[Fis] Fwd: Re[2]: Heretic

2017-10-04 Thread tozziarturo
 Messaggio inoltrato 
Da:  tozziart...@libero.it A: Alex Hankey  alexhan...@gmail.com Data: 
mercoledì, 04 ottobre 2017, 07:37PM +02:00
Oggetto: Re[2]: [Fis] Heretic

>Dear Prof. Hankey,
>I come from a free country, where everybody can say his own opinion, in 
>particular if his opinion is not totally stupid.  
>The times of Giordano Bruno and Inquisition are gone.  
>
>--
>Inviato da Libero Mail per Android mercoledì, 04 ottobre 2017, 06:20PM +02:00 
>da Alex Hankey  alexhan...@gmail.com :
>
>>Dear Professor Tozzi, 
>>
>>Might I suggest that you graciously retire from the list, 
>>as you evidently do not wish to participate in what 
>>the rest of us find fascinating topics of discussion. 
>>
>>As a physicist, I have no difficulty in relating to the concept of 
>>'information',
>>and I am aware of no less than five conceptually totally different 
>>mathematical structures, all of which merit the name, 'information'.
>>
>>With all good wishes, 
>>
>>Alex Hankey 
>>
>>
>>On 4 October 2017 at 02:30,  < tozziart...@libero.it > wrote:
>>>Dear FISers,
>>>After the provided long list of completely different definitions of the term 
>>>"information", one conclusion is clear: there is not a scientific, unique 
>>>definition of information.
>>>Nobody of us is able to provide an operative framework and a single (just 
>>>one!) empirical  testable prevision able to assess "information".  
>>>For example, what does "semantics" and "meaning" mean, in empirical terms?
>>>Therefore, to talk about information is meaningless, in the carnapian sense. 
>>> 
>>>Judging from your answers, the most of you are foremost scientists.  
>>>Therefore, my proposal is to forget about information, and to use your 
>>>otherwise very valuable skills and efforts in other fields.
>>>It is a waste of your  precious time to focus yourself in something that is 
>>>so vague.  It is, retrospectively, a mistake to state that the world is 
>>>information, if nobody knows what does it mean.  
>>>--
>>>Inviato da Libero Mail per Android
>>>___
>>>Fis mailing list
>>>Fis@listas.unizar.es
>>>http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-- 
>>Alex Hankey M.A. (Cantab.) PhD (M.I.T.)
>>Distinguished Professor of Yoga and Physical Science,
>>SVYASA, Eknath Bhavan, 19 Gavipuram Circle
>>Bangalore 560019, Karnataka, India  
>>Mobile (Intn'l): +44 7710 534195 
>>Mobile (India) +91 900 800 8789
>>
>>
>>2015 JPBMB Special Issue on Integral Biomathics: Life Sciences, Mathematics 
>>and Phenomenological Philosophy
>>___
>>Fis mailing list
>>Fis@listas.unizar.es
>>http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
___
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis


Re: [Fis] Heretic

2017-10-04 Thread Alex Hankey
Dear Professor Tozzi,

Might I suggest that you graciously retire from the list,
as you evidently do not wish to participate in what
the rest of us find fascinating topics of discussion.

As a physicist, I have no difficulty in relating to the concept of
'information',
and I am aware of no less than five conceptually totally different
mathematical structures, all of which merit the name, 'information'.

With all good wishes,

Alex Hankey


On 4 October 2017 at 02:30,  wrote:

> Dear FISers,
> After the provided long list of completely different definitions of the
> term "information", one conclusion is clear: there is not a scientific,
> unique definition of information.
>
> Nobody of us is able to provide an operative framework and a single (just
> one!) empirical  testable prevision able to assess "information".
> For example, what does "semantics" and "meaning" mean, in empirical terms?
> Therefore, to talk about information is meaningless, in the carnapian
> sense.
>
> Judging from your answers, the most of you are foremost scientists.
> Therefore, my proposal is to forget about information, and to use your
> otherwise very valuable skills and efforts in other fields.
> It is a waste of your  precious time to focus yourself in something that
> is so vague.  It is, retrospectively, a mistake to state that the world is
> information, if nobody knows what does it mean.
>
> --
> Inviato da Libero Mail per Android
>
> ___
> Fis mailing list
> Fis@listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
>


-- 
Alex Hankey M.A. (Cantab.) PhD (M.I.T.)
Distinguished Professor of Yoga and Physical Science,
SVYASA, Eknath Bhavan, 19 Gavipuram Circle
Bangalore 560019, Karnataka, India
Mobile (Intn'l): +44 7710 534195
Mobile (India) +91 900 800 8789


2015 JPBMB Special Issue on Integral Biomathics: Life Sciences, Mathematics
and Phenomenological Philosophy

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


Re: [Fis] (no subject)

2017-10-04 Thread ZouXiaohui
> Dear Fiser??

   It is possible to formalize what is information (phenomena, essence and 
ontology) with the simplest symbolic system.




??0??1??

??00??01??10??11??

??000??001,111??

??






   1.

 "Ecological Characteristics of Information and Its Scientific Research" has 
been published in Proceedings and is available online:

> Abstract: http://www.mdpi.com/2504-3900/1/3/59/

> PDF Version: http://www.mdpi.com/2504-3900/1/3/59/pdf

>  

   2.

 "Fundamental Law of Information: Proved by Both Numbers and Characters in 
Conjugate Matrices " has been published in Proceedings and is available online:

> Abstract: http://www.mdpi.com/2504-3900/1/3/60/

> PDF Version: http://www.mdpi.com/2504-3900/1/3/60/pdf



iPhone

-- Original --
From: ZouXiaohui <949309...@qq.com>
Date: ,10?? 4,2017 10:43 
To: fis 
Cc: 949309225 <949309...@qq.com>,  ?? <407167...@qq.com>
Subject: Re: [Fis]



 Dear Pedro and Joseph, Dear FISers,
Physical information; 
Psychological information; 
Mathematical information; 
The difference between the above phenomenon of information and its essence is 
the difference between the ancient??modern and the contemporary focus.

Best wishes,

 

Xiaohui ZOU 

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


Re: [Fis] (no subject)

2017-10-04 Thread ZouXiaohui
Dear Pedro and Joseph, Dear FISers,
Physical information; 
Psychological information; 
Mathematical information; 
The difference between the above phenomenon of information and its essence is 
the difference between the ancient??modern and the contemporary focus.

Best wishes,

 

Xiaohui ZOU 

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


Re: [Fis] Heretic

2017-10-04 Thread Dai Griffiths
Thanks Loet, for a very clear and concise exposition of an approach that 
I agree with.


I'm curious about your use of the word 'dualistic'. Dualism usually 
suggests that there are two aspects to a single phenomenon. As I 
interpret your post, you are saying that information and meaning are 
separate concepts. Otherwise, we are led to inquire into the nature of 
the unity of which they are both aspects, which gets us back where we 
started.


So I interpret 'dualistic' here to mean 'two concepts that are 
intertwined in the emergence of events'. Is this parallel to, for 
example, atomic structure and fluid dynamics (perhaps there are better 
examples)? If so, does that imply a hierarchy (i.e. you can have 
information without meaning, but not meaning without information)? This 
makes sense to me, though it is not what I usually associate with the 
word 'dualistic'.


Dai


On 04/10/17 08:16, Loet Leydesdorff wrote:


Nobody of us is able to provide an operative framework and a single 
(just one!) empirical  testable prevision able to assess "information".



Dear colleague,

One should not confuse the confusion on the list with the clarity of 
the concept information in information theory. This definition is 
operational (e.g., in bits). Your computer would not work without this 
definition (1 byte = 8 bits). The problem is that this definition of 
information as uncertainty is counter-intuitive.


The search for an intuitive definition of information has led to 
unclear definitions. In a recent book, Hidalgo (2015, at p. 165), for 
example, has defined “information” with reference “to the order 
embodied in codified sequences, such as those found in music or DNA, 
while /knowledge and knowhow /refer to the ability of a system to 
process information.” However, codified knowledge can be abstract 
and—like music—does not have to be “embodied” (e.g., Cowan, David, & 
Foray, 2000).


Beyond Hidalgo’s position, Floridi (2010, p. 21) proposed “a general 
definition of information” according to which “the well-formed data 
are /meaningful/” (italics of the author). Luhmann (1995, p. 67) 
posits that “all information has meaning.” In his opinion, information 
should therefore be considered as a selection mechanism. Kauffman et 
al. (2008, at p. 28) added to the confusion by defining information as 
“natural selection.”


Against these attempt to bring information and meaning under a single 
denominator--and to identify variation with selection--I argue for a 
dualistic perspective (as did Prof. Zhong in a previous email). 
Information and meaning should not be confounded. Meaning is generated 
from redundancies (Bateson, 1972, p. 420; Weaver, 1949; see 
Leydesdorff /et al./, 2017).


Best,
Loet

*References:*

Bateson, G. (1972). /Steps to an Ecology of Mind/. New York: Ballantine.

Cowan, R., David, P., & Foray, D. (2000). The Explicit Economics of 
Knowledge Codification and Tacitness. /Industrial and Corporate 
Change, 9/(2), 211-253.


Floridi, L. (2010). /Information: A very short introduction/. Oxford, 
UK: Oxford University Press.


Hidalgo, C. (2015). /Why Information Grows: The Evolution of Order, 
from Atoms to Economies/. New York: Basic Books.


Kauffman, S., Logan, R. K., Este, R., Goebel, R., Hobill, D., & 
Shmulevich, I. (2008). Propagating organization: an enquiry. /Biology 
and Philosophy, 23/(1), 27-45.


Leydesdorff, L., Johnson, M., & Ivanova, I. (2017). Toward a Calculus 
of Redundancy: Signification, Codification, and Anticipation in 
Cultural Evolution. 
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3030525 .


Luhmann, N. ([1984] 1995). /Social Systems/. Stanford, CA: Stanford 
University Press.


Weaver, W. (1949). Some Recent Contributions to the Mathematical 
Theory of Communication. In C. E. Shannon & W. Weaver (Eds.), /The 
Mathematical Theory of Communication/ (pp. 93-117.). Urbana: 
University of Illinois Press.





Loet Leydesdorff

Professor, University of Amsterdam
Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)

l...@leydesdorff.net ; 
http://www.leydesdorff.net/
Associate Faculty, SPRU, University of 
Sussex;


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


Visiting Fellow, Birkbeck , University of London;

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




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


--
-

Professor David (Dai) Griffiths
Professor of Education
School of Education and Psychology
The University of Bolton
Deane Road
Bolton, BL3 5AB

Office: T3 02
http://www.bolton.ac.uk/IEC

SKYPE: daigriffiths
UK Mobile +44 (0)7491151559
Spanish Mobile: + 34 

Re: [Fis] Heretic

2017-10-04 Thread Loet Leydesdorff
Nobody of us is able to provide an operative framework and a single 
(just one!) empirical  testable prevision able to assess "information".



Dear colleague,

One should not confuse the confusion on the list with the clarity of the 
concept information in information theory. This definition is 
operational (e.g., in bits). Your computer would not work without this 
definition (1 byte = 8 bits). The problem is that this definition of 
information as uncertainty is counter-intuitive.


The search for an intuitive definition of information has led to unclear 
definitions. In a recent book, Hidalgo (2015, at p. 165), for example, 
has defined “information” with reference “to the order embodied in 
codified sequences, such as those found in music or DNA, while knowledge 
and knowhow refer to the ability of a system to process information.” 
However, codified knowledge can be abstract and—like music—does not have 
to be “embodied” (e.g., Cowan, David, & Foray, 2000).


Beyond Hidalgo’s position, Floridi (2010, p. 21) proposed “a general 
definition of information” according to which “the well-formed data are 
meaningful” (italics of the author). Luhmann (1995, p. 67) posits that 
“all information has meaning.” In his opinion, information should 
therefore be considered as a selection mechanism. Kauffman et al. (2008, 
at p. 28) added to the confusion by defining information as “natural 
selection.”


Against these attempt to bring information and meaning under a single 
denominator--and to identify variation with selection--I argue for a 
dualistic perspective (as did Prof. Zhong in a previous email). 
Information and meaning should not be confounded. Meaning is generated 
from redundancies (Bateson, 1972, p. 420; Weaver, 1949; see Leydesdorff 
et al., 2017).


Best,
Loet

References:



Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York: Ballantine.

Cowan, R., David, P., & Foray, D. (2000). The Explicit Economics of 
Knowledge Codification and Tacitness. Industrial and Corporate Change, 
9(2), 211-253.


Floridi, L. (2010). Information: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: 
Oxford University Press.


Hidalgo, C. (2015). Why Information Grows: The Evolution of Order, from 
Atoms to Economies. New York: Basic Books.


Kauffman, S., Logan, R. K., Este, R., Goebel, R., Hobill, D., & 
Shmulevich, I. (2008). Propagating organization: an enquiry. Biology and 
Philosophy, 23(1), 27-45.


Leydesdorff, L., Johnson, M., & Ivanova, I. (2017). Toward a Calculus of 
Redundancy: Signification, Codification, and Anticipation in Cultural 
Evolution. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3030525.


Luhmann, N. ([1984] 1995). Social Systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford 
University Press.


Weaver, W. (1949). Some Recent Contributions to the Mathematical Theory 
of Communication. In C. E. Shannon & W. Weaver (Eds.), The Mathematical 
Theory of Communication (pp. 93-117.). Urbana: University of Illinois 
Press.





Loet Leydesdorff

Professor, University of Amsterdam
Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)

l...@leydesdorff.net ; 
http://www.leydesdorff.net/
Associate Faculty, SPRU, University of 
Sussex;


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


Visiting Fellow, Birkbeck , University of London;

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


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