> head>Il 23 febbraio 2018 alle 20.47 PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ > <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > > Dear Krassimir and FIS colleagues, > > > > Many thanks for your message & effort to prepare the compilation to be > published soon. It is good counting with dissemination works that take these > information debates to different environments so that new insights and > conceptual cross fertilizations may occur. (These weeks I have been rather > absent minded, involved with the nasty task of closing my desk room and > having to transport home all my archives--throwing away lots and lots of > reprints and docs. No space available at home! It was very fatiguing. > Hopefully it is almost over.) Well, about Arturo's last comment, am sorry > about having to leave out of science most of research activities of last > centuries, including some of the Greatest Founding Books of Biology > (Darwin's), Neuroscience (Ramon y Cajal's, Sherrington's) and many others. No > maths there! Watson & Crick's arch-famous paper with the DNA report had no > maths either... They all will join the heaps of papers I discarded! Well, > more seriously, FIS was conceived to articulate a common ground in between > the different info worlds, utterly separated, taking from the > physical/computational, to the biological/neuronal, and to the > personal/social. There was, and there is, no immediate "informational" > connection at all. Perhaps after taking various steps behind each one of > these realms, a sort of general interconnecting thread could be discovered; > this is what we thought long ago. Hélas, as all these years discussions have > witnessed, the itinerary resembles an intransitable Moebius band rather than > a linear path... But at least there is fun in the attempt. > > About data, "dataism", and some other curiosities we will have a new > discussion session at the end of next week. Raquel del Moral will present the > chair of this new session. > > Best wishes to all, > > --Pedro > > > > On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 20:50:08 +0200 "Krassimir Markov" wrote: > > blockquote> > > > > > > > > Dear FIS Colleagues, > > > > The main result of our paper “Data versus Information” is the > understanding that the data and information are different (external and > internal kinds of reflection for subjective consciousness), i.e. "Information > = data + something in and by consciousness" > > > > After publishing the paper, Arturo wrote an important remark and I > promise to answer in this letter. In private conversation we had discussed > some aspects. The conversation was interesting but it is not available for > the FIS-list and I have no permission to publish it. Because of this I will > use abstract form of questions (Q) and answers (A). > > Dear Arturo, I apologize in advance but I hope there is nothing bad in > this and it will be useful. > > > > The remark of Arturo was: I'm just annoyed that the most represented > position among FISers, i.e., that information is an objective, quantitative, > physical measure linked to informational entropy, has not been taken into > account at all. After all our efforts to maintain our firm position, we have > been censored. > > > > (A): Usually we say “we collect information” measuring different > real features – temperature, distance, weigh, etc. Scientists from physics do > this permanently. > > p> > > > > The methodical error here is that really we collect data. > > > > After processing the data in the consciousness, the information may be > created in it. Reflections (data) exist everywhere, but information exists > only in consciousness. It is important that information in the consciousness > of one subject is external for another, i.e. it is data for him/her. > > > > Yes, I know that many people believe in the opposite, but still there are > no scientific basics this believing to become scientific theory. > > > > I am mathematician who had worked in the institute of mathematics more > than 40 years and, in particular, I have taught probability and statistics. I > absolutely clearly know (and every good mathematician knows!) that the > probabilities are a human model and do not exist in the reality. Because of > this, all definitions of information based on probability are the same what > we had published in the paper. This kind of information exits only in the > concrete human consciousness! > > > > The rest is data; sometimes called: "statistical data". > > > > > > (Q): Statistics is so important, that we can quantify the > standpoint of our reality, i.e., quantum mechanics, just through statistical > tools. If you negate statistics in the study of reality, you fully destroy > the medicine, the scientific method and the prospective and retrospective > studies. It is totally absurd to negate the importance of statistics. I'm > sorry, but yours is just a metaphysical approach to scientific problems. > > p> > > > > > > (A): Yes, I agree that the statistics is very important and useful. > But we discuss "what is the information?" and not "is the statistics > important or not?". > > > > Only what I say is that the statistics is pure humans' activity. By > processing statistical data we may predict many events. But this not excludes > humans'. Computer prosthesis of our brains does not change the situation. > > > > Animals do not process statistical data and do not compute probabilities > but very well process data which they receive via their receptors. > > > > In the same time, humans may build statistical models of animals' > activities. > > > > Let remember that the mathematics at all ignore the subjects in the > mathematical theories but this does not means that the subjects do not > exists. One and the same formula may be computed by one student who knows how > to do this and could not be computed by other who does not know this. > > > > > > (Q): "Animals do not process statistical data and do not compute > probabilities "... > > > > p>Do not forget that one of the most successful current brain theory, > i.e., Karl Friston's free energy principle talk of Bayesian priors endowed in > our brain... > > > > > > > > (A): NIce! But brains had worked this way many, many years before > Bayes had invented his theories and Karl Friston had invented the free energy > principle. > > > > p>We may build many different models of the brain and all in some aspects > will be adequate to what we may measure in and from the brain. This in one > hand! > > > > > > In other hand, this again confirms that all information processes are > provided just in the brain but not in the stones and in the water somewhere > outside of the brain. > > > > So, we have the same: "Information = data + something in and by > consciousness" > > > > > > (Q): Mmmm... the problem is exactly your "something"... it smells > of untestable, therefore useless and metaphysical. Gimme just one testable > prevision of your model! > > > > > > (A): For the first step, please imagine that you enter in your room. > > > > What do you expect to see - table, chairs, maybe any friend, etc. > > > > p>Now, what if you passing the door will see the sea - dark blue water > with very big waves? > > > > > > Your "something in consciousness" will alarm "stop, this is not your way"! > > > > Your brain will compare the "something in consciousness" with incoming > reflection (data) and as far is the new data to it so unexpected it is. > > > > > > *** End of conversation *** > > > > > > > > The important keyword in this conversation is the concept “model”. Models > are created by or reflected in the consciousness. > > > > Because of this, my simple question is: > > > > > > div> > > > > What is the “mental model”? > > > > p> > > > > > > > > Friendly greetings > > > > Krassimir > > > > > > > > > > p> > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > Sent: Monday, February 19, 2018 12:42 PM > > To: [email protected] ; Krassimir Markov > > Subject: Re: [Fis] The polite and high scientific style of the posts to > be published in an International Journal are OBLIGATED! > > > > > > Dear Krassimir, > > > > There is a misundertanding. > > > > I'm not discussing the quality of the Journal, nor the absence of my name. > > > > I'm just annoyed that the most represented position among FISers, i.e., > that information is an objective, quantitative, physical measure linked to > informational entropy, has not been taken into account at all. After all our > efforts to mantain our firm position, we have been censored. > > > > Il 18 febbraio 2018 alle 23.15 Krassimir Markov <[email protected]> ha > scritto: > > > > > > Dear Arturo, > > > > 1. You are not correct and not right! > > > > If it is written as you have seen, it is just as it is! > > Three times we kindly asked for permission but no answer. > > It is possible that my letters were rejected automatically as spam. > > What to do? Only what we could to do was to cite posts and to give links. > > > > In addition, it is impossible to include long posts in a short paper. > > Because of this, they have to be shortened by author (preferred) or by > the editor. > > > > 2. The main result from our work on the paper is clearly summarized in my > final words in the paper. > > No problems, if you could not read them. > > My next post next week will remember it. > > > > 3. Finally, the paper in not stenographic protocol. > > Not every post is connected to the given theme and it is clear that it > could not be taken in a short paper. > > The theme of discussion for the paper usually is pointed in my “simple > questions”. > > > > If your posts will concern the discussed theme, please clearly point this. > > > > 4. In the next discussion which will start soon, everybody is kindly > invited to take part and to be included in the future paper. > > > > The polite and high scientific style of the posts to be published in an > International Journal are OBLIGATED! > > > > p>Friendly greetings > > > > Krassimir > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2018 10:58 PM > > To: Krassimir Markov ; [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Fis] The FIS paper "Data versus Information " is published > > > > > > Dear, prominent Authors, > > > > You write in this paper: " Several posts are not included in the text > below due to lack of permission from their authors". > > > > p>I think that several post were not included in the text just because > they were too critical against the loose, flabby concepts of information > provided in this paper. > > > > > > Some contributions are very interesting, but others deserve the despising > label of pseudoscience. > > > > On the other side, If you provide ELEVEN (more or less, I cannot be sure, > I counted it, but I lost my attention after the Greeek Gods...) different > definitions of information, how do you hope to be trusted? > > > > > > > > > > Forgive me to be honest, but FIS means also harsh discussion! > > > > > > > > > > > > Il 18 febbraio 2018 alle 20.49 Krassimir Markov <[email protected]> ha > scritto: > > > > p> > > > > Dear Pedro and FIS Colleagues, > > > > I am glad to inform you that the paper which was created by a group of > FIS members is ready. > > It is published with open access in the International Journal > “Information Theories and Applications”, Volume 24, Number 4, pages 303-321. > > > > The title of the paper is “Data versus Information“. > > It contains a small part of FIS discussions but it is representative how > creative is the FIS society! > > Many thanks to authors of the paper – more than three months we work on > the paper! > > > > Links: > > IJ ITA Vol. 24: http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol24/ijita-fv24.htm > http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol24/ijita-fv24.htm > > Direct link to the paper: > http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol24/ijita24-04-p01.pdf > http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol24/ijita24-04-p01.pdf > > > > Friendly greetings > > Krassimir > > > > > > p> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Fis mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Arturo Tozzi > > > > AA Professor Physics, University North Texas > > > > Pediatrician ASL Na2Nord, Italy > > > > Comput Intell Lab, University Manitoba > > > > http://arturotozzi.webnode.it/ http://arturotozzi.webnode.it/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Fis mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > > >
> _______________________________________________ > Fis mailing list > [email protected] > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis > Arturo Tozzi AA Professor Physics, University North Texas Pediatrician ASL Na2Nord, Italy Comput Intell Lab, University Manitoba http://arturotozzi.webnode.it/
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list [email protected] http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
