptive life-cycles underlie 
> the complexity of biological organizations at all scales.
> 6. It is symbolic language what conveys the essential communication exchanges 
> of the human species--and constitutes the core of its "social nature."
> 7. Human information may be systematically converted into efficient 
> knowledge, by following the "knowledge instinct" and further up by applying 
> rigorous methodologies.
> 8. Human cognitive limitations on knowledge accumulation are partially 
> overcome via the social organization of "knowledge ecologies."
> 9. Knowledge circulates and recombines socially, in a continuous 
> actualization that involves "creative destruction" of fields and disciplines: 
> the intellectual Ars Magna.
> 10. Information science proposes a new, radical vision on the information and 
> knowledge flows that support individual lives, with profound consequences for 
> scientific-philosophical practice and for social governance.
> --
> -------------------------------------------------
> Pedro C. Marijuán
> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
> -------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list

Fis mailing list

Reply via email to