Aw: [PEIRCE-L] The simplest model for the ten classes of signs

Sat, 24 Oct 2020 16:02:28 -0700

 
 
 
Supplement: There is one thing I have written about, I dont understand: I wrote I had read somewhere, that potential energy is negative and has the same amount in the universe as all other energies and masses, so the sum of energy would be zero. But in thermodynamics, potential energy is not negative. So this zero-energy model is either a hoax, or an uncommon, maybe pseudo-scientific way of calculation? I dont know. Does anybody?
Edwina, List,
 
I consider the universe closed in the way, that entropy increases, but not in the way, that, because of this, the ratio between exergy and anergy too increases. But it only is a crude hypothetic attempt to combine cosmology, semiotics, and thermodynamics. In real processes, exergy, the energy that is able to do work, is partly changed to anergy, the useless part of energy. Only in ideal model processes exergy may be completely conserved. These processes are called reversible processes. If the universe is closed or not, nobody knows, I think. I donot think, that thirdness holds energy from being dissipated. On the contrary, the more (semiotically) happens, the more dissipation happens. The more dissipation, the more exergy is changed to anergy, and entropy produced. As a counterpart to this anergy production I see the accelerating expansion of space, producing potential energy (exergy). Maybe black holes change anergy to exergy? They consume, besides solid mass, also gases with equalized temperature (anergy), and heat it up and concentrate it. But nobody knows what happens next with this mass and energy: Does it pop up elsewhere, maybe refill the virtual sphere, from which new particles appear? Cosmology is mainly speculation, I think. My speculation I have chosen in the way I like it best: No big chill.
 
Best,
Helmut
 
 
 24. Oktober 2020 um 00:53 Uhr
 "Edwina Taborsky" <tabor...@primus.ca>
wrote:

Helmut -

I'm not sure if I understand your analogies, but entropy only increases in a closed system. Do you consider the Universe closed?

And I consider that Firstness is dissipation of energy, eg, the energy stored in a cell dissipates over time unless that cell introduces more matter/energy , while Secondness is an enclosed 'bit/unit' of energy, and Thirdness is the organizational pattern that 'holds' that energy to counter dissipation.

I don't understand your comment about exergy- for it, to my understanding, refers to an irreplaceable loss of energy, while the triadic system is geared to prevent such a total dissipation. That is - a cell, which operates within a triadic process,  - this triadic process is not reversible - as it is in exergy.

An open system is a triadic semiosic process - geared to prevent total dissipation and to enable adaptation and avolution.

So- I don't compare exergy to Firstness - because the categorical modes do not operate in a non-triadic system...and Firstness functions within a triad.

Equally- I don't understand your comment that entropy is connected with Thirdness. The function of Thirdness within the triad is to introduce a continuity of morphology such that entropy cannot become dominant.

Edwina

 

On Fri 23/10/20 4:13 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:

Edwina, Robert, List,
 
I think that information aka negentropy is not a counterweight to entropy, because it depends on dissipation, and the amount of produced information cannot exceed the amount of entropy produced with its production.
I think, the counterweight for entropy is the accelerated expansion of the universe, which makes masses get further apart from each other, by which potential energy is increased. Potential energy is exergy, and i guess, that this way the ratio between exergy and anergy possibly is kept constant, though entropy constantly rises.
If exergy is connected with firstness, and the production of entropy with thirdness, and if the source of firstness is on the universal scale (accelerated expansion of the universe), I think that the whole semiotic process all in all is one of down- and upscaling. In the beginning something (triadic) happens in the universe, and in the end it happens between people or particles. The ratio between firstness and thirdness is the same in big and in small scales, firstness is provided in the biggest scale and handed or conveyed down to small ones, information is a part of that, and thirdness in the form of entropy is conveyed the other way, each small action contributing to the "big chill", which I guess will never happen.
Can the universe expand forever? Maybe it separates, calves?
 
Best, Helmut
 
 
 23. Oktober 2020 um 16:40 Uhr
 "Edwina Taborsky"
wrote:

I think that's a key notion - the necessity for a triplet, which is an intellectual construct, to become a triad, a morphological construct.

The reason for this is that basic "permanent confrontation between entropy and negentropy, which would be constitutive of the very being of energy". This means that the semiosic triad and process is not a human, so to speak, intellectual exercise, but is a physico-chemical/biological reality - which we humans then intellectually analyze. - and can do so, mathematically as evidence of this natural reality.

Edwina



 

On Fri 23/10/20 9:32 AM , robert marty robert.mart...@gmail.com sent:

Thank you Edwina ...it seems to me that you encapsulate the concepts of dissipation/morcellization/regularity with the three universal categories which have no real existence since they result from triadic reduction, an operation of pure form on the space of the n-adic relations they allow to generate. So encapsulation makes the simple triplet a triad, which makes regularity appear as a necessity produced by the permanent confrontation between entropy and negentropy, which would be constitutive of the very being of energy. So could we then see in it yet another illustration of the role that mathematics can play, even at this level?    
RM 
Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy 
 
 
Le jeu. 22 oct. 2020 à 16:08, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> a écrit :

A great paper.

My focus is, however, on WHY our universe operates within a triadic process and WHY there are three modal categories.

My simplistic answer to both is: the preservation of energy.

That is - if one posits that our universe is made up of energy - then, the agenda of the universe 'ought' to be its preservation. It first does this -[ as Peirce pointed out in 1.411-] without some regularity, that is - energy transforms rapidly into finite bits of matter. These 'bits' hold energy, so to speak.  But the fact of dissipation, aka, Firstness, means that these finite bits would, in a nanosecond, dissolve into less complex forms of energy.  The dissipation of energy would reduce the universe to nothing. How can we define this dissipation? That is - how is the domination of Firstness -  prevented?

The easiest method is, of course, that action of Secondness, which simply moves energy into those closed units-of-matter. But again, as Peirce pointed out, without regularity, these 'bits' would rapidly dissipate back to - Firstness.

Therefore, we find the need for the third category for the organization of energy: Thirdness, which provides a regularity of habit, a continuity of form and behaviour by which those Bits-of-Matter can be organized. This introduction of Mind is the most powerful method of combating the ever-present actions of dissipation/Firstness.

But- we should acknowledge the necessity of Firstness. Without its 'attacks' on continuity [which attacks usually take place at the periphery of a system] - the system would freeze into a cement of habits. Firstness enables not only adaptive robustness but also, an increase in complexity and diversity of forms.

What about that triad? What is its function? If we posit a universe made up of 'bits of energy-as-matter', then, these bits presumably interact. If we have only a direct 'hit' between two 'bits-of-matter', then this mechanical process would enhance entropy. And again - we acknowledge the reality of Thirdness - which mediates such interactions and transforms energy exchange into information, which can be used, constructively,  by both parties in the interaction.

Edwina

 

On Thu 22/10/20 6:21 AM , robert marty robert.mart...@gmail.com sent:

Abstract

This article begins with a preamble that first examines the general problem of the production of mathematical models in the social sciences and humanities. This is not the first simplification we propose. Feedback has taught us that we needed to go even further to ensure that our initial proposals made more than 40 years ago are acceptable to the entire community working in the same field. The responsibility for this long delay lies mainly with the author, who proposes here to redeem himself by detailing to the extreme both his methodology and the simplest techniques he has found in order to allow critical access to this natural extension of Peirce's semiotics from the state in which he left it to us.

https://www.academia.edu/44347570/The_simplest_model_for_the_ten_classes_of_signs

Thank you for your comments and criticism,

Robert Marty

Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy 
 

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON 
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . 
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu 
with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of 
the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Reply via email to