Dear Mark:
Do we want to defend a definition of meaning which is tied to
scientific practice as we know it? Would that be too narrow? Ours may
not be the only way of doing science...
I meant my remarks analytically. You provide them with a normative turn
as defensive against alternative ways o
Hello Sung and Arturo. Entropy is a measure of disorder and ΔS > 0. If entropy
is zero at T = 0 K because there is no disorder at T = absolute zero then
entropy can only increase from T = 0 K. If that is the case how can entropy
ever be negative?
Arturo asked me to share a private email I sent
Hi Arturo,
I agree. Engtropy can be negative MATHEMATICALLY, as Shroedinger assumed.
But what I am claiming is that that may be a mathematical artifact, since,
according to the Third Law of Thermodynamics, therer is no negative entropy.
All the best.
Sung
1. A historic parallel: a cultural handicap
We are at Mendel again. There is an unmistakable parallel between a single
person trying to drive attention of members of a learned society to general
rules and principles that are discernible on multitudes of objects in the 19
th century and a single
Dear Loet,
When you say "distinguishing between the information content and the meaning of
a message requires a discourse" this is, I think, a position regarding what
scientific discourse does. There are, of course, competing descriptions of what
scientific discourse does. Does your "meaning"
While I sometimes feel as if I speak a different language than many of you, I
believe that my initial notes for a book on creativity may shed some light on
the ongoing current discussion. Simply put, information is what a machine has
the capacity to produce. However, a machine cannot produce m
Dear Terry and colleagues,
"Language is rather the special case, the most unusual communicative
adaptation to ever have evolved, and one that grows out of and depends
on informationa/semiotic capacities shared with other species and with
biology in general."
Let me try to argue in favor of "me
