Dear List,
Prior messages can be found:
Introduction:
http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/2015-September/000512.html
On the introduction:
http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/2015-September/000528.html
Information And Locality
http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/2015-September/000529.html
http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/2015-September/000531.html
http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/2015-September/000533.html
Locality?
http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/2015-September/000542.html
This is my last main post on Information and Locality. I summarize and expand
the scope of the inquiry.
In the light of my consideration of Locality it should be clear that I have
proposed a new universal at the level of gravitation. This universal effect
denies locality in structure, is across structure, and enables biophysics,
including sense, to be included in the physical sciences.
Mathematically the effect is characterized as a shaping upon the surface of
flexible closed structure. These shapes are manifest as sense receptors or
motor functors. They are bound by action potentials via the internal genetic
mechanics. These same mechanics modify the shapes by, for example, inserting
new receptors or motor functors into the surface.
This lack of locality is called Allosteric Conformance in biophysics. These
shapes are profoundly sensitive. One or two molecules bound to a ligand may
cause the entire array to conform as though each receptor had a molecule. The
response may be a refinement of the structure and/or an action response
(activation of a motor functor).
Unfortunately, biophysicists have only attempted conventional mathematical
physics to this problem, trying - for example - to use the Ising model,
designed originally for ferro-magnetic consideration with only minor success.
In fact, this problem needs to be viewed by mathematicians (and more widely
than I) who can formulate new mathematics to address the evidence. I have
proposed one solution, another mathematician may propose another, but it seems
clear that the solution is continuous structure (geometric) and not atomic.
Unlike Shannon’s model my proposed effect is the base of experience: the
locality issues I have outlined go away and sense is formed. The changing shape
of biophysical structure is the changing feeling of our being.
Logical operations enabled by this structure are very different from those of
computational convention for it is not, indeed it cannot be, implemented by
digital or analog electrical engineering. It is rather a mechanics of diffusion
across flexible closed structure that carries the environmental stimulants
causing the action potentials to form and eventually for motor functors to
activate.
In flexible closed structure feelings are shapes upon the surface and vary as
response potentials change. Sense (s) changes as the shape changes. There is no
sense without this motion. The same shape will always produce the same sense
and is the basis of memory, familiarity, and habit. Mathematically, these cells
and other biophysical membranes are continuous holomorphic functors bound (by
the genetic mechanism) as sense and response (r) hyperfunctors. Simply, ( s, r
).
The suggestive evidence for this effect is allosteric conformance in the wide
range of biophysical observations and, naturally, experience of our own
anatomy.
You may rebel and argue that surely all this can be performed by computing
systems, but no. I demonstrated that power utilization excludes Turing
machines, of all kinds, from biophysics.
A strict Pragmaticism is the source of all “meaning." The meaning of a mark is
simply the physical response, the motions, of the apprehender.
“Communication” is a meta-consideration and relies upon convention. Whether it
be dance, a religious or political poster, a work of science or art. Convention
is learned. It comes from those in our immediate environment whom we must trust
as children, by observation of the deeds and words of our parents and siblings,
of our friends and mentors.
Without this guidance we will certainly misinterpret the world. This is why the
scientific method of discernment is so important. It really must be the first
thing we all learn or we inevitably fall into confusion.
It is perfectly valid in this model to say that the meaning of a rock impact is
the consequent behavior, just as the apprehension of a mark is the consequent
behavior.
The rock “knows” just as the apprehender “knows.” The difference is that the
rock has no flexible structure forming sense and is thus not organized to feel,
respond, or to have a “mind.” While the apprehender is a flexible closed
structure, apprehending across the entire structure, and potentially
externalizing a response immediately.
Modern Information Science is not only missing direct consideration of
Locality, it necessarily implies an extended Locality. At almost every level,
a primitive type or simple or complex aggregates of types, the typing system
deceives us. We consider 8bit or 64bit words to be one. In fact they have no
locality at all and their Locality is, in fact, in implementation, arbitrary.
Information is always about something. We speak of the world as in-formation.
And as a result it is impossible for information to be basic.
We gather these illusions, we organize them and describe them as software, and
place them into artificially organized machines based upon the mechanisms of
the industrial revolution (the Jacquard Loom). These machines are a Chinese
room except there is no-person inside the machine. There is no Turk. There can
never be any feeling.
This model consists of a discovery of a physical role for sense or feeling in
biophysical assimilation and the activity of information in the world.
In our disciplines, with all respect to people here, we speak about ideas and
hope to maybe change behavior by their acceptance. Yet if none of us change
behavior by bringing these ideas into the world then our work is quite
literally without meaning. And this may bring out the existential crisis in
each of us.
In theoretical physics motion is "in-formation." Yet we should not become
confused about its role as a generalization existentially. It can only inform
motions and identify cause. Information can never speak about basis. It can
never be equated with substance or force, it may only speak about these things.
Finally, I feel exactly as you feel. When I look upon the world, I see the same
things that you see.
We are structurally very similar and the basis of our experience is universal.
The entire difference between you and I is our environment, the things and the
people we keep in it.
I should not have to point out that this way of thinking makes the ideas of
General AI a futile fantasy. We may perhaps enhance or reproduce our
experiences through technology derived from these ideas but we can never
transfer senses or mind. These ideas are simply the dualism of the modern age.
The facts are simple motions passing through biology and mediated by structure.
There is surely a better or worse way to socially organize. But not via the
whimsy of opinion, although opinion certainly impacts motions, but by the facts
of nature. We may expect that as we are better able to discern these facts that
we will be more effective in living together.
It is worth noting that, as far as we know, we are the only instance of intent
or WILL, the manifestation of this new universal, in the entire universe. The
knowledge that we are now acquiring as a result of rapid advances in biophysics
will provide us the ability to place life where it would not otherwise occur.
This gives a role to WILL in the grander scheme of things and a “grand
challenge” for humanity.
Thinking about the nature of Locality opens a range of complex ideas that may
seem unrelated. But the bottom-line is a simple confrontation. Are we a
technological whimper, polluting our environment to demise? Or will we accept
a role to extend a place for intension and WILL beyond the Darwinian accident?
It is not that Nature does not need people (as the International Conservation
groups would have it), people are Nature.
Regards,
Steven
PS. With acknowledgement and respect to the mathematician and astronomer
Benjamin Peirce of Harvard University (1809-1880).
--
Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith, Los Gatos, California. +1-650-308-8611
http://iase.info
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
