John Collier wrote on 6/10/06:
At 05:35 PM 6/10/2006, Stanley N. Salthe wrote:
John said:
> Hmm. You should read Barwise and Seligman, Information Flow...
...
It depends what you mean by logic. The issue is too complicated to
get into here and now, but the simple answer is that there is no
At 05:35 PM 6/10/2006, Stanley N. Salthe wrote:
John said:
> Hmm. You should read Barwise and Seligman, Information Flow: the logic of
>distributed Systems. Very important for understanding Quantum Information.
>Also, I assume that you are familiar with algorithmic complexity theory,
>which is
John said:
> Hmm. You should read Barwise and Seligman, Information Flow: the logic of
>distributed Systems. Very important for understanding Quantum Information.
>Also, I assume that you are familiar with algorithmic complexity theory,
>which is certainly rigourous, Minimum Description Length (Ri
-
From:
John
Collier
To: FIS
Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2006 2:22
PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Reply to Ted Goranson:
levels of description
At 08:20 AM 6/7/2006, Andrei Khrennikov wrote:
My comment:Yes, >>
deeply about the nature of information>>This is the crucial point.
At 08:20 AM 6/7/2006, Andrei Khrennikov wrote:
My comment:
Yes, >> deeply about the nature of information>>
This is the crucial point. But as I know there are only two ways to
define information rigorously, classical Shannon information, and
quantum von Neumann information. In fact, all my discus
Dear collegues,
This is a part of my discussion with Ted Goranson. In the previous Email
to the FIS- list Ted Goranson wrote:
>> >> Any number of such ontological layers are
>> >> possible and I suppose as system scale increases
>> >> (physical, chemical, biological and so on...
