Re: Information

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Tue May 08 2001 - 20:33:38 BST

  • Next message: joedees@bellsouth.net: "Re: Information"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id UAA03097 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 8 May 2001 20:31:07 +0100
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 14:33:38 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Information
    Message-ID: <3AF803C2.20745.4C7EC5@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <20010505140751.E1058@ii01.org>
    References: <20010504125306.AAA6281@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>; from wade_smith@harvard.edu on Fri, May 04, 2001 at 08:52:53AM -0400
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 5 May 2001, at 14:07, Robin Faichney wrote:

    > On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 08:52:53AM -0400, Wade T.Smith wrote:
    > > On 05/04/01 05:30, Robin Faichney said this-
    > >
    > > >I'm talking about the information that's
    > > >intrinsic to every physical system, that Frieden and colleagues
    > > >have used *successfully* to derive the laws of physics.
    > >
    > > And, sure, I can understand that. But, if this intrinsic (is this
    > > Fisher?) information is _not_ derived, and the law of physics issued
    > > therefrom, of what significance is it, or could it possibly have?
    > >
    > > Significance- 2. A meaning that is expressed.
    >
    > I'm no physicist, and I don't know exactly how intrinsic information
    > is handled by Frieden. (It's not Fisher information -- that's the
    > sort that *can* be extracted from the system.) But for me, if its use
    > allows the laws of physics to be derived, then it's significant.
    >
    > Significance: 3. Importance; moment; weight; consequence.
    >
    Actually, the laws that emerge are artifacts of the reduction of the
    measurement fuzziness as far as is possible given Hesenbergian
    restraints. One cannot use the gap between the knowable and the
    unknowable to derive anything, because if one of the terminii is
    unknowable, so is the extent of the gap (doh!).
    > --
    > Robin Faichney
    > Get your Meta-Information from http://www.ii01.org
    > (CAUTION: contains philosophy, may cause heads to spin)
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >
    >

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue May 08 2001 - 20:35:18 BST