[Fis] _ RE: _ Re: Cho 2016 The social life of quarks

Tue Jan 19 00:14:10 CET 2016

At 2:43 AM 01/19/2016, Jerry wrote:

In order for symbolic chemical communication to occur, the language must go
far beyond such simplistic notions of a primary interaction among forces,
such as centripetal orbits or even the four basic forces.

    The quark physicist is quirky in confining a set of quarks, including
possibly tetra- or even penta-, within a closed bag with use of a virtual
exchange of matter called gluons. This bag is methodologically
tightly-cohesive because of the virtuality of the things to be exchanged
exclusively in a closed manner. In contrast, the real exchange of matter
underlying the actual instantiation of cohesion, which concerns the
information phenomenologist facing chemistry and biology in a serious
manner, is about something referring to something else in the actual and is
thus open-ended. Jerry, you seem calling our attention to the actual
cohesion acting in the empirical world which the physicist has failed in
coping with, so far. 

   Koichiro

From: Fis [mailto:fis-bounces at listas.unizar.es] On Behalf Of Jerry LR
Chandler
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 2:43 AM
To: fis <fis at listas.unizar.es>
Subject: [Fis] _ Re: Cho 2016 The social life of quarks

Koichiro, Bob U., Pedro:

Recent posts here illustrate the fundamental discord between modes of human
communication.  Pedro's last post neatly addresses the immediate issue. 

 But, the basic issue goes far, far deeper.

The challenge of communicating our meanings is not restricted to just
scientific meaning vs. historical meaning.  Nor, communication between the
general community and, say, the music (operatic and ballad) communities.

Nor, is it merely a matter of definition of terms and re-defining terms as
"metaphor" in another discipline.

Pedro's post aims toward the deeper issues, issues that are fairly known and
understood in the symbolic  logic and chemical communities.  In the chemical
community, the understanding is at the level of intuition because ordinary
usage within the discipline requires an intuitive understanding of the way
symbolic usage manifests itself in different disciplines.  

(For a detailed description of these issues, see, The Primary Logic,
Instruments for a dialogue between the two Cultures. M. Malatesta,
Gracewings, Fowler Wright Books, 1997.)

The Polish Logician, A. Tarski, recognized the separation of meanings and
definitions requires the usage of METALANGUAGES.  For example, ordinary
public language is necessary for expression of meaning of mathematical
symbolic logic.  But, from the basic mathematical language, once it grounded
in ordinary grammar, develops new set of symbols and new meanings for
relations among mathematical symbols.  Consequently, mathematicians
re-define a long index of terms that are have different meanings in its
technical language. 

 The meaning of mathematical terms is developed from an associative logic
that is foreign to ordinary language.  From these antecedents, the
consequences are abundantly clear. The communication between the
meta-languages fail. The mathematicians have added vast symbolic logical
structures to their symbolic communication with symbols. In other words, the
ordinary historian and scientist are not able to grasp the distinctive
meanings of mathematical information.  

Physical information is restricted to physical units of measure and hence
constrained to borrowing mathematical symbols and relating to the ordinary
language as its meta-language.

The perplexity of chemical information theory is such that it is not
understandable in any one meta-language or any pair of meta-languages.  In
order for symbolic chemical communication to occur, the language must go far
beyond such simplistic notions of a primary interaction among forces, such
as centripetal orbits or even the four basic forces.  

The early metalanguage of chemistry was merely terms within ordinary
language, such as the names of elements. Or, the common names for oils from
various sources. Around the turn of the 19 th Century, the metalanguage of
chemistry started it century-long journey to become a meta-language of
mathematics with the development of the concepts of atomic weights for each
singular elements and molecular weight, and molecular formula for each
different molecule. 

The critical distinction that separates the meta-language of chemistry from
other metalanguages is the absolute requirement for specification of the
name of any object on the basis of it's distinction from other signs or
collections of signs. 

Thus, chemical information theory, in terms of metalanguages, requires the
exact usage of the meta-languages of both physics and mathematics in order
to define the origin of its symbolic logic, as well as the natural
metalanguage of ordinary human communication. 

Biological information theory is grounded on chemical information theory,
using a particular encoding of meaning within dynamical systems, to
communicate among the 5 essential metalanguages necessary for the practice
of the medical arts.  And, I might add, for human history. 

The failure of luke-warm physics to serve as a foundation for a generalized
information theory is the lack of terminology that can be used to
communicate among the symbolic logics used in more advanced modes of human
communication.

In summary, in the 21 st Century, the foundation of human symbolic
communication  requires multiple metalanguages and symbol systems, that is,
a generalized information theory.  Such a generalized theory  of information
must necessarily include the symbolic logic of chemistry, which is essential
to span the  symbolic gaps between the disciplines. 

(For those of you who are familiar with my background, this email
illuminates some of the reasoning behind the development of the perplex
number system and perplex systems theory within the associative symbolic
logic of graph theory.)

Cheers

Jerry 

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" < <mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es>
pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es>

Subject: Re: [Fis] Cho 2016 The social life of quarks

Date: January 18, 2016 at 5:50:40 AM CST

To: 'fis' < <mailto:fis at listas.unizar.es> fis at listas.unizar.es>

Dear Howard and colleagues,

OK, you can say that quarks communicate, but immediately we need to create
another term for "real" communication. I mean, there are quarks (fermions)
and bosons (particle forces) everywhere: planets, stars, galaxies, etc.
Their multiple interactions constitute most of the contents of physics. If
you want to term "communication" to some basic categories of physical
interactions based on force exchange --of some of the 4 fundamental forces,
whatever-- we run into difficulties to characterize the communication that
entails signals, agents and meanings, and responses. That's the "real"
communication we find after the origins of that singular organization we
call life --essential then for the later emergence of superorganisms,
peaking order, memes, etc. You have oceans of interacting fermions and
bosons around, but the new communicating phenomenology is only found in our
minuscule planet.

As an explanatory metaphor, it is not a good idea, almost wrong I dare say.
But as a free-wheeling, literary metaphor it belongs to the author's choice.
The problem is that both realms of information, so to speak, have relatively
overlapping components, depending on the explanatory framework used (see the
ongoing exchanges by Stan, John, Terry,  etc.) And that kind of apparent
homogenization blurs the effort to establish the distinctions and advance in
a unifying perspective (I think!!). In any case, it deserves more
discussion. In your Jan. 14th message you ad more elements--I will think
twice!.

All the best--Pedro

PS. Clarifying the two messages per week rule (responding to offline
quests): the two messages should be counted along the "international
business week": starting on Monday until the end of Sunday, Greenwich Time.
Thanks to all for respecting this "boundary condition"!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20160119/1d77495c/attachment.html>