John Collier
Cc : Foundations of Information Science Information Science; Dai Griffiths
Objet : Re: [Fis] What is information? and What is life?
Leot remarks:
"... we need a kind of calculus of redundancy."
I agree whole-heartedly.
What for Shannon was the key to error-correction is
nce W. DEACON [mailto:dea...@berkeley.edu]
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2017 8:15 PM
To: John Collier
Cc: l...@leydesdorff.net; Dai Griffiths; Foundations of Information Science
Information Science
Subject: Re: [Fis] What is information? and What is life?
Leot remarks:
"... we need
nizar.es] *On Behalf Of *Loet
> Leydesdorff
> *Sent:* December 31, 2016 12:16 AM
> *To:* 'Terrence W. DEACON' <dea...@berkeley.edu>; 'Dai Griffiths' <
> dai.griffith...@gmail.com>; 'Foundations of Information Science
> Information Science' <fis@listas.unizar.es>
>
To: 'Terrence W. DEACON' <dea...@berkeley.edu>; 'Dai Griffiths'
<dai.griffith...@gmail.com>; 'Foundations of Information Science Information
Science' <fis@listas.unizar.es>
Subject: Re: [Fis] What is information? and What is life?
We agree that such a theory is a ways off, though you
rs; u...@umces.edu; Alex Hankey; FIS Webinar
Subject: Re: [Fis] What is information? and What is life?
List,
Please allow me to respond to Loet about the definition of information stated
below.
1. the definition of information as uncertainty is counter-intuitive
("bizarre&
gt;> release of energy that then constitutes work and the propagation of
>>>> organization.” I asked several times what this means and how one can
>>>> measure this information. Hitherto, I only obtained the answer that
>>>> colleagues who disagree with me will be cit
;
>>> Professor, University of Amsterdam
>>> Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)
>>>
>>> <l...@leydesdorff.net> <l...@leydesdorff.net>l...@leydesdorff.net ;
>>> <http://www.leydesdorff.net/> <http://www.leydesdorff.ne
esdorff.net/> <http://www.leydesdorff.net/>
>> http://www.leydesdorff.net/
>> Associate Faculty, SPRU, <http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/>University of
>> Sussex;
>>
>> Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. <http://www.zju.edu.cn/english/>,
>> Hangzhou; Visiting Pr
...@leydesdorff.net>
*Cc:* James Peters; u...@umces.edu <mailto:u...@umces.edu>; Alex
Hankey; FIS Webinar
*Subject:* Re: [Fis] What is information? and What is life?
List,
Please allow me to respond to Loet about the definition of
information stated below.
1
De : Fis <fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es> de la part de Loet Leydesdorff
<l...@leydesdorff.net>
Envoyé : lundi 26 décembre 2016 14:01
À : 'Terrence W. DEACON'; 'Francesco Rizzo'; 'fis'
Objet : Re: [Fis] What is information? and What is life?
In this respect L
In this respect Loet comments:
"In my opinion, the status of Shannon’s mathematical theory of information is
different from special theories of information (e.g., biological ones) since
the formal theory enables us to translate between these latter theories."
We are essentially in
;
>> l...@leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/
>> Associate Faculty, SPRU, <http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/>University of
>> Sussex;
>>
>> Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. <http://www.zju.edu.cn/english/>,
>> Hangzhou; Visiting Professor, ISTIC,
>>
http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYJ=en
From: Fis [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Terrence W. DEACON
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 5:33 AM
To: fis
Subject: Re: [Fis] What is information? and What is life?
Against information fundamentalism
Rather than figh
ces.edu; Alex Hankey; FIS Webinar
*Subject:* Re: [Fis] What is information? and What is life?
List,
Please allow me to respond to Loet about the definition of information
stated below.
1. the definition of information as uncertainty is counter-intuitive
("bizarre"); (p. 27)
I agree.
Dear Dick - I loved your analysis. You are right on the money. It also explains
why Shannon dominated the field of information. He had a mathematical formula
and there is nothing more appealing to a scientist than a mathematical formula.
But you are right his formula only tells us of how many
List,
Please allow me to respond to Loet about the definition of information
stated below.
1. the definition of information as uncertainty is counter-intuitive
("bizarre"); (p. 27)
I agree. I struggled with this definition for a long time before realising
that Shannon was really discussing
Dear James and colleagues,
Weaver (1949) made two major remarks about his coauthor (Shannon)'s
contribution:
1. the definition of information as uncertainty is counter-intuitive
("bizarre"); (p. 27)
2. "In particular, information must not be confused with meaning." (p. 8)
The
Hi, Bob.
It is an awesome book! I read the Portuguese version.
I am happy to know that it is available online for everyone :-)
Kind regards.
Moisés
2016-06-15 18:21 GMT-03:00 Bob Logan :
> Dear FIS colleagues - I received three complimentary emails re my paper,
>
Dear FIS colleagues - I received three complimentary emails re my paper,
Propagating Organization: An Enquiry, the paper I wrote with Stuart Kauffman
and others and which I shared with the list. As a result I thought some of you
might be interested in the book I wrote based on that paper
Dear all,
I apologize for the delayed response and fragmented personal replies.
I apologize that not all of your responses were selected for further
comments, only those that were the first to come and those that look as the
most relevant ones.
I apologize that not all topics of these
Dear Colleagues,
Re Pedro's point and other related postings . . .
I would never bet for a new info-reductionism, or explanatory monism,
science is an elegant Babel construction always condemned --or enjoying--
the plurality of disciplinary languages and views.
I echo the questions around
Dear colleagues,
I see informational processes as essentially being proto-scientific – how is
any science not an informational process?
The sciences, in my opinion, are different in terms of what is communicated. As
Maturana noted, the communication of molecules generates a biology.
Thanks Loet, that is helpful, and makes intuitively good sense. But I
remain puzzled. I see two distinct cases:
Case 1: For molecules 'communication' consists of interaction between
the molecules themselves, resulting in biology.
Similarly, for atoms 'communication' consists of interaction
Greetings to all,
As I read these comments I have a hard time finding an effective
anchor upon which to add notes. I see informational processes as
essentially being proto-scientific – how is any science not an
informational process? First, I think this places me in the camp of
Peirce's view.
Thanks Robert,
I agree with what you say about DNA, so I may be on the same slippery
path to catastrophic heterodoxy!
In responding to the question what is information, started by Marcus,
I was pointing out what seemed to me to be a shifting definition of
'communication', and wondering if
Dear Dai:
To say that molecules only interact directly is to ignore the metabolic
matrix that constitutes the actual agency in living systems. For example,
we read everywhere how DNA/RNA directs development, when the molecule
itself is a passive material cause. It is the network of proteomic and
26 matches
Mail list logo