### Re: [Fis] Fw: Responses

Dear colleagues, This discussion and reading the beautiful book of Bob Logan entitled What is information? (shortly forthcoming) made me go back to reading MacKay (1969) once more. I cannot find the distinction that makes a difference as it is quoted by Floridi (2005) -- and thereafter repeated

### Re: [Fis] Fw: Responses

At 09:45 PM 2014-01-21, Robert E. Ulanowicz wrote: The reason of being of information, whatever its content or quantity, is to be used by an agent (biological or artificial). Dear Christophe, In making this restriction you are limiting the domain of information to communication and excluding

### Re: [Fis] Fw: Responses

Dear Bob U, If your are talking about resident information, as available for usage, I take it as being part of information that can be used by the agent. Let me go through John's paper (thanks John). Best Christophe Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 14:45:15 -0500 Subject: Re: [Fis] Fw: Responses

### Re: [Fis] Probability Amplitudes

Dear Hans, I would like just to point that 99,99% of people working in quantum theory would say that the complex amplitude of quantum probability is the main its intrinsic property, so if you try to exclude amplitudes from the model you can in principle do this and this is well known

### Re: [Fis] Probability Amplitudes

Dear Joseph, you are going toward quantum probability theory where probabilities are determined by vectors; moreover, the vectors belong to complex Hilbert space, i.e., roughly speaking each probability has not only the direction but even the phase, andrei Andrei Khrennikov, Professor of

### [Fis] TWO MESSAGES PER WEEK

ONLY TWO MESSAGES PER WEEK ARE ALLOWED IN THE FIS LIST -- - Pedro C. Marijuán Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA) Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13,

### Re: [Fis] Probability Amplitudes

Dear Andrei, Hans and all I agree with Andrei. And why make quantum theory more complex than it is? One may use all kinds of mathematical tools in a scientific theory, and the more these tools simplify calculations the better. I see no reason to avoid using amplitudes or matrices in quantum

### [Fis] Frequentists, Bayesians and Jaynesians - assumptions and consequentces

Dear colleagues, Encouraged by your recent exchanges, which show that the topic of Hans' New Year Lecture is far from exhausted, I would like to think a bit more on the fundamental change from Frequentist to Bayesian statistics. Hans writes: “On the one hand each individual agent assembles the

### [Fis] Probability Amplitudes in Macroscopic Processes

Dear Lars-Göran, Andrei and Hans, As you (I hope) have seen, I am trying to see how the evolution of macroscopic processes can be described in terms of changing probabilities, and I am encouraged to believe this is possible. If you allow the extension from QM, all of the following would seem

### Re: [Fis] Probability Amplitudes in Macroscopic Processes

Let me clarify one point: by saying that probability amplitudes represent real physical features I reject the instrumentalist idea that they are mere calculational devices. But of course, the probability amplitude is no observable. But there is no need to claim that only observables have any