Re: [Fis] Re to Pridi: infinite bandwith and finite information content CS Peirce and Chemical Nomenclature
Pridi, Krassimir, List: (In order to place this comment in context, and for reference, I have copied Krassimir's definition of information below. My comments follow the excellent post of Pridi.) In physical world there exist only reflections but not information. Information “ i is the quadruple: i = (s, r, e, I) where s is a source entity, which is reflected in r r is the entity in which reflection of s exists e is an evidence for the subject I which proofs for him and only for him that the reflection in r reflects just s , i.e. the evidence proofs for the subject what the reflection reflects . I is information subject who has possibility to make decisions in accordance with some goals – human, animal, bacteria, artificial intelligent system, etc. In other words, information is a reflection, but not every reflection is information – only reflections for which the quadruple above exist are assumed as information by the corresponded subjects. For different I , information may be different because of subjects’ finite memory and reflection possibilities. Because of this, a physical event with an infinite bandwidth may have finite information content (for concrete information subject) . On Jul 23, 2014, at 6:45 AM, Pridi Siregar wrote: Dear Krassimir, Thank you for your explanation. It does give me a better understanding of how information (beyond Shannon) can be formalized! However, a closer look at the formalism and its semantic does raise new questions: From the definition you have given, it appears that information cannot be viewed in any absolute sense but as internal representations of external patterns whose meaning depends on the subject capturing/interpreting/storing the said patterns. In this framework then, it seems that information cannot be conceptualized without reference to the both something out there and the internal structures of the receptor/cognitive system. In other words the concept of information lies within some subjective (albeit rational) realm. I'm sure that I'm stating the obvious for most of FIS members but a question arised upon reading your formalism: How can we really quantify meaningful (semantic) information beyond Shannon (that disregards semantics) and his purely statistical framework? Or beyond Boltzmann's entropy/Information based on micro-macro states ratios? When we formalize i = (s, r, e, I) there is a meta-level formalisation that is only apparent since even (s,r) reflect our own (human) subjective world-view. We could actually write (I1(s), I1(r), e, I2) where I1 and I2 are two distinct cognitive systems and both of which lie at the OBJECT level of the formalizing agent which is NEITHER I1 or I2. All objective measures (entropy, negentropy,...) are actually totally dependant of I1 and I2 and can never be considered as absolute. This leads me to a second question (sorry for the lengthy message): there are some researchers that posit that information may be more fundamental than the fundamental physical (mass, time, space, amps). This appears (and perhaps only appears) to be at the opposite end of the above-mentioned view. Indeed, in this framework some kind of universal or absolute notions must be accepted as true. One apparent way out would be to demonstrate that information somehow logically entails the fundemantal physical entities while accepting that we are still within a human-centered world view. And thus no absolute truth (whatever this means) is really gained. Only a richer more complete (subjective but coherent) world-view . Am I making anys sense? Any thoughts? Best Pridi Pridi's comment concur with many of my views wrt the concept of information. Krassimir's assertion of a quadruple of symbols is rather close to the philosophy of C S Peirce (hereafter CSP) in one context. S as symbol represents an external source of signal, that which is independent of the individual mind and being. This is analogous to CSP's term sinsign. R is a thing itself. That is, R generates S. E as evidence is a vague term which infers an observer (2nd Order Cybernetics?) that both receives and evaluates the signal (S) from the thing (R). CSP categorizes evidence as icon, index or symbol with respect to the entity of observation. I as Krassimirian information is a personal judgment about the evidence. (Correspondence with CSP's notion of argument is conceivable.) Krassimir's assertion that: For different I , information may be different because of subjects’ finite memory and reflection possibilities. Because of this, a physical event with an infinite bandwidth may have finite information content (for concrete information subject) . moves these 'definitions' of individual symbols into the subjective realm. (CSP's notion of interpretation?) Different researchers have the freedom to interpret the evidence
[Fis] Re to Pridi: infinite bandwith and finite information content
Dear Pridi, An accordance with my understanding: In physical world there exist only reflections but not information. Information “i is the quadruple: i = (s, r, e, I) where s is a source entity, which is reflected in r r is the entity in which reflection of s exists e is an evidence for the subject I which proofs for him and only for him that the reflection in r reflects just s, i.e. the evidence proofs for the subject what the reflection reflects. I is information subject who has possibility to make decisions in accordance with some goals – human, animal, bacteria, artificial intelligent system, etc. In other words, information is a reflection, but not every reflection is information – only reflections for which the quadruple above exist are assumed as information by the corresponded subjects. For different I, information may be different because of subjects’ finite memory and reflection possibilities. Because of this, a physical event with an infinite bandwidth may have finite information content (for concrete information subject). Friendly regards Krassimir -Original Message- From: Pridi Siregar Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:35 AM To: Jerry LR Chandler Cc: Foundations of Information Science of Information Science Information Information Science Subject: Re: [Fis] FIS in Varna. Analogue Computation I was thinking about particles with mass...:-) If anyone has an idea concerning my question thanks for the reply. I'm totally ignorant concerning deep thoughts on the nature of information. Pridi - Mail original - De: Jerry LR Chandler jerry_lr_chand...@me.com À: Foundations of Information Science of Information Science Information Information Science fis@listas.unizar.es Cc: John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za, Pridi Siregar pridi.sire...@ibiocomputing.com Envoyé: Dimanche 20 Juillet 2014 05:12:53 Objet: Re: [Fis] FIS in Varna. Analogue Computation Pridi: Are you mixing apples with citrus fruits? Pure elastic collision are pre-suppose mass particles. Electrical particles in this context do what? Cheers Jerry On Jul 18, 2014, at 3:21 AM, Pridi Siregar wrote: Dear John and all, The limiting case of the particle collision (pure elastic collision) can be represented by a dirac impulse whose spectral content ranges over all the frequencies. I have a question: What does it mean to have a physical event with an infinite bandwith while its information content is finite ? Best Pridi - Mail original - De: John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za À: fis@listas.unizar.es, Pedro C. Marijuan pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es Envoyé: Mardi 15 Juillet 2014 07:19:50 Objet: Re: [Fis] FIS in Varna. Analogue Computation Dear fis members, I don't think that granularity per se is a necessary basis for the application of information theory to analog channels. In some cases it might be, and I agree that studying the relations between analog (continuous) and digital (discrete) processes is likely to be both interesting and productive. However the bandwidth of an analog channel typically can be defined even if there is no discreteness, for example if the information bearing process consists of waves so that the information bearing capacity is limited by the wavelength. Virtually all physical processes are cyclical in some way and thus have a limited bandwidth. A countercase would be a collision between particles that carries momentum from one to another. I can't think offhand right now (I just woke up), but I suspect that even in such cases there is a finite amount of information transferred. In any case, Shannon discussed the bandwidth of continuous process channels. It is worth looking at. John At 10:28 PM 2014-07-14, Srinandan Dasmahapatra wrote: I think I agree with Joseph Brenner here. Analogue computing is linked to real processes, while living beings find ways of transducing information out of dynamical states. The graininess that information theories rely on to define measures may be directly linked to physical limits in the information carriers (such as photons) or they might be limitations of the processing organism, extracting the sufficient difference that makes a difference. And yes, there's often a too hasty rush to view analogue computing through pixellated perspectives. I'm not sure if this is well known to members of this list, but Bill Bialek's biophysics text is a profound reflection of the interplay between the analogue and the digital, with selection pressure forcing the sufficiency of the grainy difference that makes a difference towards a necessity for organisms, and hence pushing sensory systems close to the physical limits of information transfer. Cheers, Sri Original message From: Joseph Brenner Date:14/07/2014 18:12 (GMT+00:00) To: Pridi Siregar ,Pedro C. Marijuan Cc: fis@listas.unizar.es Subject: Re:
Re: [Fis] Re to Pridi: infinite bandwith and finite information content
List, Karassimir: I found your definition of information to be a bit confusing because the language is a bit ambiguous to me. While the definitions of the quadruple make sense from a rhetorical sense, one notion that is missing is the concept of what is the meaning of the central reference term: physical world. For example, please show how for your definition information works for the electrical nature of the carbon atom as defined by the Rutherford/Moseley experiments, which form the base of the atomic numbers. (Carbon has the physical world definition of 6.) How would this information be symbolized? In other words, how does the concept of quantity enter into your definition? Cheers Jerry On Jul 21, 2014, at 4:40 AM, Krassimir Markov wrote: Dear Pridi, An accordance with my understanding: In physical world there exist only reflections but not information. Information “i is the quadruple: i = (s, r, e, I) where s is a source entity, which is reflected in r r is the entity in which reflection of s exists e is an evidence for the subject I which proofs for him and only for him that the reflection in r reflects just s, i.e. the evidence proofs for the subject what the reflection reflects. I is information subject who has possibility to make decisions in accordance with some goals – human, animal, bacteria, artificial intelligent system, etc. In other words, information is a reflection, but not every reflection is information – only reflections for which the quadruple above exist are assumed as information by the corresponded subjects. For different I, information may be different because of subjects’ finite memory and reflection possibilities. Because of this, a physical event with an infinite bandwidth may have finite information content (for concrete information subject). Friendly regards Krassimir -Original Message- From: Pridi Siregar Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:35 AM To: Jerry LR Chandler Cc: Foundations of Information Science of Information Science Information Information Science Subject: Re: [Fis] FIS in Varna. Analogue Computation I was thinking about particles with mass...:-) If anyone has an idea concerning my question thanks for the reply. I'm totally ignorant concerning deep thoughts on the nature of information. Pridi - Mail original - De: Jerry LR Chandler jerry_lr_chand...@me.com À: Foundations of Information Science of Information Science Information Information Science fis@listas.unizar.es Cc: John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za, Pridi Siregar pridi.sire...@ibiocomputing.com Envoyé: Dimanche 20 Juillet 2014 05:12:53 Objet: Re: [Fis] FIS in Varna. Analogue Computation Pridi: Are you mixing apples with citrus fruits? Pure elastic collision are pre-suppose mass particles. Electrical particles in this context do what? Cheers Jerry On Jul 18, 2014, at 3:21 AM, Pridi Siregar wrote: Dear John and all, The limiting case of the particle collision (pure elastic collision) can be represented by a dirac impulse whose spectral content ranges over all the frequencies. I have a question: What does it mean to have a physical event with an infinite bandwith while its information content is finite ? Best Pridi - Mail original - De: John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za À: fis@listas.unizar.es, Pedro C. Marijuan pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es Envoyé: Mardi 15 Juillet 2014 07:19:50 Objet: Re: [Fis] FIS in Varna. Analogue Computation Dear fis members, I don't think that granularity per se is a necessary basis for the application of information theory to analog channels. In some cases it might be, and I agree that studying the relations between analog (continuous) and digital (discrete) processes is likely to be both interesting and productive. However the bandwidth of an analog channel typically can be defined even if there is no discreteness, for example if the information bearing process consists of waves so that the information bearing capacity is limited by the wavelength. Virtually all physical processes are cyclical in some way and thus have a limited bandwidth. A countercase would be a collision between particles that carries momentum from one to another. I can't think offhand right now (I just woke up), but I suspect that even in such cases there is a finite amount of information transferred. In any case, Shannon discussed the bandwidth of continuous process channels. It is worth looking at. John At 10:28 PM 2014-07-14, Srinandan Dasmahapatra wrote: I think I agree with Joseph Brenner here. Analogue computing is linked to real processes, while living beings find ways of transducing information out of dynamical states. The graininess that information theories rely on to define measures may be directly linked to
Re: [Fis] Re to Pridi: infinite bandwith and finite information content - Information content of Atomic Numbers
List, Krassimir: (I have posted Krassimir's response below, since it may not have been distributed to the list.) My question was not a metaphysical question about materiality, my body and other such philosophical question of import. Rather, it is direct question about the sufficiency of the rhetoric of the proposal to define a theory of information. The response saids: Atom has no number in the reality, it has one in any information quadruple. The physical, material concept of order is the empirical ground for enumerations of physical chemistry. The concept of atomic number is central to elemental quantum mechanics as well as atomic table of elements as well as molecular biology and of course, the practice of medicine itself. To assert that Atom has no number in the reality is a denial of physical reality, is it not? By logical extension, if Atom has no number in the reality, then the material world has no reality. And: If the material world has no reality, the proposed definition of information is self-contradictory. This suggests to me that the proposed definition may need to altered to avoid the implication of self-contradiction. Cheers Jerry Dear Jery, Thank you for interesting remark. Physical world means all material reality. A special case of it are living creatures. Your example is good for discussion – somewhere the Rutherford/Moseley experiments had been reflected to be further analyzed, i.e. we have information quadruple including scientists who assign atomic numbers. Atom has no number in the reality, it has one in any information quadruple. Of course, here we have very long chain of reflections and corresponded quadruples. Ideal entities are reflections (information) in our brain and are so material as we are. This is long story about information models ... including your example ... Friendly regards Krassimir On Jul 21, 2014, at 12:33 PM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote: List, Karassimir: I found your definition of information to be a bit confusing because the language is a bit ambiguous to me. While the definitions of the quadruple make sense from a rhetorical sense, one notion that is missing is the concept of what is the meaning of the central reference term: physical world. For example, please show how for your definition information works for the electrical nature of the carbon atom as defined by the Rutherford/Moseley experiments, which form the base of the atomic numbers. (Carbon has the physical world definition of 6.) How would this information be symbolized? In other words, how does the concept of quantity enter into your definition? Cheers Jerry On Jul 21, 2014, at 4:40 AM, Krassimir Markov wrote: Dear Pridi, An accordance with my understanding: In physical world there exist only reflections but not information. Information “i is the quadruple: i = (s, r, e, I) where s is a source entity, which is reflected in r r is the entity in which reflection of s exists e is an evidence for the subject I which proofs for him and only for him that the reflection in r reflects just s, i.e. the evidence proofs for the subject what the reflection reflects. I is information subject who has possibility to make decisions in accordance with some goals – human, animal, bacteria, artificial intelligent system, etc. In other words, information is a reflection, but not every reflection is information – only reflections for which the quadruple above exist are assumed as information by the corresponded subjects. For different I, information may be different because of subjects’ finite memory and reflection possibilities. Because of this, a physical event with an infinite bandwidth may have finite information content (for concrete information subject). Friendly regards Krassimir -Original Message- From: Pridi Siregar Sent: Monday, July 21, 2014 10:35 AM To: Jerry LR Chandler Cc: Foundations of Information Science of Information Science Information Information Science Subject: Re: [Fis] FIS in Varna. Analogue Computation I was thinking about particles with mass...:-) If anyone has an idea concerning my question thanks for the reply. I'm totally ignorant concerning deep thoughts on the nature of information. Pridi - Mail original - De: Jerry LR Chandler jerry_lr_chand...@me.com À: Foundations of Information Science of Information Science Information Information Science fis@listas.unizar.es Cc: John Collier colli...@ukzn.ac.za, Pridi Siregar pridi.sire...@ibiocomputing.com Envoyé: Dimanche 20 Juillet 2014 05:12:53 Objet: Re: [Fis] FIS in Varna. Analogue Computation Pridi: Are you mixing apples with citrus fruits? Pure elastic collision are pre-suppose mass particles. Electrical particles in this context do what? Cheers Jerry On Jul 18, 2014, at 3:21 AM, Pridi Siregar
