Re: [Fis] Fw: NEW DISCUSSION SESSION--TOPOLOGICAL BRAIN

Dear Joseph, The Borsuk-Ulam theorem looks like a translucent glass sphere between a light source and our eyes: we watch two lights on the sphere surface instead of one. But the two lights are not just images, they are also real with observable properties, such as intensity and diameter.

[Fis] Another important paper

Thanks for the nice paper! Concerning the use of topology in hippocampus assessment, I suggest another paper, with a topological approach rather different from ours: https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.01905 -- Inviato da Libero Mail per Android___ Fis mailing

Re: [Fis] What if consciousness is an Euclidean n-space?

Dear Gordana, Thanks for your wise comment. You say: "It is vital to be awa­re under which assump­tion model/theory has­ been made". It is an old statement, that reminds me the axiomatic fundations of Hilbert and the linguistic jokes of the second Wittgenstein:  neuroscientists start from a

[Fis] Entia Non Sunt Multiplicanda

Dear “germane” Pedro, Thanks a lot for your comments. Entia non sunt multiplicanda.  It’s the Occam razor: it’s better to use the simplest explanation, rather than more complicated descriptions of facts and events. You talked about metabolic cellular networks, cellular life cycle, abstract

[Fis] Medieval mustidisciplinarity

Dear Karl,  thanks for your comment.   A true "medieval scholar and innovator, in touch with the interdisciplinary school of Salamanca", needs to put together different issues from a wide range of sources.   Therefore, I suggest to read:  HEIDEGGER’S BEING AND QUANTUM VACUUM A dialogue between

[Fis] Fwd: about consciousness an Euclidean n-space

Messaggio inoltrato Da: James Peters james.pete...@umanitoba.ca A: tozziart...@libero.it Cc: James Peters james.pete...@umanitoba.ca Data: mercoledì, 07 dicembre 2016, 01:37PM +01:00 Oggetto: about consciousness an Euclidean n-space >Dear Arturo and All in this great

[Fis] Game over! A Curious Story

"The operation of the LHC is safe, not only in the old sense of that word, but in the more general sense that our most qualified scientists have thoroughly considered and analyzed the risks involved in the operation of the LHC. [Any concerns] are merely hypothetical and speculative, and

[Fis] Response to Jerry LR Chandler

-- Inviato da Libero Mail per Android Messaggio inoltrato Da: tozziart...@libero.it A: pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es Data: mercoledì, 30 novembre 2016, 09:52AM +01:00 Oggetto: Response to Jerry LR Chandler > >>Dear Pedro,  >>here you are! >>I tried 4 times to submit this

[Fis] Fwd: Re[2]: Heretic

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

[Fis] Heretic

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

[Fis] Heretic 2

In sum, I will never use anymore in my papers the useless term "information". -- Inviato da Libero Mail per Android___ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Re: [Fis] A PROPOSAL ABOUT THE DEFINITION OF INFORMATION

Dear Sung, I'm sorry, but the "Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics" still holds true.  Forget philosophical concepts like Yin and Yang, because, in some cases and contexts , entropy is negative.  Just to make an example, "Since the entropy H(S|O) can now become negative, erasing a

Re: [Fis] Principles of IS

Dear FISers, Hi! ...a very hot discussion... I think that it is not useful to talk about Aristotle, Plato and Ortega y Gasset, it the modern context of information... their phylosophical, not scientific approach, although marvelous, does not provide insights in a purely scientific issue such

Re: [Fis] A PRAGMATIC LANGUAGE FOR SCIENTIFIC PURPOSES

Dear Bruno, Thanks for your nice and kind comments! I'm honoured that you got through my manuscript. -- Inviato da Libero Mail per Android lunedì, 25 settembre 2017, 07:47PM +02:00 da Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be : >Dear Arturo, > > >On 24 Sep 2017, at 21:35, tozziart...@libero.it wrote:

[Fis] Math, math, math!

Dear FISers, My so called pseudoscience has been published in not dispisable journals, for a simple reason: I provide what is required by truly scientific reviewers, i.e., testable mathematical predictions. Sent from Libero Mobile___ Fis mailing

[Fis] Fwd: Re: [FIS] Is information physical?

Daer Bruno, first of all, sorry for the previous private communication, but for a mistake, I did not add the FIS list in the CC. Concerning your Faith, i.e., arithmetic, this appraoch... simply does not work for the description of physical and biological issues. It is just in our mind.

Re: [Fis] Is information physical? OR Does the information exist without the carrier?

Dear Bruno, You claim: "all computations exists independently of the existence of anything physical". I never heard, apart probably from Berkeley and Tegmark, a more untestable, metaphyisical, a-scientific, unquantifiable claim.  Dear FISers, we NEED to deal with something testable and

Re: [Fis] [FIS] Is information physical?

Dear Bruno, You state: "IF indexical digital mechanism is correct in the cognitive science, THEN “physical” has to be defined entirely in arithmetical term, i.e. “physical” becomes a mathematical notion. ...Indexical digital mechanism is the hypothesis that there is a level of description of

[Fis] Fwd: Re[2]: [FIS] Is information physical?

Messaggio inoltrato Da: tozziart...@libero.it A: Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es Data: giovedì, 10 maggio 2018, 03:23PM +02:00 Oggetto: Re[2]: [Fis] [FIS] Is information physical? >Dear Bruno, >You state: >"IF indexical digital mechanism is

Re: [Fis] Is information physical? A logical analysis

Dear Bruno, You talk about "some non mechanical super-entities (which exist also in the arithmetical reality)". This way of reasoning throws us into the realm of the philosophy of mathematics, in which you clearly pursue a neo-platonism in the traces of Tegmark, Godel, Husserl, Tiles, against

[Fis] Everett & quantum wave collapse

Dear Bruno, as far as you wrote and I understood, your Mechanistic framework requires the tenet that quantum wave collapse does not exist. In order to prove that, you invoke the authority of Everett. I want to provide a simple, very rough explanation (excuse me!), for the FISers unaware of

Re: [Fis] Is information physical? A logical analysis

Dear Bruno, You state that: "When poll are done at congress in cosmology or quantum computing, about half of the physicists endorse the non collapse theory, as it is covariant, and has no “measurement problem”. This means that the main tenet of your account, your "First Principle", is not

Re: [Fis] Is information physical?

Dear Emanuel, Hi! I'm sorry, but the UCLA finding does not put an end to any question. Indeed, this paper about memory transfer has been highly criticized: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2018/05/18/epic-snail-about-that-injectable-memory-study/#.Ww-V81UzYps The term

Re: [Fis] Summing up: New Year Lecture

Dear Karl and Pedro, A unifying principle underlies the organization of physical and biological systems. It relates to a well-known topological theorem which succinctly states that an activity on a planar circumference projects to two activities with “matching description” into a sphere. Here

Re: [Fis] The unification of the theories of information based on the cateogry theory

Dear Karl, your analysis about Wittgenstein does not take into account the second Wittgenstein, who repudiated his own idea from the Tractatus. I think, in touch with Carnap on other issues, that the use of the terms "symbol", "signal", "marker", "information" into scientific sentences does

Re: [Fis] Summing up: New Year Lecture

Dear Karl, your words are so intriguing, that I will shamelessy quote them (and you, of course!), in my next papers. I like very much your concept of sequential as well as commutative symbols in a biological context. Concerning your very interesting issue of the possible working principle

Re: [Fis] The FIS paper "Data versus Information " is published

Dear, prominent Authors, You write in this paper: " Several posts are not included in the text below due to lack of permission from their authors". I think that several post were not included in the text just because they were too critical against the loose, flabby concepts of information

Re: [Fis] What is the “mental model”?

> head>Il 23 febbraio 2018 alle 20.47 PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ > ha scritto: > > > Dear Krassimir and FIS colleagues, > > > > Many thanks for your message & effort to prepare the compilation to be > published soon. It is good counting with

Re: [Fis] Summing up: New Year Lecture

Dear FiSers, gamechanging? Look at here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29310692 Ciao! > Il 22 gennaio 2018 alle 13.01 "Pedro C. Marijuan" > ha scritto: > > Dear FISers, > > Going to the extreme, I think this year opening lecture can be

[Fis] Welcome, novel weapons!

Dear FISers, Welcome, Dataism!Apart from the suggested "metaphysical" and sociological implications, Dataism, born officially in 2013, provides novel tools and opportunities to an otherwise frustrating landscape.  Indeed, despite the progresses in the very last years, we do not have still the

Re: [Fis] Information is physical

Dear FISers, information is a measurable physical quantity. Indeed, it has been claimed that the physical world is made up of information itself (Bekenstein 2003), so that our Universe is assessable in pure terms of information. The idea that information is the fundamental physical

Re: [Fis] a short survey on the “mental models”

Dear Krassimir, I agree with you. In our framework, your second type (deductive) exists only at the high DIMENSIONAL level of the brain. When I see a three-dimensional cat, my mind adds to the 3D picture other features (we call them dimensions), such as: I start to think that its name is

Re: [Fis] Welcome to Knowledge Market and the FIS Sci-coins

Dear Mark, the named set theory does not solve the Russell paradox. Therefore it would be better to use, in such approaches, the best theory available, i.e., the Fraenkel-Zermelo sets. In turn, the latter displays some limits: for example, the need of a set with infinite elements.