Otto, an interesting call, for a theory that  brings together the brute 
force of an abiotic universe and  information. 
Here's a short timeline that pulls the  brute force elements together as 
informational exchange: 
The evolution of  information, sociality, social structure, and the 
emergent properties of  societies 
(all dates ABB, After the Big  Bang) 
10(-31) ABB  primitive communication between quarks via the strong force.  
The  first informational language: attraction and  repulsion. 
10(-31) ABB the first social groups, threesomes of quarks, produce two  
shocking emergent  properties—protons and  neutrons 
10,000 ABB massive social dances, pressure  waves, ring the cosmos like a 
gong.  With, yes, music.  What communicative force organizes trillions of  
trillions of particles into pressure waves—into rhythmically coming together 
in  aggregations that span the universe?  Do information exchange and  
communication choreograph pressure waves in which masses of particles  
rhythmically separate just a tiny bit, then come together  again? 
380,000 ABB  emerging from a plasma, slowing down, and giving each other a 
bit of  breathing room, elementary particles use the electromagnetic force 
to  communicate.  And they discover something odd.  Tiny  particles have an 
inanimate longing.  And their inanimate longing precisely  fits the inanimate 
longing of particles 1,800 times their size.  The  tiny particles join with 
the hulking monsters.  The  result?  Another emergent property, another 
supersized  surprise: atoms.  Hydrogen, helium, and lithium, properties wildly 
unpredictable from just  the properties of an electron and a proton.  
Properties that emerge from a  communicative exchange.  An informational 
exchange 
between protons and  electrons. 
380,000 ABB the atom reveals a basic of cosmic structure—hierarchy.  
Protons dominate.  They  determine where the team goes.   Electrons subjugate 
themselves.  They meekly go along.  They subordinate.  They humbly circle the 
proton  nucleus. 
380,000 ABB atoms communicate via gravity. 
400,000 ABB more communication via gravity, but mass communication.  The  
result?  Competition.  The era of the great gravity crusades.  Wisps,  
plumes, and clots of atoms have showdowns, faceoffs in which the  bigger 
swallows 
the smaller whole.  Then the winner goes off to another  showdown, another 
competitive confrontation.  In  which it either eats or is eaten.  The result 
of these showdowns between  gravity balls?  Galaxies, stars, planets, and 
moons.  A  galaxy is, guess what, a social swirl organized in a hierarchy—
black holes at  the center, stars circling the black holes, planets circling 
the stars, and  moons circling the planets.  All via communication and  
information.  All via receivers interpreting the messages of  senders and 
acting 
on them. 
one bottom line: communication,  information, music, competition, and 
hierarchy are not the products of  post-agricultural, post industrial, or post 
capitalist societies.  they are  at work even in dead stuff.  even pre-living 
nature. 
hope that helps. 
thanks again for letting me parade such  strange ideas in such august 
company. 
Dear all,
Just a quick reply to Howard's fascinating account of  cosmic history. 
It seems what is crucially needed is a theory that brings together  "brute 
force" on the one hand - laws of nature "blindly" colliding and  colluding, 
from quarks to planets - and "information" on the other - from  pre-human 
codes (perhaps including quantum computation) and communication to  advanced 
human and cybernetic networks. 
The former seems to be able to do away with everything except a few  simple 
rules of operation (gravity, natural selection, will-to-power),  everything 
more complex being the unfolding of the interaction between these few  
simple rules (eternal or emergent is beside the point here). The latter seems 
to 
 depend upon subjective interpretation, the retention of systems memory, 
symbolic  coding-decoding, and other processes that compose only a subset of 
the  (creatures and processes) of the universe. Never the twain shall meet. 
Or perhaps brute force can be analyzed as equivalent to information? Or  
vice versa? Or as two sides of the same coin? 
Best, 
Otto  Lehto,
Tampere, Finland 
On  2 Feb 2016 13:46, "Krassimir Markov" <_markov@foibg.com_ 
(mailto:mar...@foibg.com) > wrote:


 
 
Dear Howard,
 
Thank you very much for your great effort and nice  explanation!
I like it!
 
Only what I needed to see is a concrete answer to the  question “what it 
the Information?”
You absolutely clearly described it and I totally agree with  your 
considerations.
Only what is needed is to conclude with a short  definition.
I think it may be the next:
 
The Information is a reflection which may be interpreted by  its receiver 
in the context the receiver has in his/her memory.
 
>From this definition many consequences follow. In future we  may discuss 
them.
 
Friendly regards
Krassimir
 
PS:
Dear FIS Colleagues,

1. At the ITHEA web side, the conferences for year 2016 have  been 
announced.
One of them is the XIV-th International Conference on  “General Information 
Theory”.
Please visit link:
 (http://www.ithea.org/conferences/conferences.html) 
http://www.ithea.org/conferences/conferences.html
Welcome in Varna, Bulgaria !
 
2. May be it will be interesting to read the paper,  published in our
International Journal “Information Theories and  Applications” (  
(http://www.foibg.com/ijita/) http://www.foibg.com/ijita/ ) :
_Formal Theory of Semantic and Pragmatic Information - a Technocratic  
Approach_ (http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol22/ijita22-04-p05.pdf) 
by Venco Bojilov
 (http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol22/ijita22-04-p05.pdf) 
http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol22/ijita22-04-p05.pdf
Please send your remarks to the author to e-mail:  
(mailto:off...@ithea.org) _office@ithea.org_ (mailto:off...@ithea.org) 
 
Krassimir
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
From:  (mailto:howlbl...@aol.com) _HowlBloom@aol.com_ 
(mailto:howlbl...@aol.com) 
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 8:46  AM
To:  (mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es) _pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es_ 
(mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es) 
Cc:  (mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es) _fis@listas.unizar.es_ 
(mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es) 
Subject: [Fis] _ Closing  lecture


 

 

 
First, a few  responses.  I  agree with Hans von Baeyer.  Pedro’s kindness 
is  magic.  
I agree with  Gyorgy Darvas that quarks communicate. 
I also agree with  Jerry Chandler.  Brute force is not the major  mover of 
history.  Values and virtues  count.  A  lot.  In fact,  a culture organizes 
itself by calling one way of doing things evil—brute  force—and another 
way of doing things a value  and a virtue.  Our way is the value and the  
virtue.  The  ways of others are brute force and evil.  We see  cooperation  
and 
warmth among  us.  But only  enmity  and  destruction among them.  
The  brute force is not within groups, where values, virtues, and  
compassion prevail.  It’s between groups.  It’s in the pecking order  battles 
between groups.  
Which means, in  answer to Marcus Abundis, yes, groups struggle for 
position in inter-group  hierarchies like chickens in a barnyard.  For example, 
America and China  are vying right now for top position in the barnyard of  
nations.  Russia’s in that battle,  too.  On a  lower level, so are Saudi 
Arabia and Iran, whose proxy war in Syria for  pecking order dominance has cost 
a 
quarter of a million  lives.  That’s  brute force.  Between groups whose 
citizens  are often lovely and loving to each other.  Whose citizens are  
proud of their values and virtues. 
Now for a final  statement. 
Information  exists in a context.  That’s not at all  surprising.  
Information is all about  context.  As  the writings of Guenther Witzany hint.  
And 
as Ludwig  Wittgenstein also suggested.  Information is  relational.  
Information does not exist in  a vacuum.  It  connects participants.  And it 
makes 
things  happen.  When  it’s not connecting participants, it’s not  
information 
FIS gets fired up  to a high energy level when discussing the definition of 
information and its  relationship to Shannon’s entropic information 
equation.  Alas, these discussions  tend  to  remove the context.  And context 
is 
what gives  information its indispensable ingredient, meaning. 
There are two  basic approaches in science:  
·        the abstract  mathematical; 
·        and the  observational empirical.  
Mathematical  abstractionists dwell on definitions and equations.  
Empirical observers gather  facts.  Darwin  was an observational empiricist. 
I’d 
like to see more of Darwin’s kind of  science in the world of information 
theory. 
One of Darwin’s  most important contributions was not the concept of 
natural  selection.  It  was an approach that Darwin got from Kant and from his 
grandfather  Erasmus.  That  approach?  Lay  out the history of the cosmos on 
a timeline and piece together its  story.  In  chronological order.  Piece 
together the saga of how  this cosmos has created itself.  Including the 
self-motivated,  self-creation of life. 
Communication  plays a vital role in this story.  It appears in the first  
10(-32) of a second of the cosmos’ existence, when quarks communicated using 
 attraction and repulsion cues.  OK, it’s not quite right to  call the cues 
attraction and repulsion cues.  When two quarks sized each  other up, they 
interpreted the signals of the strong force  differently.  If you were a 
quark, another  quark might size you up and promptly speed away.  But a quark 
of a different  variety might detect the same signals, find them wildly 
attractive, and speed  in your direction.  One quark’s meat was another’s  
poison, even in that first form of communication in the  cosmos.  
Information is  not a stand-alone.  Again, it’s  contextual.  It’s ruled 
by what Guenther  Witzany calls syntax, semantics, and, most important of 
all,  pragmatics.  Its meaning comes from where  it fits in a bigger picture. 
Were the signals  quarks exchanged information?  Not according to many of 
the  definitions in FIS.  Some of those definitions say  that to be regarded 
as information, a sender must deliberately signify  something symbolically.  
She must, for example, want to  warn you about a poisoned apple.  She must 
put that message in  symbols, like the words “poisoned apple,” then convey 
that signal to a  receiver.  If  she doesn’t want to see you poisoned, she 
might text you, “watch out for  poisoned apples.”  I’m not sure whether the  
definitions extant in FIS demand that you look at her text or  not.  Much  
less whether you act on it. 
In my latest  book, The God Problem: How A  Godless Cosmos Creates, I 
propose a different definition of  information. Information is anything a 
receiver can decode,  anything he can decipher.  How do you know a receiver has 
 
decoded a message?  Through the decoder’s  actions.  If  you are a quark and 
you detect my strong force, you either scoot away or you  rush over and join 
me.  You act.  If you are a neurosurgeon  looking at an mri, you make 
internal decisions, mental  decisions.  You don’t move  physically.  Not at 
first. 
 But you move  mentally.  You  imagine your scalpel poised over a different 
spot than you might have picked  before seeing the mri.  
Information is  anything a receiver can decode.  So starlight reaching 
planet  earth 4.5 billion years ago, nearly half a billion years before the 
appearance  of the first life, was not information.  There was no one or no 
thing  that interpreted it, translated it, or acted on it.  But starlight in 
the 
age of  the Babylonians 2,600 years ago was highly informational.  Entire 
teams of scribes and  priests spent their lives observing it and interpreting 
it.  Many of their  interpretations were detailed bullet points of 
political and personal advice  to the ruler.  Was there motion in response  to 
starlight?  You bet.  Starlight literally moved the  troops and policies of 
empires. 
And today, when  there are tens of thousands of professional astronomers 
and millions of  amateurs with telescopes, all churning out data and emails  
to each other, the amount of  information in starlight has skyrocketed.  But, 
in fact, the actual  starlight has not increased.  Not a bit.  It’s the 
number of  interpreters that’s shot up.  And with the interpreters,  something 
else has mushroomed: the information, the interpretation, and the  theories 
along with their supporting or opposing  “facts.” 
The timeline of  communication from quarks to empires is crucial.  It’s the 
natural history we  need to see the evolution of information.  No matter 
what we define  information to be.  The timeline of the cosmos is  context on 
the biggest scale.  It can make new meaning of  facts we scarcely see.  It 
can make more phenomena we  experience every day but do not see into, guess 
what?  Information. 
That’s a timeline  I’m working on. 
Thanks for having  me in your group.  And thanks for giving me a  chance to 
share thoughts with you.
howard
____________
Howard Bloom
Author of: The Lucifer Principle: A  Scientific Expedition Into the Forces 
of History ("mesmerizing"-The Washington  Post),
Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind From The Big Bang to  the 21st 
Century ("reassuring and sobering"-The New  Yorker),
The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of  Capitalism ("A 
tremendously  enjoyable book." James Fallows, National Correspondent, The 
Atlantic),
The God  Problem: How A Godless Cosmos Creates ("Bloom's argument will rock 
your  world." Barbara Ehrenreich),
How I Accidentally Started the  Sixties ("Wow! Whew!  Wild!
Wonderful!" Timothy Leary), and
The Mohammed Code ("A terrifying book…the best book  I've read on Islam." 
David Swindle, PJ Media).
_www.howardbloom.net_ (http://www.howardbloom.net/) 
Former Core Faculty Member, The  Graduate Institute; Former Visiting 
Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department,  New York University.
Founder: International Paleopsychology Project;  Founder, Space Development 
Steering Committee; Founder: The Group Selection  Squad; Founding Board 
Member: Epic of Evolution Society; Founding Board  Member, The Darwin Project; 
Founder: The Big Bang Tango Media Lab; member: New  York Academy of 
Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science,  American 
Psychological Society, Academy of Political Science, Human Behavior  and 
Evolution 
Society, International Society for Human Ethology, Scientific  Advisory Board 
Member, Lifeboat Foundation; Editorial Board Member, Journal of  Space 
Philosophy; Board member and member of Board of Governors, National  Space 
Society.


In a message dated 2/1/2016 8:46:55 A.M. Eastern Standard  Time, 
_pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es_ (mailto:pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es)  writes:

Thanks Howard.  Please, at your convenience send the concluding comments to 
the fis  list. 



 
____________________________________
_______________________________________________
Fis  mailing list
_Fis@listas.unizar.es_ (mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es) 
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis



This  email has been protected by YAC (Yet Another Cleaner)_www.yac.mx_ 
(http://www.yac.mx/?source=email) 


_______________________________________________
Fis  mailing list
_Fis@listas.unizar.es_ (mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es) 
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis




____________
Howard Bloom
Author of: The Lucifer Principle:  A Scientific Expedition Into the Forces 
of History ("mesmerizing"-The  Washington Post),
Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind From The  Big Bang to the 21st 
Century ("reassuring and sobering"-The New  Yorker),
The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of  Capitalism ("A 
tremendously enjoyable book." James Fallows, National  Correspondent, The 
Atlantic),
The God Problem: How A Godless Cosmos  Creates ("Bloom's argument will rock 
your world." Barbara  Ehrenreich),
How I Accidentally Started the Sixties ("Wow! Whew!  Wild!
Wonderful!" Timothy Leary), and
The Mohammed Code ("A  terrifying book…the best book I've read on Islam." 
David Swindle, PJ  Media).
www.howardbloom.net
Former Core Faculty Member, The Graduate  Institute; Former Visiting 
Scholar-Graduate Psychology Department, New York  University.
Founder: International Paleopsychology Project; Founder, Space  Development 
Steering Committee; Founder: The Group Selection Squad; Founding  Board 
Member: Epic of Evolution Society; Founding Board Member, The Darwin  Project; 
Founder: The Big Bang Tango Media Lab; member: New York Academy of  
Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American  
Psychological Society, Academy of Political Science, Human Behavior and  
Evolution 
Society, International Society for Human Ethology, Scientific Advisory  Board 
Member, Lifeboat Foundation; Editorial Board Member, Journal of Space  
Philosophy; Board member and member of Board of Governors, National Space  
Society.
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Reply via email to