Re: Information

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Sat May 12 2001 - 02:59:16 BST

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

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id CAA10705 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 12 May 2001 02:57:06 +0100
    From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 20:59:16 -0500
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: Re: Information
    Message-ID: <3AFC52A4.27354.11121B6@localhost>
    In-reply-to: <20010509125414.B11502@ii01.org>
    References: <3AF802CC.28834.48BE56@localhost>; from joedees@bellsouth.net on Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:29:32PM -0500
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On 9 May 2001, at 12:54, Robin Faichney wrote:

    > On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:29:32PM -0500, joedees@bellsouth.net wrote:
    > > On 5 May 2001, at 13:33, Robin Faichney wrote: > > > I'm sorry, but
    > that quote seems to me to support my position. Perhaps > > you'd be
    > good enough to explain? > > > The part about observer participation
    > giving rise to information > (which in turn gives rise to physics) is
    > as clear as a bell; in the > absence of observer participation, one
    > cannot claim information, for > there is no participating observer for
    > it to INFORM. As for all things > physical being
    > information-theoretic in origin, that's information- > theoretic FOR
    > US, who formulate theories from the information we, > as participant
    > observers, apprehend, via perception, from our > perspectives upon the
    > physical and participatory universe we > inhabit.
    >
    > As usual, you fall back on insisting that "information" only be used
    > where someone is actually "informed". That concerns the most useful
    > way to use the word, and is necessarily a matter of opinion, about
    > which we differ. Everything else you say there is fine by me.
    >
    The point is that the quote (and the entire premise of Fisher
    information physics) does not support your apprehender-is-
    unnecessary intrinsic-information position, but instead contradicts
    it.
    > --
    > 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 : Sat May 12 2001 - 03:02:15 BST