Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)

2016-10-15 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 14 Oct 2016, at 16:16, Dai Griffiths wrote: To trying to answer this question, I find myself asking "Do patterns exist without an observer?". Would 2+2=4 be true without the big bang occurring? Of course this depend on the fundamental theory chosen. With a physicalist theory, it is

Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)

2016-10-15 Thread Jose Javier Blanco Rivero
Dear Fis members, I have followed with interest the discussion and I have not intervened until now since I am just a beginner in information theory. But from my background in systems theory (Luhmann) and intellectual history, the questions raised here are familiar to me. Louis has differentiated

Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)

2016-10-14 Thread Louis H Kauffman
Dear Dai, Consider the pattern .142857142857142857142857142857142857142857… In our world of observers and technology, this pattern is constructed so that it can be transmitted verbatim by this computer system to you. No meaning is transmitted, just the list of numbers. Even the fact that the

Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)

2016-10-14 Thread John Collier
ca/collier > -Original Message- > From: Fis [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Dai Griffiths > Sent: Friday, 14 October 2016 4:16 PM > To: fis@listas.unizar.es > Subject: Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark) > > To trying to answer this que

Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)

2016-10-14 Thread Dai Griffiths
To trying to answer this question, I find myself asking "Do patterns exist without an observer?". A number of familiar problems then re-emerge, which blur my ability to distinguish between foreground and background. Dai On 13/10/16 11:32, Karl Javorszky wrote: Do patterns contain

Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)

2016-10-13 Thread Karl Javorszky
Theology and Information Once again, Bruno has put his finger on the central point of interest: it is irrelevant, what we call the problem, the subject-matter remains the same over the generations. In times long gone, thinkers have called the same problems THEOLOGICAL questions, because it was

Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)

2016-10-11 Thread Loet Leydesdorff
Dear Mark and colleagues, Loet, clearly the redundancy is apophatic, although one has to be cautious in saying this: the domain of the apophatic is bigger than the domain of Shannon redundancy. At some point in the future we may do better in developing measurement techniques for 'surprise' in

Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)

2016-10-10 Thread PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ
De: Mark Johnson [johnsonm...@gmail.com], Dear Dai, Rafael, Loet and all, Thank you for your comments - the theological connection interests me because it potentially presents a paradigm of a more vulnerable and open dialogue. Loet, clearly the