Thanks for that Pedro,
Just a few comments.

All the best,

Christophe

________________________________
De : Fis <fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es> de la part de Pedro C. Marijuan 
<pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>
Envoyé : lundi 13 novembre 2017 14:30
À : 'fis'
Objet : [Fis] some notes

Dear All,

Herewith some notes on the exchanges of past weeks (sorry, I was away in
bureaucratic tasks).

1. Agents & Information. There were very good insights exchanged;
probably both terms make a fertile marriage. Actually I have been
writing about "informational entities" or "subjects" as
receivers/builders of information but taking into account the other
disciplines around, "agents" look as the most natural companion of
information. The only thing I don't quite like is that they usually
appear as abstract, disembodied communicative entities that do not need
self-producing. Their communication is free from whatever life
maintenance...

Yes, agents naturally go with information as they are the source of meaning
generation, of sense making. Agents can be organic, human and artificial.
(I look at agents as  identifyable entities submitted to internal
constraints and capable of actions for the satisfaction of the constraints).
Artificial agents can be looked at as disembodied but their  being is
derived from our human ones. So their self (if any) is part of the
human designer's self.

2. Eigenvectors of communication. Taking the motif from Loet, and
continuing with the above, could we say that the life cycle itself
establishes the eigenvectors of communication? It is intriguing that
maintenance, persistence, self-propagation are the essential motives of
communication for whatever life entities (from bacteria to ourselves).
With the complexity increase there appear new, more sophisticated
directions, but the basic ones probably remain intact. What could be
these essential directions of communication?


Perhaps it could be interesting here to highlight  that physics/chemistry
and biology/psychology cannot address information the same way.
Physics and chemistry use tools with precise definitions allowing to
model our environment in a deterministic and predictable way
(QM and Chaos deserving more investigations).
Biology/psychology do not benefit of such rigorous mathematical
support. We do not even know how to define life or consciousness,
and our models are incomplete.
So what about separating the two domains and looking at their relations
as a third domain?
1) Thermodynamics, entropy, quantity of information, channel capacity,
data transmission.
2) Meaning generation, biology and self-consciousness
3) Emergence and locality of constraints, emergence of meanings
This puts again the focus on meaning generation, a key evolutionary
step without which we would not be here.
Also, let's not forget that data transmission and quantification of
information are about meaningful information.
So why not consider internal constraint satisfaction, the source of
meaning generation,  as an essential direction of communication?

3. About logics in the pre-science, Joseph is quite right demanding that
discussion to accompany principles or basic problems. Actually
principles, rules, theories, etc. are interconnected or should be by a
logic (or several logics?) in order to give validity and coherence to
the different combinations of elements. For instance, in the
biomolecular realm there is a fascinating interplay of activation and
inhibition among the participating molecular partners (enzymes and
proteins) as active elements.  I am not aware that classical ideas from
Jacob (La Logique du vivant) have been sufficiently continued; it is not
about Crick's Central Dogma but about the logic of pathways, circuits,
modules, etc. Probably both Torday and Ji have their own ideas about
that-- I would be curious to hear from them.

4. I loved Michel's response to Arturo's challenge. I think that the two
"zeros" I mentioned days ago (the unsolved themes around the cycle and
around the observer) imply both multidisciplinary thinking and
philosophical speculation...

Best wishes--Pedro

-------------------------------------------------
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)
pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es
http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
[https://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/_/rsrc/1468865628625/home/DSC00254-1.JPG?height=420&width=346]<http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/>

Pedro.C.Marijuan<http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/>
sites.google.com
Personal Webpage of Pedro C. Marijuán



-------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Fis Info Page - unizar.es<http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis>
listas.unizar.es
The FIS initiative (Foundations of Information Science) started in 1994 with a 
first meeting in Madrid (organized by Michael Conrad and Pedro Marijuan), and 
was ...



_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Reply via email to