[Fis] An Important Dialog

Sun Jan 20 13:06:29 CET 2019

Comparing explanatory models

Xueshan’s side-by-side comparison of two explanatory systems furthers our
common goal of finding a solid, coherent, rational model that depicts
truthfully such processes taking place in Nature, which we agree to call
“information management”. Unfortunately, we have not agreed yet on the
meaning of the term “information”. The side-by-side comparison is a
practical tool to decide, which features of which theory are essential,
which are necessary and which are optional.

Let me continue this noble effort by adding one more column to the
comparison, together with some more rows. There is a model that deserves to
enter the competition. This model’s name is not yet generally agreed on:
let us call it a {numeric, rhythmic, order-centred, natural, tautologic,
cycles-based, comprehensive, general, strict, no-nonsense, no-speculation,
deictic, logical-compromise, dynamic} model.

Feature

num.

competitor M

competitor J

Remarks

Based on rules a 6-year-old understands

Yes

No

No

Can a child sort their dolls first on color then on size? Can they re-sort?
Can they observe what happens?

Principle can be demonstrated both on dolls (or other things) and on
abstract objects

Both

On abstract objects only

On abstract objects only

Discusses relation between sequenced and contemporary collections

Yes

No

No

The DNA is sequenced, the corresponding organism is contemporary.

Model builds up on mental creations as units that are each and all alike,
uniform, indistinguishable

No

Yes

Yes

It is easier to think by schematising into the extreme

Model builds up on mental creations as units that are distinguishable,
having up to 11 property dimensions

Yes

No

No

Permitting archetypes of form, extent, property to exist is picturing
Nature better than thinking her to consist of uniform units

Shows that in a multitude of elements that do have properties, orders and
sequences are axiomatic

Yes

Does not discuss

Does not discuss

Shows that the natural numbers by their properties have a well-defined
place on a plane

Yes

No

No

The user is required to think by their own head that of planes, spaces can
be constructed

Eliminates the need for an extra axiom for the concept of a point, as the
central element(s) are points that are corollaries of the axioms and
definitions of natural numbers

Yes

Does not discuss

Does not discuss

Artful sorting, sequencing and resequencing of natural numbers is expected
to be within the competence level of users

As corollaries of natural numbers, 2 (two) rectangular (Euclid) spaces
emerge

Yes

Does not discuss

Does not discuss

When possible, prefer a model that depicts basic duality, from
proton-neutron to DNA-RNA

Gravitation is explained as a corollary of the merge of the 2 Euclid spaces

Yes

Does not discuss

Does not discuss

When choosing, prefer a model that depicts gravitation as an a-priori
existing implication

Can be used to discuss the term information

Yes

Yes

Yes

Can be used to discuss the term information by pointing in a deictic
fashion to natural numbers

Yes

No

No

First, see the numeric facts. Then give names to the observed facts. Not
the other way around.

Explains 4 genomes of triplets as a basic statement about the structure and
properties of space

Yes

No

No

Once you have found the basic tautology, the mystery decomposes into
combinatorics and taxonomy

Am So., 20. Jan. 2019 um 08:50 Uhr schrieb Joseph Brenner <
joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>:

> Dear Xueshan,
>
>
>
> Thank you for facilitating this dialog. It should be mentioned that Mark’s
> GTI is set out in a 600+ page book, and that nothing comparable on
> information exists for my critique. That should not in and of itself
> invalidate specific points I am trying to make, in my opinion.
>
>
>
> I cannot accept, however, Loet’s trivialization of the discussion, as it
> shows among other things that he has not read *my *book on Logic in
> Reality. He does not have a ‘monopoly’ on probability. There is a
> substantial discussion of my system in terms of a non-Kolmogorovian
> probability distribution of evolving complex processes, such as information
> generation and exchange. It is a serious question to ask whether *all *probability
> distributions and uncertainties can be or need to be measured in bits.
>
>
>
> Finally, my position is consistent with Terry’s conception of information,
> which includes considerations from Boltzmann and Darwin as well as Shannon.
> If Mark could indicate his position on this point, it might be useful to
> add it to Xueshan’s side-by-side comparison.
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
> Joseph
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Fis [mailto:fis-bounces en listas.unizar.es] *On Behalf Of *Loet
> Leydesdorff
> *Sent:* dimanche, 20 janvier 2019 08:17
> *To:* yxs en pku.edu.cn; FIS Group
> *Cc:* Annette Grathoff; Søren Brier; Mark Burgin; Pedro C. Marijuán;
> Terrence Deacon; Joseph Brenner
> *Subject:* Re: [Fis] An Important Dialog
>
>
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
>
>
> It sounds a bit as a continuation of the discussions among the "scavants"
> at the Univerrsity of Coimbra about whether we live in the best of all
> possible worlds; see Voltaire's Candide.
>
>
>
> Did the snake talk to Eve or should we take this metaphorically? Does
> GTI/Sinterclaus/God exist or not? In my opinion, one were advised to
> proceed to empirical research. Some questions are then more fruitful than
> others. Shannon's theory of information can, for example, be used as
> entropy statistics. It thus offers to combine a theoretical perspective and
> a methodology. Without developing the latter, however, the discussion
> becomes very abstract and philosophical.
>
>
>
> The linking pin, in my opinion, is the notion of probability. A
> probability distribution contains an uncertainty which can be measured in
> bits. A one-dimensional probability distribution can be represented as a
> vector (or a set of relations); a two-dimensional as a matrix. The second
> dimension can be used for the decomposition in terms of principal
> components (eigenvectors). A three-dimensional probability distribution--a
> cube of information--can contain local minima and trajectories in an
> Euclidean space. A four-dimensional one represents a hyper-geometry
> containing next-order regimes as structures of (globalized instead of
> stabilized) expectations.
>
>
>
> While instantiations can be described in three dimensions,
> self-organization (autopoiesis, nisus) requires this extension to four
> dimenisons of the probability distribution. The Shannon formula set no
> limits on the number of dimensions and thus one obtains a rich researchable
> domain. As some of you know, my interest nowadays is particularly in the
> measurement and calculus of redundancy (new options). But that is only one
> of the options for empirical research.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Loet
>
>
>
> PS. Sinterklaas is a Dutch fest on the evening of December 5, when a
> bishop arrives from Spain with presents for the children. Most children
> lose their belief in his existence at the age of six or seven.  L.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Loet Leydesdorff
>
> Professor emeritus, University of Amsterdam
> Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR)
>
> loet en leydesdorff.net ; http://www.leydesdorff.net/
> Associate Faculty, SPRU, <http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/>University of
> Sussex;
>
> Guest Professor Zhejiang Univ. <http://www.zju.edu.cn/english/>,
> Hangzhou; Visiting Professor, ISTIC,
> <http://www.istic.ac.cn/Eng/brief_en.html>Beijing;
>
> Visiting Fellow, Birkbeck <http://www.bbk.ac.uk/>, University of London;
>
> http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ych9gNYAAAAJ&hl=en
>
>
>
>
>
> ------ Original Message ------
>
> From: "Xueshan Yan" <yxs en pku.edu.cn>
>
> To: "FIS Group" <fis en listas.unizar.es>
>
> Cc: "Annette Grathoff" <annette.grathoff en is4si.org>; "Søren Brier" <
> sb.ikk en cbs.dk>; "Mark Burgin" <markburg en cs.ucla.edu>; "Pedro C. Marijuán"
> <pcmarijuan.iacs en aragon.es>; "Terrence Deacon" <deacon en berkeley.edu>; "Joseph
> Brenner" <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>
>
> Sent: 1/20/2019 4:17:39 AM
>
> Subject: [Fis] An Important Dialog
>
>
>
> Dear FIS Colleagues,
>
> A few days ago, among some of active IS4SI Board members, we have a very
> constructive discussion about Mark Burgin’s General Theory of Information
> (GTI, based on his book *Theory of Information: Fundamentality, Diversity
> and Unification*, 2010), the discussion was in progress mainly between
> Joseph and Mark and focused on the following three points:
>
> 1. Is information a phenomena or a reality?
>
> 2. Are the mathematical methods Mark developed useful?
>
> 3. Where is the position of a GTI?
>
> I have made a commitment that I will summarize the main arguments of the
> discussion then. The following are the gist of them and please give enough
> attention to.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Xueshan
>
>
>
>                              *The main points of the arguments*
>
>
>
> Mark’s gist
>
>
>
> 1. (My) GTI consists of two parts - ontology of information and axiology
> of information. The mathematical component of this theory is mainly
> ontological based on mathematical models of information as operators and
> functors. The system of ontological and axiological principles of the GTI
> provides unified foundations for information studies, though it is
> difficult to understand.
>
> 2. Information is a phenomenon. It's neither quantitative nor qualitative.
> It's people (and sometimes machines) who ascribe qualitative or
> quantitative measures to information. My GTI does acknowledge qualitative
> information but only existence of qualitative and quantitative measures.
>
> 3. My GTI does not define Information in term of bit, bit is a unit of a
> particular measure of information only in some special information theory.
>
> 4. My GTI defines information as a real essence. Although many think that
> there are only one reality – physical things, actually there are different
> realities.
>
> 5. My GTI allows specification to all existing information theories. It
> provides constructive tools for doing such specifications and building
> special information theories without including these theories into its
> scope.
>
> 6. The theories of Shannon, Fisher or Bar-Hillel, etc. are the varieties
> of GTI, together all these theories form information science.
>
> 7. My GTI forms a unified foundation of information science and can be
> used for studies of actually any kind of information including ethical
> information or semantic information, for which meaning is the defining
> feature.
>
> Joseph’s gist
>
>
>
> 1. There is no role for the information what Mark stated, including
> qualitative, non-measurable and/or non-quantitative one. It is a lower
> ontological level.
>
> 2. A GTI should not define information in terms of bit.
>
> 3. The question of “What information is” implies a substance rather than
> dynamic process ontology.
>
> 4. If information is only a phenomenon, I cannot imagine a ‘measure’
> operating on an appearance.
>
> 5. Mark’s GTI tries to explain “*What Information Is”* but without a
> discussion.
>
> 6. If information by Mark’s GTI consideration cannot be a process or have
> processual characteristics, it cannot be ‘general’.
>
> 7. What Mark have defined is a THEORY OF GENERAL INFORMATION but not a
> GENERAL THEORY OF INFORMATION.
>
> 8. Mark’s GTI extracts the general characteristics of information
> processes independently of their substratum of physical (energetic)
> properties, all of the mathematical aspects of what he has called a GTI
> then apply to that abstraction, and a ‘meaning’ of those aspects exists, it
> is tautological.
>
> 9. What is ontologically primary, then, are the phenomena that have
> meaning – the information necessary for the survival of living beings and
> for their reproduction.
>
> 10. According to Mark, Meaning will be the foundation of all theories of
> information.
>
> 11. And Mark’s GTI will become a Meta-Theory of Information, a theory of
> Theories of Information.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> Garanti
> sans virus. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> <#m_2457476283706481955_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis en listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20190120/963e5172/attachment-0001.html>