Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S.
Dear Koichiro, With due respect for you and for the people you mention, there may be a fatal error in the initial description of the key relationships you mention as dichotomies. Unless, in all but the most trivial cases, you allow for interaction and sharing of the effective dynamic properties of the phenomena you are looking at, getting new insights into the way they evolve will continue to be difficult. In particular, neither actuality nor potentiality go to 0 or 1. The major contribution of Lupasco was to break through the strait-jacket of the concept of totally independent classes that follow standard bivalent logic. You seem to hint at this in your last point which talks in terms of "probabilistic events". However, having "explicit and definite distributions" is hardly possible in the real world, except as idealized, unrealizable abstractions. I am hoping that some readers of this note may be moved to consider what, in principle, might be achieved by opening up our language in the direction I suggest. We might lose some rigor in the narrow sense, but this is proving a dead end in any case. Its loss would be compensated by having a greater array of logical conceptual tools to work with. Thank you and best wishes, Joseph Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: cxq02...@nifty.com Datum: 19.03.2012 23:24 An: Betreff: Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S. Folks, A nice thing about the dichotomies such as the actual-potential (Peirce), einselection-superposition (Schroedinger), figure-background (Merleau-Ponty), filling-up - void (Marijuan), presence-absence (Deacon) and the like is the appraisal of the individual-class dichotomy even if an exhaustive list of the individuals constituting the class is not available. The price we have to pay for this, however, is that first person descriptions would have to be employed for appreciating the presence of some individuals that are currently absent on the spot for whatever reasons. In contrast, the individual-class dichotomy accessible to third person descriptions such as the dichotomy of each probabilistic event and its distribution would have to be explicit and definite with regard to both the individuals and the class from the outset. Cheers, Koichiro Matsuno ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S.
Folks, A nice thing about the dichotomies such as the actual-potential (Peirce), einselection-superposition (Schroedinger), figure-background (Merleau-Ponty), filling-up - void (Marijuan), presence-absence (Deacon) and the like is the appraisal of the individual-class dichotomy even if an exhaustive list of the individuals constituting the class is not available. The price we have to pay for this, however, is that first person descriptions would have to be employed for appreciating the presence of some individuals that are currently absent on the spot for whatever reasons. In contrast, the individual-class dichotomy accessible to third person descriptions such as the dichotomy of each probabilistic event and its distribution would have to be explicit and definite with regard to both the individuals and the class from the outset. Cheers, Koichiro Matsuno ___ fis mailing list fis@listas.unizar.es https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S.
on is to participate to the > determination of an action that will be implemented in order to satisfy the > constraint of the system”. > This definition allows to model meaning generation by the Meaning Generator > System –MGS- (Fig 1). > Meanings do not exist by themselves. A meaning is about a constraint and > about an entity of the environment. It is generated by and for a system. > Meaning generation links the system to its environment (2.2). > Agents contain several MGSs. An entity of the environment sensed by an agent > will generate several meanings. All these interrelated meanings will build up > networks of meanings relative to the entity. These networks of meanings lead > to the notion of meaningful representations that avoid the combinational > explosion (2.5) > The MGS is simple. It can be used as a building block for agents (animals, > humans, robots) assuming we correctly identify the constraints with their > intrinsic or derived nature (living entities vs artifacts. See 4). > The case of humans is the most complex and difficult as we do not know the > nature of human mind. Human constraints are difficult to identify, but some > hypothesis can be made and bring perspectives on an evolutionary nature of > human mind (3). Much more is to be done in this area. > Best > Christophe > > > Subject: Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S. > > From: ste...@iase.us > > Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 10:53:19 -0700 > > CC: christophe.men...@hotmail.fr > > To: fis@listas.unizar.es > > > > Dear Christophe, > > > > I don't buy this overloading of the term "information" by the > > "uoward/downward" argument. > > > > I also lament the lack of rigor concerning the definition of the term > > "information," but I lament more the lack of rigor concerning the > > definition of the term "meaning." What is the definition of the term in the > > chapter you reference? > > > > The best that I could guess in terms of my own work is that it refers to > > some action potential that is altered by information, although this does > > not exactly fit your description. This, as opposed to my own use of the > > term "meaning" as the term speaking about the behavior produced by the > > apprehension of a sign (Peirce's pragmaticism). In my terms the action > > potential to which you seem to refer is called "knowledge." By this > > definition "representations" do not have a fixed associated meaning, they > > do not always produce the same behavior. In apprehension by individuals > > they can be said to have an action potential that is additive to the > > current potential in the organism. This would be consistent with a claim > > that representations "mean" different things to different individuals in > > different contexts. > > > > We also appear to disagree concerning the term "semantics," that I take in > > the spirit of logic (with Carnap) to refer only to the rules of language > > transformation. > > > > With respect, > > Steven > > > > > > -- > > Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith > > Institute for Advanced Science & Engineering > > http://iase.info > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Christophe Menant wrote: > > > > > Dear FISers, > > > Indeed information can be considered downwards (physical & meaningless) > > > and upwards (biological & meaningful). The difference being about > > > interpretation or not. > > > It also introduces an evolutionary approach to information processing and > > > meaning generation. > > > There is a chapter on that subject in a recent book > > > (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Information-Computation-Philosophical-Understanding-Foundations/dp/toc/9814295477). > > > > > > “Computation on Information, Meaning and Representations.An Evolutionary > > > Approach” > > > Content of the chapter: > > > 1. Information and Meaning. Meaning Generation > > > 1.1. Information.Meaning of information and quantity of information > > > 1.2. Meaningful information and constraint satisfaction. A systemic > > > approach > > > 2. Information, Meaning and Representations. An Evolutionary Approach > > > 2.1. Stay alive constraint and meaning generation for organisms > > > 2.2. The Meaning Generator System (MGS). A systemic and evolutionary > > > approach > > > 2.3. Meaning transmission
Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S.
Dear Steven, It is precisely the lack of a good definition for the term “meaning” that brought me to propose a systemic approach to meaning generation. A system submitted to a constraint generates meanings to satisfy its constraint. To stay alive, an animal will generate meanings when sensing food (or predators). The generated meanings will be used to determine actions: eat the food (or run away from danger). The proposed definition of meaning is (see 2.1 hereunder): “A meaning is a meaningful information that is created by a system submitted to a constraint when it receives an incident information that has a connection with the constraint. The meaning is formed of the connection existing between the received information and the constraint of the system. The function of the meaningful information is to participate to the determination of an action that will be implemented in order to satisfy the constraint of the system”. This definition allows to model meaning generation by the Meaning Generator System –MGS- (Fig 1). Meanings do not exist by themselves. A meaning is about a constraint and about an entity of the environment. It is generated by and for a system. Meaning generation links the system to its environment (2.2). Agents contain several MGSs. An entity of the environment sensed by an agent will generate several meanings. All these interrelated meanings will build up networks of meanings relative to the entity. These networks of meanings lead to the notion of meaningful representations that avoid the combinational explosion (2.5) The MGS is simple. It can be used as a building block for agents (animals, humans, robots) assuming we correctly identify the constraints with their intrinsic or derived nature (living entities vs artifacts. See 4). The case of humans is the most complex and difficult as we do not know the nature of human mind. Human constraints are difficult to identify, but some hypothesis can be made and bring perspectives on an evolutionary nature of human mind (3). Much more is to be done in this area. Best Christophe > Subject: Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S. > From: ste...@iase.us > Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 10:53:19 -0700 > CC: christophe.men...@hotmail.fr > To: fis@listas.unizar.es > > Dear Christophe, > > I don't buy this overloading of the term "information" by the > "uoward/downward" argument. > > I also lament the lack of rigor concerning the definition of the term > "information," but I lament more the lack of rigor concerning the definition > of the term "meaning." What is the definition of the term in the chapter you > reference? > > The best that I could guess in terms of my own work is that it refers to some > action potential that is altered by information, although this does not > exactly fit your description. This, as opposed to my own use of the term > "meaning" as the term speaking about the behavior produced by the > apprehension of a sign (Peirce's pragmaticism). In my terms the action > potential to which you seem to refer is called "knowledge." By this > definition "representations" do not have a fixed associated meaning, they do > not always produce the same behavior. In apprehension by individuals they can > be said to have an action potential that is additive to the current potential > in the organism. This would be consistent with a claim that representations > "mean" different things to different individuals in different contexts. > > We also appear to disagree concerning the term "semantics," that I take in > the spirit of logic (with Carnap) to refer only to the rules of language > transformation. > > With respect, > Steven > > > -- > Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith > Institute for Advanced Science & Engineering > http://iase.info > > > > > > > > On Mar 16, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Christophe Menant wrote: > > > Dear FISers, > > Indeed information can be considered downwards (physical & meaningless) and > > upwards (biological & meaningful). The difference being about > > interpretation or not. > > It also introduces an evolutionary approach to information processing and > > meaning generation. > > There is a chapter on that subject in a recent book > > (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Information-Computation-Philosophical-Understanding-Foundations/dp/toc/9814295477). > > > > “Computation on Information, Meaning and Representations.An Evolutionary > > Approach” > > Content of the chapter: > > 1. Information and Meaning. Meaning Generation > > 1.1. Information.Meaning of information and quantity of information > > 1.2. Me
Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S.
Dear Christophe, I don't buy this overloading of the term "information" by the "uoward/downward" argument. I also lament the lack of rigor concerning the definition of the term "information," but I lament more the lack of rigor concerning the definition of the term "meaning." What is the definition of the term in the chapter you reference? The best that I could guess in terms of my own work is that it refers to some action potential that is altered by information, although this does not exactly fit your description. This, as opposed to my own use of the term "meaning" as the term speaking about the behavior produced by the apprehension of a sign (Peirce's pragmaticism). In my terms the action potential to which you seem to refer is called "knowledge." By this definition "representations" do not have a fixed associated meaning, they do not always produce the same behavior. In apprehension by individuals they can be said to have an action potential that is additive to the current potential in the organism. This would be consistent with a claim that representations "mean" different things to different individuals in different contexts. We also appear to disagree concerning the term "semantics," that I take in the spirit of logic (with Carnap) to refer only to the rules of language transformation. With respect, Steven -- Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith Institute for Advanced Science & Engineering http://iase.info On Mar 16, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Christophe Menant wrote: > Dear FISers, > Indeed information can be considered downwards (physical & meaningless) and > upwards (biological & meaningful). The difference being about interpretation > or not. > It also introduces an evolutionary approach to information processing and > meaning generation. > There is a chapter on that subject in a recent book > (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Information-Computation-Philosophical-Understanding-Foundations/dp/toc/9814295477). > > “Computation on Information, Meaning and Representations.An Evolutionary > Approach” > Content of the chapter: > 1. Information and Meaning. Meaning Generation > 1.1. Information.Meaning of information and quantity of information > 1.2. Meaningful information and constraint satisfaction. A systemic approach > 2. Information, Meaning and Representations. An Evolutionary Approach > 2.1. Stay alive constraint and meaning generation for organisms > 2.2. The Meaning Generator System (MGS). A systemic and evolutionary approach > 2.3. Meaning transmission > 2.4. Individual and species constraints. Group life constraints. Networks of > meanings > 2.5. From meaningful information to meaningful representations > 3. Meaningful Information and Representations in Humans > 4. Meaningful Information and Representations in Artificial Systems > 4.1. Meaningful information and representations from traditional AI to > Nouvelle AI. Embodied-situated AI > 4.2. Meaningful representations versus the guidance theory of representation > 4.3. Meaningful information and representations versus the enactive approach > 5. Conclusion and Continuation > 5.1. Conclusion > 5.2. Continuation > A version close to the final text can be reached at > http://crmenant.free.fr/2009BookChapter/C.Menant.211009.pdf > > As Plamen says, we may be at the beginning of a new scientific revolution. > But I’m afraid that an understanding of the meaning of information needs > clear enough an understanding of the constraint at the source of the meaning > generation process. And even for basic organic meanings coming from a “stay > alive” constraint, we have to face the still mysterious nature of life. And > for human meanings, the even more mysterious nature of human mind. > This is not to discourage our efforts in investigating these questions. Just > to put a stick in the ground showing where we stand. > Best, > Christophe > Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:47:28 +0100 > From: pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es > To: fis@listas.unizar.es > Subject: [Fis] [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S. > > Mensaje original > Asunto: Re: [Fis] Physics of computing > Fecha:Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:24:38 +0100 > De: Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov > Para: Pedro C. Marijuan > Referencias: <20120316041607.66ffc68000...@1w8.tpn.terra.com> > <4f6321c3.5000...@aragon.es> > > > +++ > > Dear All, > > I could not agree more with Pedro's opinion. The referred article is > interesting indeed. but, information is only physical in the narrow sense > taken by conventional physicalistic-mechanistic-computational approaches. > Such a statement defends the reductionist view at nature: sorry. But > information is more than bits and Shanno's law and biology has far more to > offer. I think we are at the beginning of a new scientific revolution. So, we > may need to take our (Maxwell) "daemons" and (Turing) "oracles" closer under > the lens. In fact, David Ball, the author of the Natur
Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S.
Stan - great formula but as I learned from Anthony Reading who wrote a lovely book on information Meaningful Information - it is the recipient that brings the meaning to the information. PS My book What is Information was been translated into Portuguese and published in Brazil where I am doing a 4 city, 5 university speaking tour. The book has not yet appeared in English but it is scheduled to be published soon by Demo press. Regards from Brazil - Bob On 2012-03-17, at 11:17 AM, Stanley N Salthe wrote: > Concerning the meaning (or effect) of information (or constraint) in general, > I have proposed that context is crucial in modulating the effect -- in all > cases. Thus: it would be like the logical example: > > Effect = context a x Constraint ^context b > > STAN > > > > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Christophe Menant > wrote: > Dear FISers, > Indeed information can be considered downwards (physical & meaningless) and > upwards (biological & meaningful). The difference being about interpretation > or not. > It also introduces an evolutionary approach to information processing and > meaning generation. > There is a chapter on that subject in a recent book > (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Information-Computation-Philosophical-Understanding-Foundations/dp/toc/9814295477). > > “Computation on Information, Meaning and Representations.An Evolutionary > Approach” > Content of the chapter: > 1. Information and Meaning. Meaning Generation > 1.1. Information.Meaning of information and quantity of information > 1.2. Meaningful information and constraint satisfaction. A systemic approach > 2. Information, Meaning and Representations. An Evolutionary Approach > 2.1. Stay alive constraint and meaning generation for organisms > 2.2. The Meaning Generator System (MGS). A systemic and evolutionary approach > 2.3. Meaning transmission > 2.4. Individual and species constraints. Group life constraints. Networks of > meanings > 2.5. From meaningful information to meaningful representations > 3. Meaningful Information and Representations in Humans > 4. Meaningful Information and Representations in Artificial Systems > 4.1. Meaningful information and representations from traditional AI to > Nouvelle AI. Embodied-situated AI > 4.2. Meaningful representations versus the guidance theory of representation > 4.3. Meaningful information and representations versus the enactive approach > 5. Conclusion and Continuation > 5.1. Conclusion > 5.2. Continuation > A version close to the final text can be reached at > http://crmenant.free.fr/2009BookChapter/C.Menant.211009.pdf > > As Plamen says, we may be at the beginning of a new scientific revolution. > But I’m afraid that an understanding of the meaning of information needs > clear enough an understanding of the constraint at the source of the meaning > generation process. And even for basic organic meanings coming from a “stay > alive” constraint, we have to face the still mysterious nature of life. And > for human meanings, the even more mysterious nature of human mind. > This is not to discourage our efforts in investigating these questions. Just > to put a stick in the ground showing where we stand. > Best, > Christophe > Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:47:28 +0100 > From: pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es > To: fis@listas.unizar.es > Subject: [Fis] [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S. > > Mensaje original > Asunto: Re: [Fis] Physics of computing > Fecha:Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:24:38 +0100 > De: Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov > Para: Pedro C. Marijuan > Referencias: <20120316041607.66ffc68000...@1w8.tpn.terra.com> > <4f6321c3.5000...@aragon.es> > > > +++ > > Dear All, > > I could not agree more with Pedro's opinion. The referred article is > interesting indeed. but, information is only physical in the narrow sense > taken by conventional physicalistic-mechanistic-computational approaches. > Such a statement defends the reductionist view at nature: sorry. But > information is more than bits and Shanno's law and biology has far more to > offer. I think we are at the beginning of a new scientific revolution. So, we > may need to take our (Maxwell) "daemons" and (Turing) "oracles" closer under > the lens. In fact, David Ball, the author of the Nature paper approached me > after my talk in Brussels in 2010 on the Integral Biomathics approach and > told me he thinks it were a step in the right direction: biology driven > mathematics and computation. > > By the way, our book of ideas on IB will be released next month by Springer: > http://www.springer.com/engineering/computational+intelligence+and+complexity/book/978-3-642-28110-5 > If you wish to obtain it at a lower price (65 EUR incl. worldwide delivery) > please send me your names, mailing addresses and phone numbers via email to: > pla...@simeio.org. There must be at least 9 orders to keep that discount > price.. > > Best, > > Plamen > > >
Re: [Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S.
Concerning the meaning (or effect) of information (or constraint) in general, I have proposed that context is crucial in modulating the effect -- in all cases. Thus: it would be like the logical example: Effect = context a x Constraint ^context b STAN On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Christophe Menant < christophe.men...@hotmail.fr> wrote: > *Dear FISers, > Indeed information can be considered downwards (physical & meaningless) > and upwards (biological & meaningful). The difference being about > interpretation or not. > It also introduces an evolutionary approach to information processing and > meaning generation. > There is a chapter on that subject in a recent book ( > http://www.amazon.co.uk/Information-Computation-Philosophical-Understanding-Foundations/dp/toc/9814295477 > ). > “Computation on Information, Meaning and Representations.An Evolutionary > Approach” > Content of the chapter: > 1. Information and Meaning. Meaning Generation > 1.1. Information.Meaning of information and quantity of information > 1.2. Meaningful information and constraint satisfaction. A systemic > approach > 2. Information, Meaning and Representations. An Evolutionary Approach > 2.1. Stay alive constraint and meaning generation for organisms > 2.2. The Meaning Generator System (MGS). A systemic and evolutionary > approach > 2.3. Meaning transmission > 2.4. Individual and species constraints. Group life constraints. Networks > of meanings > 2.5. From meaningful information to meaningful representations > 3. Meaningful Information and Representations in Humans > 4. Meaningful Information and Representations in Artificial Systems > 4.1. Meaningful information and representations from traditional AI to > Nouvelle AI. Embodied-situated AI > 4.2. Meaningful representations versus the guidance theory of > representation > 4.3. Meaningful information and representations versus the enactive > approach > 5. Conclusion and Continuation > 5.1. Conclusion > 5.2. Continuation > A version close to the final text can be reached at > http://crmenant.free.fr/2009BookChapter/C.Menant.211009.pdf > > As Plamen says, we may be at the beginning of a new scientific revolution. > But I’m afraid that an understanding of the meaning of information needs > clear enough an understanding of the constraint at the source of the > meaning generation process. And even for basic organic meanings coming from > a “stay alive” constraint, we have to face the still mysterious nature of > life. And for human meanings, the even more mysterious nature of human mind. > This is not to discourage our efforts in investigating these questions. > Just to put a stick in the ground showing where we stand. > Best, > Christophe > * > -- > Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:47:28 +0100 > From: pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es > To: fis@listas.unizar.es > Subject: [Fis] [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S. > > Mensaje original Asunto: Re: [Fis] Physics of computing > Fecha: > Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:24:38 +0100 De: Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov >Para: Pedro > C. Marijuan > Referencias: > <20120316041607.66ffc68000...@1w8.tpn.terra.com><20120316041607.66ffc68000...@1w8.tpn.terra.com> > <4f6321c3.5000...@aragon.es> <4f6321c3.5000...@aragon.es> > > > +++ > > Dear All, > > I could not agree more with Pedro's opinion. The referred article is > interesting indeed. but, information is only physical in the narrow sense > taken by conventional physicalistic-mechanistic-computational approaches. > Such a statement defends the reductionist view at nature: sorry. But > information is more than bits and Shanno's law and biology has far more to > offer. I think we are at the beginning of a new scientific revolution. So, > we may need to take our (Maxwell) "daemons" and (Turing) "oracles" closer > under the lens. In fact, David Ball, the author of the Nature paper > approached me after my talk in Brussels in 2010 on the Integral Biomathics > approach and told me he thinks it were a step in the right direction: > biology driven mathematics and computation. > > By the way, our book of ideas on IB will be released next month by > Springer: > http://www.springer.com/engineering/computational+intelligence+and+complexity/book/978-3-642-28110-5 > If you wish to obtain it at a lower price (65 EUR incl. worldwide > delivery) please send me your names, mailing addresses and phone numbers > via email to: pla...@simeio.org. There must be at least 9 orders to keep > that discount price.. > > Best, > > Plamen > > > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Pedro C. Marijuan < > pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> wrote: > > Dear discussants, > > I tend to disagree with the motto "information is physical" if taken too > strictly. Obviously if we look "downwards" it is OK, but in the "upward" > direction it is different. Info is not only physical then, and the > dimension of self-construction along the realization of life cycle has to > be entered. Then the signal
[Fis] FW: [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S.
Dear FISers, Indeed information can be considered downwards (physical & meaningless) and upwards (biological & meaningful). The difference being about interpretation or not. It also introduces an evolutionary approach to information processing and meaning generation. There is a chapter on that subject in a recent book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Information-Computation-Philosophical-Understanding-Foundations/dp/toc/9814295477). “Computation on Information, Meaning and Representations.An Evolutionary Approach” Content of the chapter: 1. Information and Meaning. Meaning Generation 1.1. Information.Meaning of information and quantity of information 1.2. Meaningful information and constraint satisfaction. A systemic approach 2. Information, Meaning and Representations. An Evolutionary Approach 2.1. Stay alive constraint and meaning generation for organisms 2.2. The Meaning Generator System (MGS). A systemic and evolutionary approach 2.3. Meaning transmission 2.4. Individual and species constraints. Group life constraints. Networks of meanings 2.5. From meaningful information to meaningful representations 3. Meaningful Information and Representations in Humans 4. Meaningful Information and Representations in Artificial Systems 4.1. Meaningful information and representations from traditional AI to Nouvelle AI. Embodied-situated AI 4.2. Meaningful representations versus the guidance theory of representation 4.3. Meaningful information and representations versus the enactive approach 5. Conclusion and Continuation 5.1. Conclusion 5.2. Continuation A version close to the final text can be reached at http://crmenant.free.fr/2009BookChapter/C.Menant.211009.pdf As Plamen says, we may be at the beginning of a new scientific revolution. But I’m afraid that an understanding of the meaning of information needs clear enough an understanding of the constraint at the source of the meaning generation process. And even for basic organic meanings coming from a “stay alive” constraint, we have to face the still mysterious nature of life. And for human meanings, the even more mysterious nature of human mind. This is not to discourage our efforts in investigating these questions. Just to put a stick in the ground showing where we stand. Best, Christophe Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:47:28 +0100 From: pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es To: fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: [Fis] [Fwd: Re: Physics of computing]--Plamen S. Mensaje original Asunto: Re: [Fis] Physics of computing Fecha: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:24:38 +0100 De: Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov Para: Pedro C. Marijuan Referencias: <20120316041607.66ffc68000...@1w8.tpn.terra.com> <4f6321c3.5000...@aragon.es> +++ Dear All, I could not agree more with Pedro's opinion. The referred article is interesting indeed. but, information is only physical in the narrow sense taken by conventional physicalistic-mechanistic-computational approaches. Such a statement defends the reductionist view at nature: sorry. But information is more than bits and Shanno's law and biology has far more to offer. I think we are at the beginning of a new scientific revolution. So, we may need to take our (Maxwell) "daemons" and (Turing) "oracles" closer under the lens. In fact, David Ball, the author of the Nature paper approached me after my talk in Brussels in 2010 on the Integral Biomathics approach and told me he thinks it were a step in the right direction: biology driven mathematics and computation. By the way, our book of ideas on IB will be released next month by Springer: http://www.springer.com/engineering/computational+intelligence+and+complexity/book/978-3-642-28110-5 If you wish to obtain it at a lower price (65 EUR incl. worldwide delivery) please send me your names, mailing addresses and phone numbers via email to: pla...@simeio.org. There must be at least 9 orders to keep that discount price.. Best, Plamen On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote: Dear discussants, I tend to disagree with the motto "information is physical" if taken too strictly. Obviously if we look "downwards" it is OK, but in the "upward" direction it is different. Info is not only physical then, and the dimension of self-construction along the realization of life cycle has to be entered. Then the signal, the info, has "content" and "meaning". Otherwise if we insist only in the physical downward dimension we have just conventional computing/ info processing. My opinion is that the notion of absence is crucial for advancing in the upward, but useless in the downward. By the way, I already wrote about info and the absence theme in a 1994 or 1995 paper in BioSystems... best ---Pedro walter.riof...@terra.com.pe escribió: Thanks John and Kevin to updat
