[Fis] [Fwd: Information And Locality, Addendum's]--Steven

[Pedro C. Marijuan]

Dear Steven and FIS colleagues,

Sorry about the problems with the server. Next messages, please, send 
them directly to me and I will re-enter.

The approach to locality you have explained is interesting. In general 
it looks right, as biological information can be widely delocalized, 
relatively delocalized, but also strictly localized. Apart from your 
examples on allosterism and receptor synergistic action, the gradients 
of second messengers and the transmembrane transmission of signaling 
effects in other receptors may be instances of the relative class, and 
the base pairing of nucleotides would correspond to the localized class. 
If I am not wrong, it is quite difficult to shoehorn into a single 
category the bioinfo architectures of the cell. Therefore in general I 
use the "info flow" parlance, for the result of the cell's communication 
with the environment is quite often a Brownian flow or an "influence" 
(mostly of the delocalized class) that travels towards the action 
centers of the cell --the transcription factors that guide gene expression.

Then, arriving at that instance, I have some disagreement in the way 
Guenther speaks about the syntactic-semantic-pragmatic rules applying to 
any sign-system of natural biocommunication language. Imagine, following 
with the previous paragraph, that we have just received (E. coli) a puff 
of cAMP signal from the environment. It has been trapped by some 
receptors of a two component system and some activated transcription 
factors  CRP type travel to express around 400 different genes. Of 
course, it previously depends on the dominant sigma factors (if sigma 70 
dominates, it is OK, otherwise there might be problems with the previous 
sequence). Well, most of this narrative is fictitious, but the problem 
is how do you express in "rule-mediated" statements this type of 
half-known tremendous complexity? How do you handle the very different 
signaling capabilities/properties of one component systems, two 
components, three components, and above all, the sigma factors --that in 
my view are most of them essential for connecting with the life cycle; 
they represent the equivalent to our "moods" and "emotions". Otherwise I 
think he is quite right in the conflation of signs and sign-users at the 
sub-viral level. I consider it, potentially, a breakthrough 
complementing the symbiotic theory of Lynn Margulis with a new viral 
(sub-viral) branch, plus the well-known archeal and eubacterial ones.

Unfortunately, the neglect of the life cycle is almost universal. 
Neither neuroscientists nor psychologists nor social scientists are 
sufficiently aware of this invisible "water" that permeates all living 
stuff. Echoing some old evolutionary statement, everything should made 
sense in relation with the advancement of the corresponding life cycle. 
Just the superficial observation of human exchanges in our societies, or 
in whatever historical epoch, the conversational small-talk topics, the 
way people greet each other, the gossip media... the condensates of the 
individuals' info cycles are everywhere. A new conceptualization of 
information as accompanying the development of human action for the sake 
of life cycles and subtending the cooperation structures of economic 
life could have wide multidisciplinary interest--I think. 
(Unfortunately, these adventures are discouraged: Mark is terribly right 
about the sorrow state of our collective brain reservoirs--poor 
universities! kingdoms of conventionalism and tunnel vision).

To conclude, the emphasis on the generative also allows some connection 
with Howard's and Bob's  criticisms on the "dead"  approach to  
cosmological matters.  I do not venture to expose my own naive views, 
rather will repeat a wonderful sentence from Michael Conrad (1996): 
"When we look at a biological system we are looking at the face of the 
underlying physics of the universe."

best--Pedro


Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:
> (From Steven)
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:     Information And Locality, Addendum's
> Date:     Mon, 28 Sep 2015 16:46:41 -0700
> From:     Steven Ericsson-Zenith <steven at iase.us>
> To:     Foundations of Information Science Information Science 
> <fis at listas.unizar.es>
> CC:     Pedro Marijuan <pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es>
>
>
>
> Dear List,
>
> Looking over my promises in this discussion I have two particular 
> notes to provide. These got put aside as I became distracted by both 
> the server issues and my health.
>
> I promised to provide a historical statement (referencing Benjamin 
> Peirce, Einstein and Turing) and a brief mathematical statement.  I 
> will make these statements separately over the coming days.
>
> Pedro, I note that server issues continue. 
> Regards,
> Steven
>
>
> -- 
>  Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith, Los Gatos, California. +1-650-308-8611
>  http://iase.info
> ---
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>


-- 
-------------------------------------------------
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, planta X
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
-------------------------------------------------