Re: Is information physical?
On 01 Mar 2014, at 18:14, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrot information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. And that is a necessary consequence of computationalism, but this leads to the explicit problem of justifying physics from arithmetic or Turing equivalent. Perhaps it's a difference in degree not of kind, when the properties of stuff becomes rich and complex enough we start referring to it as physical not mathematical. I understand the feeling. But Mandelbrot has already made *that* sort of physicalness into mathematics. We have the regular solid + the Mandelbrot set (which contains clouds, thunder, trees, houses, embryo, etc. from the shape point of view). Most would say that a pie chart is mathematical but an apple pie is physical, but other than the fact that one is enormously more complex than the other it's difficult to pin down a fundamental difference between the two. ? Google translates pie chart by camembert and apple pie, which makes what you say rather funny. And what about the memory of a apple pie you saw last week, is that mathematical or physical? Why not: is that psychological or computer science theoretical? Why not: theological or arithmetical? Well, that's all the cases when we assume something about consciousness, and take the relative points of view into account. The assumption is that such (1p) consciousness is maintained through a digital emulation done at some description level. If Darwin's ideas were even close to being correct then we know that the sensation we experience when we remember last week's apple pie could almost certainly be duplicated on a Turing Machine, and that is mathematical. Yes indeed. And all the apple pies you've ever experienced come from the past, it's just that some are more recent than others, again a difference in degree not of kind. The point is in making the hypotheses precise, and then the definitions, and to work out the problems. Computationalism, obviously, makes computer science and mathematical logic tools to formulate the questions and solve them. By the way, you told me that Og the cave man understood the step 3, could you please ask him his opinion on step 4? Thanks. Bruno John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 05:28:47PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: ? Google translates pie chart by camembert and apple pie, which makes what you say rather funny. I've noticed this too. I think the French equivalent is graphe circulaire. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On 03 Mar 2014, at 23:33, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 05:28:47PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: ? Google translates pie chart by camembert and apple pie, which makes what you say rather funny. I've noticed this too. I think the French equivalent is graphe circulaire. Thanks. But this makes the argument by Clark still unclear. If the pie chart is as physical as the apple pie, they both are physical. Then they might be mathematical if the theory used is compatible, or enforce (like comp, that John seems to assume (and even take for granted), mathematicalism. Bruno -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Friday, February 28, 2014 9:18:29 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:51:00AM -0500, spudb...@aol.com javascript:wrote: Ok, Thanks. We're back to the Observer again, where all things are decided at the quantum. From here on the questions tumble forth as a cascade, on whether the Observer is conscious, who is the Observer, what is the Observer? Interesting questions, to be sure, but all quite irrelevant to information theory. All an observer needs to do for information theory is detect a difference (that makes a difference). Something needs to be able to assign a significance to that detection also, and to have the power to manipulate and combine significance, difference, detection, and re-manipulation. In short, something needs to sense and to make sense of sense. Craig Cheers -Original Message- From: Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au javascript: To: everything-list everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript: Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 5:15 pm Subject: Re: Is information physical? On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:01:51PM -0500, spudb...@aol.com javascript:wrote: Not to be a dick, but is not information or data perforations, and pulses, in mater and energy? This is how we recognize information from background noise, correct? Is there a third state of reality that is not matter or energy? Only when interpreted by an observer. An electrical circuit has only voltages and currents, not bits. To an observer, a voltage on a data line might be interpreted as 1 if it is greater than 3V, and zero if it is less than 1V. In between those two thresholds, the voltage might be determinate, but the information is not. The third state, as you call it, is a semantically different picture where things are described in terms of whether some physical state is the same as, or different from, some other physical state, according to the interpretation of an observer. From that, comes bits, and all the other information-based quantities. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpc...@hpcoders.com.aujavascript: University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.comjavascript:. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.comjavascript:. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpc...@hpcoders.com.aujavascript: University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrot information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. And that is a necessary consequence of computationalism, but this leads to the explicit problem of justifying physics from arithmetic or Turing equivalent. Perhaps it's a difference in degree not of kind, when the properties of stuff becomes rich and complex enough we start referring to it as physical not mathematical. Most would say that a pie chart is mathematical but an apple pie is physical, but other than the fact that one is enormously more complex than the other it's difficult to pin down a fundamental difference between the two. And what about the memory of a apple pie you saw last week, is that mathematical or physical? If Darwin's ideas were even close to being correct then we know that the sensation we experience when we remember last week's apple pie could almost certainly be duplicated on a Turing Machine, and that is mathematical. And all the apple pies you've ever experienced come from the past, it's just that some are more recent than others, again a difference in degree not of kind. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Friday, February 28, 2014 8:54:19 PM UTC, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edga...@att.netjavascript: wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark He's so not as cool as me. I'm like - antiques dealing is not for me. But tracking down rare antiquities in a bashed up fedora I will so like do -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
If one can believe TV shows, antiques dealers are a bunch of rogues hoping to fleece old dears out of a fortune by giving them a tiny payout for some valuable item they've kept in the attic for decades and don't realise the true value of. On 2 March 2014 12:34, ghib...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, February 28, 2014 8:54:19 PM UTC, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edga...@att.net wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark He's so not as cool as me. I'm like - antiques dealing is not for me. But tracking down rare antiquities in a bashed up fedora I will so like do -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
Liz, Well, we already know we get your knowledge of physics from TV shows so why not your knowledge, or lack thereof, of other subjects as well? :-) And you should really learn the difference between antiques and antiquities. You just display your continuing dismal ignorance by confusing them... Edgar On Saturday, March 1, 2014 7:08:00 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: If one can believe TV shows, antiques dealers are a bunch of rogues hoping to fleece old dears out of a fortune by giving them a tiny payout for some valuable item they've kept in the attic for decades and don't realise the true value of. On 2 March 2014 12:34, ghi...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: On Friday, February 28, 2014 8:54:19 PM UTC, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edga...@att.net wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark He's so not as cool as me. I'm like - antiques dealing is not for me. But tracking down rare antiquities in a bashed up fedora I will so like do -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.comjavascript: . Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On 27 February 2014 21:35, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: When I last took a look at constructor theory, it wasn't much of a theory. I know David's been working on it, when he's not doing the chat show circuit, but hadn't heard any major development in it announced, so haven't taken another look. Do you have any papers on it? This is the most recent, I think: http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.7439 He says the paper is philosophical rather than technical. David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
All, In the computational theory of reality I present in my book, information is not physical, but it is real and is the fundamental component of reality, Information is what computes physicality, or more accurately what is interpreted as physicality in the minds of organismic beings in their personal simulations of reality. Yet this information does need a substrate in which to manifest. This substrate is simply the existence space of reality itself, what I call ontological energy, which is not a physical energy, but simply the locus (non-dimensional) of the presence of reality, the living happening of being. A good way to visualize this is that ontological energy is like a perfectly still sea of water, and the various waves, currents, eddies etc. that can arise within the water are all the forms of information that make up and compute the universe. They have no substance of their own other than the underlying water (existence) in which they arise. And of course the nature of water determines what forms can arise within it just as the underlying nature of existence determines the types of information forms that can arise within our universe. In this theory EVERYTHING without exception is information only. It is only abstract computationally interacting forms that continually compute the current information state of the universe. In fact, if one observes reality with trained eyes, one can actually directly observe that the only thing out there is just various kinds of information. After all ANYTHING that is observable is by definition information. Only information is observable, ONLY information exists... It is the fact that this information exists in the actual realm of existence that makes it real and actual and enables it to compute a real information universe. Edgar On Thursday, February 27, 2014 8:34:32 AM UTC-5, David Nyman wrote: http://edge.org/conversation/constructor-theory I don't recall if the list has discussed these ideas of David Deutsch recently. The link is to an Edge interview in which he discusses his view that mathematicians are mistaken if they believe that information or computation are purely abstract objects. He says that both are in fact physical, but to justify that assertion we may need deeper principles of physics than the existing ones. He proposes constructor theory as a candidate. Implications for comp (or anything else for that matter)? David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On 27 February 2014 22:22, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: Only when interpreted by an observer. An electrical circuit has only voltages and currents, not bits. To an observer, a voltage on a data line might be interpreted as 1 if it is greater than 3V, and zero if it is less than 1V. In between those two thresholds, the voltage might be determinate, but the information is not. AFAICT observers don't seem central to constructor theory - it seems to be (or aims at being) an objective theory from which everything else of relevance will be emergent. From what I remember of the topic in FOR, David isn't an avowed eliminativist on consciousness but on the whole seems content to sideline it as a subsidiary problem for psychologists. That said, do you feel that his information-is-physical position, even in the case that physics-is-construction, is in effect crypto-eliminativism? David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
Ok, Thanks. We're back to the Observer again, where all things are decided at the quantum. From here on the questions tumble forth as a cascade, on whether the Observer is conscious, who is the Observer, what is the Observer? -Original Message- From: Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 5:15 pm Subject: Re: Is information physical? On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:01:51PM -0500, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Not to be a dick, but is not information or data perforations, and pulses, in mater and energy? This is how we recognize information from background noise, correct? Is there a third state of reality that is not matter or energy? Only when interpreted by an observer. An electrical circuit has only voltages and currents, not bits. To an observer, a voltage on a data line might be interpreted as 1 if it is greater than 3V, and zero if it is less than 1V. In between those two thresholds, the voltage might be determinate, but the information is not. The third state, as you call it, is a semantically different picture where things are described in terms of whether some physical state is the same as, or different from, some other physical state, according to the interpretation of an observer. From that, comes bits, and all the other information-based quantities. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
Spud, Based on a computational universe all things are just information states. Thus computational changes to any information state constitutes a generic experience (what I call an Xperience). Thus any information state is in effect a generic observer. This is a neat and useful definition because then human observers are seen as just special cases of a universal phenomenon and we neatly incorporate observers as an essential aspect of reality. We can then even view the universe as consisting of Xperience only. Edgar On Friday, February 28, 2014 10:51:00 AM UTC-5, spudb...@aol.com wrote: Ok, Thanks. We're back to the Observer again, where all things are decided at the quantum. From here on the questions tumble forth as a cascade, on whether the Observer is conscious, who is the Observer, what is the Observer? -Original Message- From: Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au javascript: To: everything-list everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript: Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 5:15 pm Subject: Re: Is information physical? On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:01:51PM -0500, spudb...@aol.com javascript: wrote: Not to be a dick, but is not information or data perforations, and pulses, in mater and energy? This is how we recognize information from background noise, correct? Is there a third state of reality that is not matter or energy? Only when interpreted by an observer. An electrical circuit has only voltages and currents, not bits. To an observer, a voltage on a data line might be interpreted as 1 if it is greater than 3V, and zero if it is less than 1V. In between those two thresholds, the voltage might be determinate, but the information is not. The third state, as you call it, is a semantically different picture where things are described in terms of whether some physical state is the same as, or different from, some other physical state, according to the interpretation of an observer. From that, comes bits, and all the other information-based quantities. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpc...@hpcoders.com.au javascript: University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com javascript:. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com javascript:. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On 28 Feb 2014, at 13:09, David Nyman wrote: On 27 February 2014 21:35, Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au wrote: When I last took a look at constructor theory, it wasn't much of a theory. I know David's been working on it, when he's not doing the chat show circuit, but hadn't heard any major development in it announced, so haven't taken another look. Do you have any papers on it? This is the most recent, I think: http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.7439 He says the paper is philosophical rather than technical. I agree on that. When scientists says this, it means they want to abandon rigor and scientific method. Might take closer look later, but if his point is correct, it should be testable, and would probably refute comp or put our level in the very very low. Or require a small physical universe, and an error in MGA. Bruno David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
Surely information is an emergent concept, like entropy? Hence it isn't physical, because the physical MAY be fundamental - but even if it isn't, it's at a lower level than information. It might happen to turn out that information underlies the physical - it from bit - but that would not be what we normally consider information (i.e. the stuff that has meaning to us, stored in books and computers and minds) I think. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
John, I agree that the substrate that information manifests in is NOT physical, it is abstract in the sense of no physicality. But the information that constitutes the universe is REAL, so the substrate it exists within is the real actual presence of existence itself. That's what brings it to life and makes it real and actual... And yes that's me. Thanks for your kind comment! Edgar On Friday, February 28, 2014 3:54:19 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edga...@att.netjavascript: wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Friday, February 28, 2014 5:04:29 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: John, I agree that the substrate that information manifests in is NOT physical, it is abstract in the sense of no physicality. But the information that constitutes the universe is REAL, so the substrate it exists within is the real actual presence of existence itself. That's what brings it to life and makes it real and actual... If the real actual presence of 'existence' itself is what brings information to life and makes it real and actual, why isn't that substrate what we call physics and what REALLY constitutes the universe? If information cannot be or do anything without the substrate, then how can we say that information is the important part? And yes that's me. Thanks for your kind comment! Edgar On Friday, February 28, 2014 3:54:19 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edga...@att.net wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
Craig, I'm not exactly sure what you mean here. The substrate is itself formless (somewhat analogous to the concept of Tao). Within that arises all the forms whose computational interactions compute the current state of the universe. These computations compute on the basis of the laws of nature which in this model are just as much a part of reality as the information states they compute. So what we call physics is how humans mentally model and try to understand this system in terms of their H-math. Or if you wanted you could say that R-computations are the actual R-physics to distinguish that from H-physics. Edgar On Friday, February 28, 2014 5:34:10 PM UTC-5, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Friday, February 28, 2014 5:04:29 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: John, I agree that the substrate that information manifests in is NOT physical, it is abstract in the sense of no physicality. But the information that constitutes the universe is REAL, so the substrate it exists within is the real actual presence of existence itself. That's what brings it to life and makes it real and actual... If the real actual presence of 'existence' itself is what brings information to life and makes it real and actual, why isn't that substrate what we call physics and what REALLY constitutes the universe? If information cannot be or do anything without the substrate, then how can we say that information is the important part? And yes that's me. Thanks for your kind comment! Edgar On Friday, February 28, 2014 3:54:19 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edga...@att.net wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Friday, February 28, 2014 7:30:22 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Craig, I'm not exactly sure what you mean here. The substrate is itself formless (somewhat analogous to the concept of Tao). Within that arises all the forms whose computational interactions compute the current state of the universe. Then the substrate is not formless, is all trans-formal. All forms are produced, preserved, and dissolved within it, through it, for it, etc. The substrate is sense - the capacity for appreciation and participation which records itself as form. Information is what sense does and knows, not what it is and experiences. These computations compute on the basis of the laws of nature which in this model are just as much a part of reality as the information states they compute. If the substrate is sense, then you don't need to have laws of nature. Sense is intrinsically sensible. It acts lawfully as well as spontaneously and creatively. It cheats at its own rules and then pretends to forget that it cheated. So what we call physics is how humans mentally model and try to understand this system in terms of their H-math. Or if you wanted you could say that R-computations are the actual R-physics to distinguish that from H-physics. I agree, but I'm saying that what we call information is how humans mentally model and try to understand how the system is measured in terms of their H-Math. The R is not physics or computation, it is aesthetic participation. R-Math is a silhouette of that which we mistake for the essence. Math is not the essence of consciousness or presence, it is the essence of distance and absence. Craig Edgar On Friday, February 28, 2014 5:34:10 PM UTC-5, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Friday, February 28, 2014 5:04:29 PM UTC-5, Edgar L. Owen wrote: John, I agree that the substrate that information manifests in is NOT physical, it is abstract in the sense of no physicality. But the information that constitutes the universe is REAL, so the substrate it exists within is the real actual presence of existence itself. That's what brings it to life and makes it real and actual... If the real actual presence of 'existence' itself is what brings information to life and makes it real and actual, why isn't that substrate what we call physics and what REALLY constitutes the universe? If information cannot be or do anything without the substrate, then how can we say that information is the important part? And yes that's me. Thanks for your kind comment! Edgar On Friday, February 28, 2014 3:54:19 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edga...@att.net wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:51:00AM -0500, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Ok, Thanks. We're back to the Observer again, where all things are decided at the quantum. From here on the questions tumble forth as a cascade, on whether the Observer is conscious, who is the Observer, what is the Observer? Interesting questions, to be sure, but all quite irrelevant to information theory. All an observer needs to do for information theory is detect a difference (that makes a difference). Cheers -Original Message- From: Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 5:15 pm Subject: Re: Is information physical? On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:01:51PM -0500, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Not to be a dick, but is not information or data perforations, and pulses, in mater and energy? This is how we recognize information from background noise, correct? Is there a third state of reality that is not matter or energy? Only when interpreted by an observer. An electrical circuit has only voltages and currents, not bits. To an observer, a voltage on a data line might be interpreted as 1 if it is greater than 3V, and zero if it is less than 1V. In between those two thresholds, the voltage might be determinate, but the information is not. The third state, as you call it, is a semantically different picture where things are described in terms of whether some physical state is the same as, or different from, some other physical state, according to the interpretation of an observer. From that, comes bits, and all the other information-based quantities. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On 28 Feb 2014, at 21:54, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Edgar L. Owen edgaro...@att.net wrote: information does need a substrate in which to manifest. That seems to be the case but perhaps not at the very lowest level. The integers are abstract things that aren't made of anything except other numbers and once you describe how they interact with other mathematical objects you've said all there is to say about them. In the same way in string theory the strings aren't made of anything and they have reality only in how they interact with other strings; so perhaps at the fundamental level reality not only can be described mathematically but actually IS mathematical. And that is a necessary consequence of computationalism, but this leads to the explicit problem of justifying physics from arithmetic or Turing equivalent. The math confirms this. Bruno On a completely different subject, are you Edgar Owen the antiquities dealer? If so you have a pretty cool job. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
Deutsch cites the discovery of the neutrino as an application of energy conservation, but he doesn't seem to notice that energy conservation is simply a consequence of requiring that our theories by time-translation invariant. It's exactly the kind of impossibility restriction he hopes to get from constructor theory and the example shows it is a restriction we impose, because we don't want theories tied to specific times. Brent On 2/27/2014 5:34 AM, David Nyman wrote: http://edge.org/conversation/constructor-theory I don't recall if the list has discussed these ideas of David Deutsch recently. The link is to an Edge interview in which he discusses his view that mathematicians are mistaken if they believe that information or computation are purely abstract objects. He says that both are in fact physical, but to justify that assertion we may need deeper principles of physics than the existing ones. He proposes constructor theory as a candidate. Implications for comp (or anything else for that matter)? David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 01:34:32PM +, David Nyman wrote: http://edge.org/conversation/constructor-theory I don't recall if the list has discussed these ideas of David Deutsch recently. The link is to an Edge interview in which he discusses his view that mathematicians are mistaken if they believe that information or computation are purely abstract objects. He says that both are in fact physical, but to justify that assertion we may need deeper principles of physics than the existing ones. He proposes constructor theory as a candidate. Implications for comp (or anything else for that matter)? When I last took a look at constructor theory, it wasn't much of a theory. I know David's been working on it, when he's not doing the chat show circuit, but hadn't heard any major development in it announced, so haven't taken another look. Do you have any papers on it? AFAICT, physical information is really talking about the fact that information has physical consequences, such as heat dissipation and entropy change. But if you consider that statistical physics can be completely formulated in terms of information theory, that is not surprising. But in terms of micro-physics, ie the reversible stuff described by classical, unitary quantum or relativistic physics, concepts such as entropy and information are meaningless. And once you do add these concepts, all you are doing is expanding physics to describe observers, the process of observation, and abstract things like semantics. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
Not to be a dick, but is not information or data perforations, and pulses, in mater and energy? This is how we recognize information from background noise, correct? Is there a third state of reality that is not matter or energy? -Original Message- From: Russell Standish li...@hpcoders.com.au To: everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Thu, Feb 27, 2014 4:28 pm Subject: Re: Is information physical? On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 01:34:32PM +, David Nyman wrote: http://edge.org/conversation/constructor-theory I don't recall if the list has discussed these ideas of David Deutsch recently. The link is to an Edge interview in which he discusses his view that mathematicians are mistaken if they believe that information or computation are purely abstract objects. He says that both are in fact physical, but to justify that assertion we may need deeper principles of physics than the existing ones. He proposes constructor theory as a candidate. Implications for comp (or anything else for that matter)? When I last took a look at constructor theory, it wasn't much of a theory. I know David's been working on it, when he's not doing the chat show circuit, but hadn't heard any major development in it announced, so haven't taken another look. Do you have any papers on it? AFAICT, physical information is really talking about the fact that information has physical consequences, such as heat dissipation and entropy change. But if you consider that statistical physics can be completely formulated in terms of information theory, that is not surprising. But in terms of micro-physics, ie the reversible stuff described by classical, unitary quantum or relativistic physics, concepts such as entropy and information are meaningless. And once you do add these concepts, all you are doing is expanding physics to describe observers, the process of observation, and abstract things like semantics. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:01:51PM -0500, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Not to be a dick, but is not information or data perforations, and pulses, in mater and energy? This is how we recognize information from background noise, correct? Is there a third state of reality that is not matter or energy? Only when interpreted by an observer. An electrical circuit has only voltages and currents, not bits. To an observer, a voltage on a data line might be interpreted as 1 if it is greater than 3V, and zero if it is less than 1V. In between those two thresholds, the voltage might be determinate, but the information is not. The third state, as you call it, is a semantically different picture where things are described in terms of whether some physical state is the same as, or different from, some other physical state, according to the interpretation of an observer. From that, comes bits, and all the other information-based quantities. -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Is information physical?
On 2/27/2014 1:35 PM, Russell Standish wrote: On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 01:34:32PM +, David Nyman wrote: http://edge.org/conversation/constructor-theory I don't recall if the list has discussed these ideas of David Deutsch recently. The link is to an Edge interview in which he discusses his view that mathematicians are mistaken if they believe that information or computation are purely abstract objects. He says that both are in fact physical, but to justify that assertion we may need deeper principles of physics than the existing ones. He proposes constructor theory as a candidate. Implications for comp (or anything else for that matter)? When I last took a look at constructor theory, it wasn't much of a theory. I know David's been working on it, when he's not doing the chat show circuit, but hadn't heard any major development in it announced, so haven't taken another look. Do you have any papers on it? AFAICT, physical information is really talking about the fact that information has physical consequences, such as heat dissipation and entropy change. But if you consider that statistical physics can be completely formulated in terms of information theory, that is not surprising. But in terms of micro-physics, ie the reversible stuff described by classical, unitary quantum or relativistic physics, concepts such as entropy and information are meaningless. And once you do add these concepts, all you are doing is expanding physics to describe observers, the process of observation, and abstract things like semantics. An expansion not to be sneezed at. :-) Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
RE: Is information physical?
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 05:01:51PM -0500, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: Not to be a dick, but is not information or data perforations, and pulses, in mater and energy? This is how we recognize information from background noise, correct? Is there a third state of reality that is not matter or energy? Only when interpreted by an observer. An electrical circuit has only voltages and currents, not bits. To an observer, a voltage on a data line might be interpreted as 1 if it is greater than 3V, and zero if it is less than 1V. In between those two thresholds, the voltage might be determinate, but the information is not. The third state, as you call it, is a semantically different picture where things are described in terms of whether some physical state is the same as, or different from, some other physical state, according to the interpretation of an observer. From that, comes bits, and all the other information-based quantities. Perhaps one could say it is a meta-system that exists upon an underlying system (more like a truly vast assemblage of such discreet systems). The information exists only for those observers able to interpret the meaning of the current state of this set of nodes comprising the system. An observer who ignored, or was ignorant of the meaning encoded by the pattern would perceive no information. Only the sub-set of observers who could interpret the meta-significance of the particular ordering and sequence of states would be able to access this meta-system existing on top of a (potentially dynamic) pattern of states encoded in some underlying system. Chris -- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics hpco...@hpcoders.com.au University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
