Ah, so, to you, 'information is a way of speaking about something'.  To me, 
information is 'matter-that-is-organized' such that it is differentiated from 
other matter. This matter exists because it is in-form-ed, i.e., organized 
within a particular form. Therefore, I agree with the outline provided by John 
Collier.

To me, information has nothing to do with the secondary level of speaking about 
something. And of course, no requirement therefore for 'adding to knowledge' 
and 'identifying cause'. Those are secondary levels.

Edwina
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Steven Ericsson-Zenith 
  To: Edwina Taborsky 
  Cc: Steven Ericsson-Zenith ; Biosemiotics ; Peirce Discussion Forum 
([email protected]) 
  Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 1:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: [biosemiotics:8138] Article on origina of the 
universe relevant to some recent discussions on these lists


  Information is a way of speaking about that which adds to knowledge and 
identifies cause. 


  Where I use the term "knowledge" in the general Liberal Physicalist sense to 
refer to that which determines subsequent action.


  Steven


  On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote:

    Steven - are you saying that information 'is nothing'?

    Edwina
      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Steven Ericsson-Zenith 
      To: Biosemiotics 
      Cc: Peirce Discussion Forum ([email protected]) 
      Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 1:22 PM
      Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Re: [biosemiotics:8138] Article on origina of the 
universe relevant to some recent discussions on these lists


      Stunningly comical. Energy from information ... an unplausible 
mathematical description of something from nothing. It goes to show what you 
get from an ungrounded purely mathematical education. 


      Steven


      On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 9:47 AM, John Collier <[email protected]> wrote:

        Dear lists,



        The following article is relevant to issues of “What came before the 
Big Bang?”, the evolution of laws in the universe and some others. It cites, 
among others, David Layzer and myself, and generally follows the approaches 
that we have argued for. It also brings together other related material from 
other sources related to symmetry breaking (information formation, and, if on a 
cosmic scale, law formation). In particular it invokes the “no boundary 
conditions” requirement for a satisfactory cosmological theory (favoured by 
Hawking, Smolin, Layzer and many other cosmologists). The authors give this 
condition as that the universe originated in a singularity that is not 
knowable, since it contains no information. Information, here, is of course the 
physicists’ notion of “it from bit”, used in cosmology, the study of black 
holes and in some branches of Quantum Theory (quantum computation and quantum 
field theory in particular), according to which energy and matter are 
incidental, and information (distinctness) is fundamental.



        The paper is Spontaneous Creation of the Universe Ex Nihilo

        Maya Lincoln

        Electronic Address: [email protected]

        Affiliation: University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel

        Avi Wasser

        Electronic Address: [email protected]

        Affiliation: University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel



        It can be found online with a good search engine.



        The paper is a sketch of the theory rather than a theory (as they say 
“a first step”). I don’t think it differs all that much from David Layzer’s 
views, judging by my discussions with him about twenty years ago. But perhaps 
it is more boldly stated. I am not satisfied that it really resolves the issue 
of why there is something rather than nothing, but if it does, it makes the 
existence of the Universe necessary rather than contingent. 



        Cheers,

        John



        John Collier, Philosophy, UKZN, Durban 4041

        http://web.ncf.ca/collier







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



      -----------------------------
      PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON 
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with 
the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at 
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .







-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at 
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .




Reply via email to