Dear Joe, Dear FISers,
I would like to add a short remark.
In fact, I repeat a fact that I mentioned several times in the past.
We often miss to list a very simple form of
information among the others, namely that, what I
call information on existence.
This is a double-valued property, with the words
of Joe, binary opposition. Something exists
here and now, or does not. E.g., I am here or I
am not here; you are hungry or you are not
hungry; it is red or not red, that object has the
same colour like this, or has different colour, etc.
(Note, difference is not certainly a binary
category in itself, because it compares two
things, where one of the compared things has one
property, while the other side - asymmetrically -
is many-valued. These many values may be finite,
discrete infinite, or may belong to a smooth continuum.)
This observation comes for me from my experience
with the description of symmetries in physics.
For decades, there were described different kinds
of symmetry by discrete groups, then by
(continuous) Lie groups - more and more
complicated appearances of symmetry phenomena.
The significance of parity was recognised late,
in the nineteen fifties, and I would say, that
there are even now (fortunately not all, only)
many physicists who are surprised when meet the
difference between the behaviour of parity in odd
and even dimensional spaces. This is caused by
lack of general knowledge about the nature of
paritiy. Nevertheless, the most simple appearance of the phenomenon.
Something similar happened around existence type information.
It is important, it is lovely, worthy of
affection. Let us not forget/neglect it.
Gyuri
At 06:43 22.02.2010, you wrote:
Dear FIS Colleagues and Friends,
As you have for a long time before me, I have
been trying to tame (I prefer the French make
private â apprivoiser) the notion of
information. One thought was suggested by
Batesonâs seemingly generally accepted dictum
of âa difference (and/or distinction) that
makes a difference. But I think this difference
is no ordinary âdeltaâ; this is an active
referring or better differing term like the
différance of Derrida. Iâm sure someone has
made a reference to this before Iâm new here
â but then Derrida uses différance to
question the structure of binary oppositions,
and says that différance âinvites us to undo
the need for balanced equations, to see if each
term in an opposition is not after all an
accomplice of the other. At the point where the
concept of différance intervenes, all of the
conceptual oppositions of metaphysics, to the
extent that they have for ultimate reference the
presence of a present
(signifier/signified;
diachrony/synchrony; space/time;
passivity/aactivity, etc.) become non-pertinent.
Since most of the usual debates about
information are based on such conceptual
oppositions, and classical notions of here and
now, it may be high time to deconstruct them.
I am sure you are familiar with this, but I
found it rather interesting to read that
Kolmogorov had given one definition of
information as âany operator which changes the
distribution of probabilities in a given set of
eventsâ. (Apparently, this idea was attacked by Markov.)
Différance in the informational context then
started looking to me like an operator,
especially since in my process logic, where
logical elements of real processes resemble
probabilities, the logical operators are also
processes, such that a predominantly actualized
positive implication, for example, is always
accompanied by a predominantly potentialized negative implication.
At the end of all this, then, one has, starting from the lowest level:
a) information as what is processed by a computer;
b) information as a scalar quantity of
uncertainty removed, the entropy/negentropy picture;
c) semantic information as well-formed, meaningful data (Floridi);
d) information as a process operator that
makes a difference to and for other processes,
including above all those of receivers and senders.
A first useful consequence is that information
âoperationsâ with my operator are naturally
polarized, positive, negative or some
combination which Iâll leave open for the
moment. The negative effects of some information
follow naturally. Many of you may conclude Iâm
doing some oversimplification or conflation, and
I apologize for that in advance. But I believe
that Kolmogorovâs original idea has been
neglected in the recent discussions of
information Iâve seen, and I would very much
welcome comments. Thank you and best wishes.
Joseph
___
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
http://symmetry.hu/coming-meetings.htmlBridges
Conference 2010, Pecshttp://symmetry.hu/coming-meetings.html, 24-28 July
http://vod.niif.hu/symmetry2009/Symmetry
Festival
