My resonses are in red.
Le 16/10/2016 à 07:29, Bruno Marchal a écrit :
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?
The reponse depends of a
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 arg
Dear Fis members,
I have followed with interest the discussion and I have not intervened
until now since I am just a beginner in information theory. But from my
background in systems theory (Luhmann) and intellectual history, the
questions raised here are familiar to me. Louis has differentiated b
Dear Dai,
Consider the pattern
.142857142857142857142857142857142857142857…
In our world of observers and technology, this pattern is constructed so that
it can be transmitted verbatim by this computer system to you.
No meaning is transmitted, just the list of numbers. Even the fact that the
pat
//web.ncf.ca/collier
> -Original Message-
> From: Fis [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Dai Griffiths
> Sent: Friday, 14 October 2016 4:16 PM
> To: fis@listas.unizar.es
> Subject: Re: [Fis] Scientific communication (from Mark)
>
> To trying to answe
To trying to answer this question, I find myself asking "Do patterns
exist without an observer?".
A number of familiar problems then re-emerge, which blur my ability to
distinguish between foreground and background.
Dai
On 13/10/16 11:32, Karl Javorszky wrote:
Do patterns contain informatio
Theology and Information
Once again, Bruno has put his finger on the central point of interest: it
is irrelevant, what we call the problem, the subject-matter remains the
same over the generations. In times long gone, thinkers have called the
same problems THEOLOGICAL questions, because it was u
Dear Mark and colleagues,
Loet, clearly the redundancy is apophatic, although one has to be cautious
in saying this: the domain of the apophatic is bigger than the domain of
Shannon redundancy. At some point in the future we may do better in
developing measurement techniques for 'surprise' in
Dear Mark, dear Pedro, dear colleagues,
On 10 Oct 2016, at 19:50, PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ wrote:
On 10 Oct 2016, at 19:50, PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ wrote:
De: Mark Johnson [johnsonm...@gmail.com],
Dear Dai, Rafael, Loet and all,
De: Mark Johnson [johnsonm...@gmail.com],
Dear Dai, Rafael, Loet and all,
Thank you for your comments - the theological connection interests me
because it potentially presents a paradigm of a more vulnerable
and open dialogue.
Loet, clearly the redundan
10 matches
Mail list logo
