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

2018-06-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
systems ", are widely used in many fields. If the interaction is >>>>> rational, that is: formally equivalent to a logical discussion modi >>>>> Wittgenstein, the difference in: "who arrived at this answer, machinery >>>>> or a human"

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

2018-06-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
e is not a machine from its/her private first person view. Only “god” (the arithmetical truth is enough her) knows better. Best, Bruno > -- > Inviato da Libero Mail per Android > > lunedì, 21 maggio 2018, 00:16PM +02:00 da Bruno Marchal > <

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

2018-05-21 Thread Bruno Marchal
een any evidence for primary matter found yet, better to not add it. Bruno > -- > Inviato da Libero Mail per Android > > domenica, 20 maggio 2018, 07:06PM +02:00 da Bruno Marchal > <>: > > Hi Dai Griffith, Hi Colleagu

Re: [Fis] Everett & quantum wave collapse

2018-05-21 Thread Bruno Marchal
there was a collapse, but without any collapse. 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”. Bruno > > >> Il 17 maggio 2018

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

2018-05-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
;> kind. >>> >>> Karl >>> >>> < <>> schrieb am Do., 10. >>> Mai 2018 15:24: >>> Dear Bruno, >>> You state: >>> "IF indexical digital mechanism is

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

2018-05-17 Thread Bruno Marchal
Roberto Magari, 2007). The math part requires some background in mathematical logic including provability logics, like: G. Boolos. 1979, The Unprovability of Consistency, an Essay in Modal Logic, Cambridge University Press. G. Boolos. The Logic of Provability. Cambridge University Press, Cam

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

2018-05-14 Thread Bruno Marchal
(the mind of the universal Turing machine) and the physical is the border of the universal mind viewed from inside that universal mind. Again, I do not defend that claim. I show it testable only. Best regards, Bruno > > > -- > Inviato da Libero Mail per Android > >

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

2018-05-11 Thread Bruno Marchal
hat your son or daughter marry someone having got an artificial hippocampus prosthesis? Bruno > -- > Inviato da Libero Mail per Android > > giovedì, 10 maggio 2018, 02:46PM +02:00 da Bruno Marchal > <>: > > (This mail h

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

2018-05-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
(This mail has been sent previously , but without success. I resend it, with minor changes). Problems due to different accounts. It was my first comment to Mark Burgin new thread “Is information physical?”. Dear Mark, Dear Colleagues, Apology for not answering the mails in the chronological

Re: [Fis] The Concept of Two

2018-04-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 25 Apr 2018, at 19:51, Alex Hankey wrote: > > Extract from Louis Kauffman: > > Two is a concept and it is outside of formal systems and outside of the > physical > except in that we who have that concept are linked with formalism and linked > with the apparent

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

2018-04-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Lou, Colleagues, > On 25 Apr 2018, at 16:55, Louis H Kauffman wrote: > > Dear Krassimir and Mark, > Let us not forget the intermediate question: > How is information independent of the choice of carrier? > This is the fruitful question in my opinion, and it avoids the

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

2018-04-08 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Mark, > On 28 Mar 2018, at 23:10, Burgin, Mark wrote: > > Dear Arturo, > Set theory is a particular case of named set theory. If set theory solves > some problem, then named set theory solves the same problem. Use logic and > some knowledge and you'll see truth.

Re: [Fis] Music : Noise = Meaning : Data

2018-03-22 Thread Bruno Marchal
ven third person describable in any way). I am aware that what I say contradicts 1500 years of (Aristotelian) theology, but then it was enforced by 1500 years of argument per authority, sometimes violent. Best, Bruno > > STAN > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 12:23 PM, Bruno

Re: [Fis] Music : Noise = Meaning : Data

2018-03-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Dai, Hi Carl, Hi colleagues, > On 19 Mar 2018, at 16:22, Dai Griffiths wrote: > > On 15/03/18 10:11, Karl Javorszky wrote: > > >To me, it does not appear necessary to make a distinction between “reality” > >and “data” > > That's a defensible position, but it

Re: [Fis] Is Dataism the end of classical hypothesis-driven research and the beginning of data-correlation-driven research?

2018-03-15 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Alex, > On 13 Mar 2018, at 08:38, Alex Hankey wrote: > > Dear Mark and Alberto, > > Let me propose a radical new input. > The Human intuition is far more > powerful than anything anyone > has previously imagined, except > those who use it regularly. I agree

Re: [Fis] Meta-observer?

2018-03-09 Thread Bruno Marchal
Plamen, Loet, Pedro, > On 2 Mar 2018, at 10:36, Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov > wrote: > > I know him: his name is God, the meta-observer + meta-actor at the same time. > Correct, Bruno? God has no name that can be invoked … in the antic greek scientific approach of

Re: [Fis] A Paradox

2018-03-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
degrees of unsolvability of the arithmetical problems. Before Gödel, we thought we could secure the use of the infinite with precise use of the finite, but after Gödel we know we need already the infinite to partially control and understand the finite realm. Best regards, Bruno Marchal (*) Follow

Re: [Fis] The shadows are real !!!

2018-02-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi John, > On 26 Feb 2018, at 04:37, John Collier wrote: > > Inclined to agree with Joseph. OK. Nice. > I would like to point out that there are different meanings for "real', and > one has to be clear about ones metaphysics to make the idea (somewhat) clear. Yes. That is a

Re: [Fis] The shadows are real !!!

2018-02-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear John, Dear colleagues, > On 25 Feb 2018, at 20:51, John Collier wrote: > > Daer Krassimir, List > > I basically support what you are saying. I understand the mathematics you > presented, I am good at mathematics and studied logic with some of the best. > However, and this

Re: [Fis] there is no need to number every word

2018-02-18 Thread Bruno Marchal
ains a very startling aspect of nature (the quantum aspect); Bruno > > > On 15 February 2018 at 15:14, Bruno Marchal < > <>> wrote: > > > On 13 Feb 2018, at 04:46, mihir chakraborty < >

Re: [Fis] there is no need to number every word

2018-02-15 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 13 Feb 2018, at 04:46, mihir chakraborty wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > i did not enter the site --- but was not such numbering already done > by great Goedel ? The so called Goedel numbering ? Yes, good point. And that made possible the arithmetization of

Re: [Fis] Code Biology

2018-01-17 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Pedro, dear colleagues, Thank you for this announcement. I make a comment below based on the abstract of the conference: > On 11 Jan 2018, at 13:28, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote: > > > Dear FISers, this Conference in Code Biology may be of interest to some >

Re: [Fis] Math, math, math!

2017-11-21 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Koichiro, On 19 Nov 2017 at 10:50 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Time might be an indexical, like with Mechanism in cognitive science, or like in General Relativity. Dear Bruno, It would be nice to share with you some agreement, no matter how minute it may be. That said, with regard

Re: [Fis] Math, math, math!

2017-11-19 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Koichiro, On 15 Nov 2017, at 01:02, Koichiro Matsuno wrote: On 14 Nov 2017 at 6:21 AM, wrote: I provide what is required by truly scientific reviewers, i.e., testable mathematical predictions. [KM] Any mathematical proposition, once confirmed, can stand alone.

Re: [Fis] I do not understand some strange claims

2017-11-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Arturo, dear FISers, On 08 Nov 2017, at 22:11, wrote: Dear FISers, science talks about observables, i.e., quantifiable parameters. I can't agree more. Science measure numbers, and infer relations among them. But we know also that untestable ideas can be

Re: [Fis] About 10 Principles

2017-11-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Krassimir, On 31 Oct 2017, at 15:07, Krassimir Markov wrote: Dear FIS Colleagues, Many years ago, in 2011, I had written a special remark about scientific and non-scientific approaches to try to understand the world around. The letter of Logan Streondj returns this theme as actual

Re: [Fis] What is ³Agent²?

2017-10-23 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Gordana, On 20 Oct 2017, at 11:02, Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic wrote: Dear Terry, Bob, Loet Thank you for sharing those important thoughts about possible choices for the definition of agency. I would like to add one more perspective that I find in Pedro’s article which makes a

Re: [Fis] Simple question: What we really see in the mirror?

2017-10-23 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Lou, dear Gordanna, On 22 Oct 2017, at 05:56, Louis H Kauffman wrote: Dear Krassimir, Thank you!! Yours is the most creative resolution of the Barber Paradox that I have encountered. Perhaps we can apply it also to the Russell Paradox. I do not know. Let us think about it. Another

Re: [Fis] Simple question: What we really see in the mirror?

2017-10-22 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Krassimir and FIS Colleagues, It is time for my second post this week. First of all I am glad to participate in such very interesting discussion! Thank you for the nice posts. More than 25 years ago, working on the new theory, I had to solve the problem with concept of entity

Re: [Fis] What is “Agent”?

2017-10-18 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Jose, dear Loet, dear Krassimir, dear Alex, dear Pedro, dear All, I sum up answers to Loet, and many others in this answer to Jose, to avoid too much posts, but also I am in a very busy period. On 16 Oct 2017, at 01:34, Jose Javier Blanco Rivero wrote: Dear Krassimir, dear all, I

Re: [Fis] Fw: PRINCIPLES OF IS. The Pre-Science of Information

2017-10-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Joseph, Pedro and FISers, On 02 Oct 2017, at 10:45, Joseph Brenner wrote: Dear Pedro, Dear FISers, In the 2 weeks I have been away, an excellent discussion has self- organized as Pedro noted. Any preliminary comments and criticisms of Pedro’s 10 Principles I could make now can refer


2017-09-18 Thread Bruno Marchal
problem. Bruno Marchal — Terry On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Bruno Marchal <> wrote: Dear Jose, On 15 Sep 2017, at 16:37, Jose Javier Blanco Rivero wrote: Dear Arturo, Math is indeed a language that CAN describe scientific issues, but it is not the only one. A

Re: [Fis] Unpleasant answer ? From Bruno Marchal

2017-03-21 Thread Bruno Marchal
h symbols and numbers with only a tad of poetry. On Mar 3, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Bruno Marchal <> wrote: The tensions between the computational natures of discrete and the “continuous” numbers haunts any attempt to make mathematical sense out of scientific hypotheses.

Re: [Fis] A curious tale and QBism

2017-02-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hello Hans, On 02 Feb 2017, at 16:32, Hans von Baeyer wrote: Thank you Pedro for mentioning my new book. Actually, there is a connection between my book and the curious tale. QBists look at the future as a web of interlaced personal, numerical probability estimates, with no certainties

Re: [Fis] Fw: Is quantum information the basis of spacetime? Some New Theories

2016-12-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 14 Nov 2016, at 09:59, Joseph Brenner wrote: Dear All, It is fascinating to watch the evolution of ideas about information as a function of some new theories which beg for critique: 1. Andrei gives a correct explanation of the origin of Irreducible Quantum Randomness. In my opinion,

Re: [Fis] Is quantum information the basis of spacetime?

2016-11-15 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 13 Nov 2016, at 10:48, Andrei Khrennikov wrote: Dear all, I make the last remark about "physical information". The main problem of quantum physics is to justify so called IRREDUCIBLE QUANTUM RANDOMNESS (IQR). It was invented by von Neumann. Quantum randomness, in contrast to

Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 32, Issue 13

2016-11-15 Thread Bruno Marchal
No machine can build a complete unequivocal study of its own semantics. It has to be elusive, and that elusiveness plays an important role in the unavoidable evolution of machines and collective of machines. Bruno Marchal Malcolm Dean Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2016 20:29:21 +0100 From: &q

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] _ Towards a 3φ integrative medicine

2016-06-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Plamen, Hi colleagues, I would feel guilty not adding two grains of salt here, but I am aware that a thorough understanding of what I say require some familiarity with theoretical computer science and mathematical logic, at least for the first remark. About phenomenology, the

Re: [Fis] _ Re: _ Gödel discussion

2016-05-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Alex, dear friends, On 04 May 2016, at 02:49, Alex Hankey wrote: Dear Friends, I was so struck by the group's focus on Gödel's theorems that I went back to John R. Lucas who originated the idea that Gödel's insights imply that the human miind is not a machine - and therefore capable

Re: [Fis] Gödel discussion

2016-05-10 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Albert, On 07 May 2016, at 06:57, Albert A Johnstone wrote: Greetings everyone, I’d like to say a few words about Smullyan’s thought experiment and its relevance to Gödel’s Theorem in the hope of putting an end to discussion of a topic somewhat tangential to the main one. Before

Re: [Fis] FIS Discussion (No Vol #)

2016-05-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
nsional variants of provability, or truth and provability. Note also that Gödel managed to avoid the use of semantic or truth, like I just did. His proof can be made simpler by using them. Today, thanks to Tarski, the notion of truth is no more problematic in logic, and in the elementary par

Re: [Fis] FIS Discussion (No Vol #)

2016-05-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Alex, On 02 May 2016, at 08:30, Alex Hankey wrote: RE Bruno Marchal: It is easier to explain the illusion of matter to something conscious than to explain the illusion of consciousness to something material. ME: At the Consciousness Conference I found it extraordinary that at least

Re: [Fis] _ FIS discusion

2016-05-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Maxine, On 30 Apr 2016, at 19:37, Maxine Sheets-Johnstone wrote: To FIS colleagues, First, an open-to-all response to Lou Kaufmann: Thank you for your lengthy tutorial—some time back--but I wonder and am genuinely puzzled given the “phenomenology-life sciences theme” why none of

Re: [Fis] _ Re: _ Discussion

2016-04-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
of many parallel computations: this seems to explain both qualitatively and quantitatively most of the quantum "weirdness", without needing an abandon of determinism and locality. It leads to a sort of many dreams internal interpretation of arithmetic. Best, Bruno Marchal On

Re: [Fis] _ Interlude: emotional shock

2016-04-06 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Karl, On 31 Mar 2016, at 17:30, Karl Javorszky wrote: In the present Interlude after the session chaired by Lou on Symmetry and before the coming one, allow me to enlarge on something Bruno raised. Bruno wrote: Then this confirms the "computationalist theory of everything",

Re: [Fis] SYMMETRY & _ On BioLogic (was Re: The Measurement Problem from the Perspective of an Information-Theoretic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

2016-03-28 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Koichiro, dear John and Colleagues, I bump this older post, as it is related to my recent post to Lou. On 27 Nov 2015, at 02:06, Koichiro Matsuno wrote: At 4:28 AM 11/27/2015, John C. wrote: A paper by my former graduate advisor, Jeff Bub, who was a student of David Bohm’s.

Re: [Fis] SYMMETRY & _ On BioLogic

2016-03-28 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Lou and Colleagues, On 25 Mar 2016, at 19:51, Louis H Kauffman wrote: Dear Karl, Thank you for this very considered letter. I would like to ask you about your entry "6. Quantum information. By keeping an exact accounting about which predictions are being fulfilled to which

Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 23, Issue 24

2016-02-23 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Loet, On 22 Feb 2016, at 20:36, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: All worldviews begin in a miracle. No exceptions. I agree. Nevertheless, we should, and can, minimize the miracle. Why would one need a worldview? We need some theory, and around the mind-body problem or the first

Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 23, Issue 24

2016-02-22 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Malcolm, On 21 Feb 2016, at 22:51, Malcolm Dean wrote: All worldviews begin in a miracle. No exceptions. I agree. Nevertheless, we should, and can, minimize the miracle. With the digital mechanist assumption, the miracle can be limited to the axioms of elementary arithmetic (or

Re: [Fis] Fw: Information Conservation in black holes

2016-02-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
I still don't know if memories filter consciousness or enhance it. The relation seems complex and non linear. Here the informational approach, when properly related to the self-referential logical approach, might add some light on that important problem. Best, Bruno - Original Message

Re: [Fis] Fw: Five Momenta. Five Itineraries

2016-02-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Loet, Sorry for bumping this old post, but I cannot resist (I tried!) to add my grain of salt. On 21 Oct 2015, at 08:37, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: Self-reference is a key principle in art and humor and it may also be a key component of the structured coherence in science Pedro and

Re: [Fis] Fw: Information Conservation in black holes

2016-02-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Joseph, On 30 Jan 2016, at 19:31, Joseph Brenner wrote: Dear John, Sorry you have been ill. I agree fully with your statement: All of these explanations, and even stating the problem, require information notions, not just energy as in classical physics. What I object to are

Re: [Fis] information as physical entity

2015-07-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
are machines, then it is duplicable, and we have no algorithm to predict the particular subjective experience when we accept such personal duplication. Physics can then be recovered by the global FPI on the computable number relations. Best regards to all, Bruno Marchal yours, andrei Andrei

Re: [Fis] FIS newcomer

2015-06-24 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 23 Jun 2015, at 07:13, Emanuel Diamant wrote: My dear FIS-friends, I apologize for not withstanding the pace of our discussion – you are already busy with the problem of “meaning” (Steven) and I am still preparing to answer Howard’s letter about linguistic biology… Dear Howard,

Re: [Fis] We have different “fen clubs” depending of sympathy to one or other definition of information

2015-06-19 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Krassimir, I apologize because I have just realized that I have miss-replied in my last posting, and send them only to the writer of the post, and not to the list. Same for some comment I made to John Collier. I intent to send a mail where I sum up my position on the information

Re: [Fis] Fw: [Feedforward II and Anticipation] Joseph Brenner

2014-02-18 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Loet, On 17 Feb 2014, at 21:32, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: Dear Joseph, The energetic terms are external referents to the communication (scholarly discourse). These external referents can differently be codified; for example, in terms of thermodynamics or various forms of physics

Re: [Fis] [PEIRCE-L] Stanford seminar On The Origin Of Experience

2013-12-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Steven, On 12 Dec 2013, at 12:10, Steven Ericsson-Zenith wrote: I make one thing I say here clear. When I say rejection of scripture, I really must say rejection of the literal interpretation of scripture. Important nuance. Many of these radical Unitarian's - if not all of them at

Re: [Fis] social exchanges

2013-11-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
projects, Bruno For the new comers in the list, there is an archive with all the messages exchanged: Interested parties may look for the current discussion session, which started on 27/09/2013. Best, Raquel El 12/11/2013 13:31, Bruno

Re: [Fis] from Bi lin

2013-11-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Bi, On 12 Nov 2013, at 09:55, bilin1001 wrote: Dear Raquel, I am also a PhD student, in Information Philosophy. My Thesis deals with Mutual Meaning Space in social exchanges (interpersonal communication). I am very interested in your work on the necessity of conversation:

Re: [Fis] reply to Loet

2013-11-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi, On 02 Nov 2013, at 17:40, Joseph Brenner wrote: Dear Gordana and Loet, I think that you here and Loet, with his idea of local inversion of the hierarchy, have an intuition of something I consider potentially very important. In reality, it is the processes in the hierarchy that have

Re: [Fis] Praxotype

2013-10-18 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Karl, On 15 Oct 2013, at 17:23, Karl Javorszky wrote: As Bob said experiences - words. Wittgenstein said words - numbers. Pythagoras: world - numbers. Idea: organise numbers like you organise words and see the world. Question from Stan: experience - number ?. Answer: Like in Bobs

Re: [Fis] Collier's Metaphysics

2013-05-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 27 May 2013, at 08:08, John Collier wrote: Another vapid criticism with no argument. Give me an idea, Jerry, give me an idea. You obviously think I don't have it, so it would be rude of you to just say this sort of thing and refrain. List some things that are involved with metaphysics

Re: [Fis] [Fwd: SV: Science, Philosophy and Information. An Alternative Relation] S.Brier

2013-02-12 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 11 Feb 2013, at 18:38, John Collier wrote: I guess I am at a loss to see them as separate discourses. Me too. Actually I do not believe in something like *Science*. But I do believe in the human *scientific attitude*, and I have eventually realized that such attitude is totally domain

Re: [Fis] Paradigmatic diversity

2012-11-24 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Gordana, Robin, John and FIS colleagues, On 19 Nov 2012, at 14:05, Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic wrote: Dear Joseph, I agree with you. I am also against totalitarianism. Computationalism is not the world, it is only a modeling framework. It is parallel to mechanicism, but has stronger expressive

Re: [Fis] The Information Flow

2012-11-13 Thread Bruno Marchal
Dear Robert and FIS colleagues, On 12 Nov 2012, at 16:35, Robert Ulanowicz wrote: Dear Pedro, Roman Littlefield is coming out with a volume along those lines entitled Beyond Mechanism As for our Chinese

Re: [Fis] The Information Flow

2012-11-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
/ RadioSeaman Paste into itunes (Advanced/open audio streams) for internet radio: On Oct 27, 2012, at 11:34 AM, Bruno Marchal

Re: [Fis] The Information Flow

2012-10-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 26 Oct 2012, at 22:32, PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ wrote: Dear FISers, Is it interesting the discussion on wether those informational entities contain realizations of the Aristotelian scheme of causality or not? The cell, in my view, conspicuously fails --it would be too

Re: [Fis] Good (clear) article on information and physics

2012-06-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
the fundamental reality, nor its physical part, can be Turing emulable, despite quantum machine can be Turing emulated. This is more or less a direct consequence of the existence of the first person indeterminacy in arithmetic. Bruno Marchal

Re: [Fis] Good (clear) article on information and physics

2012-06-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
in principle. Both computationalism in cognitive science, and quantum mechanics (without collapse) point toward a completely reversible physical reality. Best, Bruno Marchal Professor John Collier Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal Durban 4041 South Africa T: +27 (31) 260 3248 / 260

Re: [Fis] Stephen Wolfram discussing his ANKS in Reedit this Monday

2012-05-11 Thread Bruno Marchal
. Bruno Marchal Sincerely. ___ fis mailing list ___ fis mailing list https


2012-05-04 Thread Bruno Marchal
and mechanism (or physicalism and computationalism) arises from a reductionist view on the machines themselves. -- Bruno Marchal So, after a glance in the whole book, I am now in the detailed reading of Chapter 4, with mounting disappointment... Incomplete Book!! Deeper exploration needed


2012-04-30 Thread Bruno Marchal
and analyses, and my critics here bears only on his most fundamental preconception. Sincere respects, - Bruno Marchal PS: A short but complete paper: FOAR mailing list:

Re: [Fis] Physics of computing

2012-04-17 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 17 Apr 2012, at 11:44, Loet Leydesdorff wrote: It seems to me that, if I believe I am duplicable, and understand the protocol, I must predict that I will experience being in both Moscow and Washington. The process bifurcates one person, who becomes two people with absolutely

Re: [Fis] Physics of computing

2012-03-18 Thread Bruno Marchal
can understand that we might have just been guilty of having developed a reductionist conception of numbers and machines. Arithmetic is not just full of life. Angels, goddesses, and other oracles are also at play :) Bruno On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Bruno Marchal

Re: [Fis] Physics of computing

2012-03-17 Thread Bruno Marchal
emulable. In particular digital physics can be shown self-contradictory. Those (actually old) results are not well known but have been verified by many people. I don't think there is a flaw, but we never can be sure, of course. Bruno Marchal PS see below for a concise version of the proof: http

Re: [Fis] WG: stuff and non-stuff

2012-02-29 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Joe, and FIS colleagues, On 28 Feb 2012, at 19:16, wrote: Dear Pedro, John and Colleagues, The article by Terrence Deacon in the book referred to by John is entitled What is Missing from Theories of Information? and, as Pedro has indicated, it and Deacon's new

Re: [Fis] stuff and non-stuff

2012-02-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
Hi Pedro, On 21 Feb 2012, at 18:02, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote: Dear FIS colleagues, John's comments below on that book are quite interesting. Most approaches to information rely on stuff and organization of stuff --information is inevitably physical, as Rolf Landauer put long ago. OK.