Re: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

[Koichiro Matsuno]

At 4:00 AM 06/27/2015, John Collier wrote:

 

I also see no reason that Bateson’s difference that makes a difference needs to 
involve meaning at either end.

 

[KM] Right.  The phrase saying “a difference that makes a difference” must be a 
prototypical example of second-order logic in that the difference appearing 
both in the subject and predicate can accept quantification. Most statements 
framed in second-order logic  are not decidable. In order to make them 
decidable or meaningful, some qualifier must definitely be needed. A popular 
example of such a qualifier is a subjective observer. However, the point is 
that the subjective observer is not limited to Alice or Bob in the QBist 
parlance. 

 

   Koichiro

 

 

 

___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

[Loet Leydesdorff]

Koichiro: “In order to make them decidable or meaningful, some qualifier must 
definitely be needed. A popular example of such a qualifier is a subjective 
observer.”

 

“A difference that makes a difference” for a qualifier, thus requires 
specification of: 

1.  The first difference; 

2.  The second difference; 

3.  The qualifier (e.g., the observer).

 

The first difference can be measured using Shannon-type information, since a 
probability distribution can be considered as a set of (first-order) 
differences. Brillouin tried to specify the second difference as a ΔH. ΔH can 
also be negative (“negentropy”). But how does one proceed to the measurement?

 

Best, 

Loet

 

  _  

Loet Leydesdorff 

Emeritus University of Amsterdam
Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)

  l...@leydesdorff.net ;  
 http://www.leydesdorff.net/ 
Honorary Professor,   SPRU, University of 
Sussex; 

Guest Professor   Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 
Visiting Professor,   ISTIC, Beijing;

Visiting Professor,   Birkbeck, University of London; 

  
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJ&hl=en

 

From: Fis [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Koichiro Matsuno
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 9:04 AM
To: 'John Collier'; 'fis'
Subject: Re: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

 

At 4:00 AM 06/27/2015, John Collier wrote:

 

I also see no reason that Bateson’s difference that makes a difference needs to 
involve meaning at either end.

 

[KM] Right.  The phrase saying “a difference that makes a difference” must be a 
prototypical example of second-order logic in that the difference appearing 
both in the subject and predicate can accept quantification. Most statements 
framed in second-order logic  are not decidable. In order to make them 
decidable or meaningful, some qualifier must definitely be needed. A popular 
example of such a qualifier is a subjective observer. However, the point is 
that the subjective observer is not limited to Alice or Bob in the QBist 
parlance. 

 

   Koichiro

 

 

 

___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] QM and information

[Steven Ericsson-Zenith]

> On Jun 26, 2015, at 10:02 PM, Andrei Khrennikov  
> wrote:
> Life is hard... I am afraid that it is impossible to put this qualifier in 
> front "information" used in recent information approaches to quantum 
> mechanics. 
> For Zeilinger and Brukner (this is my private impression from private 
> discussions), information so to say "exists" in nature so to say by itself, 
> it seems it is "meaningless", however, to apply quantum theory an OBSERVER 
> has to appear at the scene, information here is PRIVATE INFORMATION of 
> observer.

I do not know what to call your model here other than Solipsism. It certainly 
has nothing to do with Information Theory or Information Science. Indeed, it is 
unrecognizable I suggest to anyone associated with epistemology or the study of 
Logic in its broadest sense, except to give it that label. Indeed, it further 
affirms an increasing conviction that the discipline of physics has abandoned 
all good reason.


> The same happens in QBism of Fuchs and Mermin (this is again my private 
> impression from private discussions), they start with interpreting the wave 
> function as representing 
> subjective probability about possible results of measurements, but privately 
> they speak about Nature producing chance and hence information.
> 
> see also arxiv.org/pdf/1503.02515v1.pdf section 3.2, in particular, one 
> important citation of Fuchs.
> 
> All this can be disappointing, but it works; quantum people want to say: we 
> do not know what is information 
> but when we get it we immediately understand that this is it. 

Not just disappointing but entirely fanciful. I cannot imagine that “it works” 
in any material sense or in any purely mathematical sense. 

Regards,
Steven


___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

[John Collier]

Sorry Loet, but I just don't see the need for an observer. I do think the 
difference must be by something to something (perhaps the same thing) but 
Koichiro's formulation implies this.  Again, I warn against unneeded 
complication.


Sent from Samsung Mobile


 Original message 
From: Loet Leydesdorff
Date:27/06/2015 10:00 (GMT+02:00)
To: 'Koichiro Matsuno' ,John Collier ,'fis'
Subject: RE: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

Koichiro: "In order to make them decidable or meaningful, some qualifier must 
definitely be needed. A popular example of such a qualifier is a subjective 
observer."

"A difference that makes a difference" for a qualifier, thus requires 
specification of:

1.  The first difference;

2.  The second difference;

3.  The qualifier (e.g., the observer).

The first difference can be measured using Shannon-type information, since a 
probability distribution can be considered as a set of (first-order) 
differences. Brillouin tried to specify the second difference as a ?H. ?H can 
also be negative ("negentropy"). But how does one proceed to the measurement?

Best,
Loet


Loet Leydesdorff
Emeritus University of Amsterdam
Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)
l...@leydesdorff.net  ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/
Honorary Professor, SPRU,  University of Sussex;
Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ., Hangzhou; 
Visiting Professor, ISTIC,  Beijing;
Visiting Professor, Birkbeck, University of London;
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJ&hl=en

From: Fis [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Koichiro Matsuno
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 9:04 AM
To: 'John Collier'; 'fis'
Subject: Re: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

At 4:00 AM 06/27/2015, John Collier wrote:

I also see no reason that Bateson's difference that makes a difference needs to 
involve meaning at either end.

[KM] Right.  The phrase saying "a difference that makes a difference" must be a 
prototypical example of second-order logic in that the difference appearing 
both in the subject and predicate can accept quantification. Most statements 
framed in second-order logic  are not decidable. In order to make them 
decidable or meaningful, some qualifier must definitely be needed. A popular 
example of such a qualifier is a subjective observer. However, the point is 
that the subjective observer is not limited to Alice or Bob in the QBist 
parlance.

   Koichiro



___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

[Loet Leydesdorff]

From: John Collier [mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za] 
Sent: Saturday, June 27, 2015 11:10 AM
To: l...@leydesdorff.net; 'Koichiro Matsuno'; 'fis'
Subject: Re: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

 

Sorry Loet, but I just don't see the need for an observer. I do think the
difference must be by something to something (perhaps the same thing) but
Koichiro's formulation implies this.  Again, I warn against unneeded
complication. 

 

 

Sent from Samsung Mobile


OK. Let's get rid of Koichiro's observer. Remains the need to specify: 

1.  The first difference; 

2.  The second difference; 

 

The first difference can be measured using Shannon-type information, since a
probability distribution can be considered as a set of (first-order)
differences. Brillouin tried to specify the second difference as a ΔH. ΔH
can also be negative ("negentropy"). But how does one proceed to the
measurement?

 

Best, 

Loet

 

PS. I apologize to Pedro if this is beyond my second posting. I'll shut up. 

I needed to correct the misunderstanding as if the observer would be
important to me. L.

 

___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] It-from-Bit and information interpretation of QM

[Koichiro Matsuno]

At 6:19 PM 06/27/2015, Loet Leydersdorff wrote:

 

Remains the need to specify: 

1.  The first difference [cf. Shannon's information bits]; 

2.  The second difference [cf. Brillouin's negentropy]; 

 

[KM] Loet, if you stick to first-order logic, there would be no need for
recruiting an observer for the decidable theoretical edifice. Both Shannon's
information and Brillouin's information-cum-thermodynamics belong to
first-order logic as implying that the distinction between the existential
quantifier and the universal one applies only to the subject. The role of
measurement in first-order logic is at most secondary and no more than
confirming the theoretical predictions.  However, if you consider the
difference making a difference making a further difference ad infinitum, the
resulting proposition would be of the type following at the least
second-order logic in the sense that quantification would also apply to the
predicate. If one further wants to see a proposition of second-order logic
decidable, some qualifier would have to be implemented of course naturally.
That natural aspect would make biology quite unique in the material world.
This has been my second for this week. 

 

   Koichiro

 

 

 

___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis