[Fis] whether this useful simulation is information, data or something else?

[Karl Javorszky]

Dear Annette,



Thank you for returning to the rhetorical challenges of explaining the
works of a pocket watch to a Neanderthal. Your sympathy is greatly
appreciated.

The captatio benevolentiae as the first step of any explanation has to
stick to the didactic facts, and correctly describe the task: the
explanation of some divine machination is of such a striking novelty, that
the learned audience has to be ready to start completely afresh. You have
never seen things like this here invention, what is more: you never thought
it possible that such gadgets can exist.

The object of the demonstration to be a pocket watch is an illuminating
allegory. The order by which Nature present itself to us is intricate and
artful, but first of all periodic and interrelated. The noble savage has to
conceptualise himself and the world around himself different to heretofore
with identical units and no pre-existing relations among the units, into a
new concept, where there are many pre-existing relations among the units,
and the state of the assembly is what we look at, not the biographies of
the individuals. The individuals are connected by pre-existing bonds, which
are called cycles; these become apparent as any permutation is transformed
into a different permutation.

Dr N. E. Anderthal shall also be prepared to conceptualise that the whole
system is (contains, consists of) nothing but cycles, and elements are
available or less so, in dependence of what order prevails. Orders are
periodicities, and the model reflects periodicities imposing places.
Sorting and ordering reflect the influences of periodicities of outside
circumstances on a habitat.

The parable of the pocket watch shall drive your attention to following
main perspective suggestions in connection with the narrative:

a. everything is periodic, the stages in a period follow each other in a
sequence (teeth are fixed on a cog);

b. for each pair of order changes from-to that can take place (with *k*
different orders), each element is assigned – (a priori, by Nature, as a
property of it being a pair of natural numbers) – some other elements, with
which together it is fulfilling the exercise “reorder”. (With which it is a
co-member in the corpus of that cycle in which it is contained during a
reorder *ki **→ kj);*

c. we assume a reorder *ki **→ kj* to take place by drawing conclusions
from our observations, that such subsets of elements have been observed
that make it reasonable to assume that a reorder *ki **→ kj *takes place
(the cogs and wheels of the watch are self-referencing);

d. the remaining alternative(s), namely that assuming that reorder *kq **→
kr* is taking place had also many points speaking for it, remain in
existence at least as long as both reorders process such members of the
cycle, which are common to both;



So far, in the words above, stands how I would have tried to clarify the
pocket watch parable. Let us now follow your points:

Picturing the influences of external forces affecting a habitat (day –
night, tidal) is equivalent to sorting the collection. The elements are
different among each other, and these differences impose a linear order on
them. (Students stand in a row according to last name) Two symbols of
difference generate two linear orders (Students in a row on first name). A
plane can be constructed, where the x,y coordinates are the sequential
positions in the rows. (Aron Abelson will always stay near *(1,1)*, and
Zlotan Zwonimir near the *(n,n) *x,y coordinates of a plane with places for
*n* students). We insist, that the operators *{<,=,>} *are present and
operate.

The linear place and the planar position are an inborn property of pairs of
natural numbers. Anything in the world that is made up of 2 parts, obeys
the sentence *a+b=c.* That, what we observe and perceive are but variations
of this and a few other basic axioms (laws of Nature). In order to restrict
our investigations to a manageable scope, we look only into the
self-organisation of a multitude of *true *sentences as they undergo
periodic changes. If this does not try to model Nature, then what is? The
original and central task of FIS was, and is, to explain the functioning of
theoretical genetics. That is a conceptual operating theatre, where
everything is optimal, no errors are made and no noise is perceived. We try
to see, how a few dozen of true sentences begin self-organising. On a
different level, sorting procedures picture the inundation flows, as the
cells are nourished or transmit information, quite well. In any periodic
process, there will be some that have achieved the goal to x%, while others
are at y%. This is the basis for ranking, ordering, sorting. The survival
of the fittest is a judgement passed down by that lord: sequencing.

The Rubik cube analogy refers to the mechanical constraints of which cubes
are connected with which cubes. You can not move a single cube: it is bound
in a ‘cycle’. In fact, the relations between *(a,b)* being such as they
are, the cycles come in two main varieties: those that appear between
order-related issues, and then the space-related reorders, which we call
the standard reorders. These generate two such spaces, where 3 axes are
rectangular, in both of the spaces. The generation of the two spaces takes
three steps, as the spaces are the result of three sets of planes being in
existence: horizontal, vertical, sagittal. The standard cycles stitch the
planes together.

*But the information I would want to receive from you, in which way you
found out that “a+b=c” can become limited and predictable when knowing more
about the mechanics of permutation and cyclic combination not yet reached
my mind.  *

It is, again, the economy. Will the elements be available at that moment as
prescribed by the progression of the reorder within cycle *k* of the
reorder? Those elements of the cycle that will come later are not with us
in the moment: these elements are outside our logical world, probably we
call them dark matter. Whether they will actually materialise there and
then is a function of the cycle’s resilience and the competitive situation
in the dark shadows behind the scenes.

Cycles are by their nature limited in all their properties. Yet they manage
to raise competitive claims regarding the coming-into-existence or not of
elements. Each element is in many cycles. Its loyalties may be torn. If the
overall battle cry of the day is: reorder *ki **→ kj*, its linear position
in cycle *w *is known. If however it turns out that reorder *kq **→ kr* is
to be executed, it will then activate its properties of belonging to cycle *z
*, there on linear position *k*. This would cause a breakdown of the
system. As we discuss ideal circumstances, one of all those pairs of
reorders has to be eliminated, which does not harmony with its pair. There
remain only a limited number of possible adaptive transformations (reorder
combinations) which can coexist with each other.

The enhanced notation of *(a,b) *for a symbol that describes one case of (*a
*inclusion and *b *exclusion) relations of elements would allow, in later
steps, to keep count of negations, up to a supposed threshold where the
accumulated negations outweigh the assertions and the system undergoes a
transformation.

The most encouraging words in your letter come near the end: if by your
good offices you could facilitate a computing laboratory to assign some
exploratory manpower, that would be great. My last *crí de coeur* was a
contribution to a congress in Cracow 2 or 3 years ago. The article
Picturing Order is addressed to professionals in computer graphics. The
wish list has not changed much since, some new promising indications have
been found that the system of algorithms that can be deducted from the
basic interdependence shown in oeis.org/A242615 could indeed be helpful in
many fields.

A different marketing approach would put forward the same idea under the
title of Prediction Tables. Like multiplication or trigonometrical tables,
a table for predictions would fill a void. Establishing on the basis of
*a+b=c* a collection of possible observations and allowing to sharpen the
predicting capabilities of younger systems, the etalon could become the
fundament to reasoned judgement, the grandfather of artificial
intelligence. When do we deduct that reorder *ki **→ kj* is taking place?
How many and which observations are necessary to establish that reorder *kq
**→ kr *is not taking place? How far removed can the targets of one’s bets
be? Assuming that counting will transform in some fields into a counting of
cycles, periods and rhythms, the Prediction Table will be a central
necessity for the industry.



Thanks for your constructive attitude

Karl





Am Di., 14. Apr. 2020 um 15:58 Uhr schrieb <annette.grathoff en is4si.org>:

> Dear Karl,
>
> I would love to understand more of the implications of your interesting
> model. Since I have difficulties following your argumentation, I have to
> ask you for clarification. Your writing style and style of explanation is
> difficult for me to follow, since I am not *that* good in jumping from
> example to example while having the feeling that you do not actually
> exemplify using the mechanics of the example to aid in generating a picture
> of your model in my head. You prompt to visualize a Neandertal together
> with a pocket watch so this picture is clear: Some guy who has neither the
> understanding of the elements nor of the relations of the system presented
> to him, so the expectation is that the watch will be either destroyed or
> ignored or something will be changed not-destructively per chance. Or that
> the guy will be watching the outcomes on the clock face, memorizing them
> and thereby maybe deduce that there are cycles involved creating the bigger
> cycle. But you do not use or tie to any of my expectations but instead jump
> to the logic of unit cycles and the analytic tool of combining cycles of
> different diameters (number of teeth) in superpositions. When I follow you
> there, you immediately remind me of examples for ecological necessities and
> basis behind cycles, maybe having in the back of your mind again the
> Neandertal guy to who you might have tried to explain the working of clock
> cogs with the help of this metaphor. But the information I would want to
> receive from you, in which way you found out that “a+b=c” can become
> limited and predictable when knowing more about the mechanics of
> permutation and cyclic combination not yet reached my mind.  You continue
> with a foreshadowing of constrained motion in periodic respectively
> cyclically repeating processes and their step-size, respectively angular
> velocity of cogs in your pocket watch model and my mind prepares itself for
> some kind of Fourier transform- model but instead you jump to … what I in
> my confused state only can interpret as hint to spatial dimensionality and
> independence (difference) of three orthogonal coordinates guiding motion
> through time. At least then you lost me, when you continue talking about
> “linear, planar, and in some cases, spatial existence.” Are you referring
> to forms of attractors in 2d and 3d space? Are you referring to something
> like Waddington´s (sorry as a Biologist I have the example of
> genotype-phenotype maps when thinking of potential landscapes) potential
> landscape model? I am only able to guess.
>
>  I start anew: “The elements are by their properties joined in a wheel
> with other elements together with which they change place during a
> reorder.” Is the reorder you are referring to the reorder possible in the
> constrained situation inside the intact pocket watch, i.e. rotating at a
> given speed in a given sense of rotation (clockwise or counter clockwise)
> so creating a sequence of numbers which two clockhands guided by their
> motion are streaking when passing the clock face in clockwise motion? In
> this case I understand properties as given by the intact system pocket
> watch. Or is it the reorder which could be possible when opening the watch
> and rearranging the coordinated cogs changing their correlation? Then I
> would understand properties as given by sizes and teeth-frequency of cogs.
> You do not explicitly exclude any of the interpretations. But since you
> jump to the example of Rubik´s cube which also is a constrained system that
> usually is kept intact, I assume you were referring to the rearrangement in
> the clock by winding it up or simply by letting it run observing which time
> (number) it will generate. In the example of the Rubik cube there are of
> course more combinatory patterns to be expected than in the clock. Are you
> trying to make my mind switch to external patterns generated by internal
> interactive mechanisms which are hidden to the superficial decision making?
> The concurrency of teeth of different cogs or of colours on the Rubik cube
> is calculable. “because the properties of the elements had given them
> places in linear sequences, positions on planes and at times spatial
> positions, too. The properties of the elements are like playing cards at
> the beginning of the game: not each of the possible impacts on the game of
> a property of an element will be necessarily played out.” I agree, excited
> what will be coming next.
>
> Like Shannon and Terry you see information as given by the possible and
> potentially available combinations of developed elements which are not to
> be seen at the actual moment but which are given by the constraints on
> relations and elements that developed with (and within) a system. The
> remaining alternatives are a part of the setup. Understood, still excited
> for the explanation how your model helps in narrowing down theoretical
> alternatives without a full analysis of the “cogs” and their relations
> inside the system.
>
> “Taking a closer look at the positions of *a+b=c* during periodic
> rearrangements due to external” influences… You are hinting at the fact
> that there is a numeric (modellable by number sequence permutation and
> combination of sequences) processing of external influences in systems and
> that there exists only a limited set of possibilities which are “viable”
> given the sequences and options for their rearrangement are known.
>
> “…inclusion, exclusion notation of group relations suddenly refers to the
> figures in the shadows: the truth and validity of sentences remains
> identical, whether they refer to states of the world in the foreground or
> in the background.” Now you have my full attention. I am really curious how
> your model helps in finding the right cog sizes and relations given a
> system dynamic or something like that. I am thrilled but at the same time I
> see that your text has almost come to its end.
>
> “patterns evolving when a collection of realizations of *a+b=c*is
> subjected to periodic rearrangements.” …sounds like you might be needing
> more computation power. You know the contact address of the general
> secretary of IS4SI and you know people in the community who are interested
> in the implications of your interesting model (and I bet you know several
> people who already gained a deeper insight into the capacities of your
> model than I managed to gain until now, inside the community). My proposal
> would be: Tell the community which calculations you need to be done, which
> you cannot do yourself and ask for support. Or you explain the model and
> its implications in a way that can be understood by the gs, the president
> of IS4SI, the vice presidents etc. to make them organize a team working on
> a research question relevant for your model.
>
> In either case whether my proposal might be of help or not, I wish you the
> best for your interesting model!
>
> Best wishes and thank you for the exciting and promising insinuations,
>
> Annette
>
> ---
>
> Dr. Annette Grathoff
>
> Evolution of Information Processing Systems
>
> Vienna
>
> grathoff en icbm.de
>
> 06802341968
>
>
>
> General Secretary of the
>
> International Society for the Study of Information (IS4SI)
>
> Annette.grathoff en is4si.org
>
> Karl Javorszky wrote on 04.04.2020 16:39 (GMT +02:00):
>
> Dear Colleges,
>
>
>
> There emerges a rather well-defined concept of a “bed” as a tool, in which
> to investigate the behaviour of a model undergoing simulation exercises.
> The conceptual infrastructure for a laboratory is present.
>
> Why don’t we work in a systematic, scientific fashion and find out, what
> modelling and simulating yields in knowledge. The idea is to put *a+b=c* in
> the cradle, and watch, how the multitude of true sentences begins
> self-organising.
>
> For the study of information, understanding the technical term of
> information is helpful, because at least one can say, that the further, the
> non-technical, the empirical interpretations of the term information are
> different to the technical understanding of information, namely in such
> points:; such a clarification would help to keep chasing the fairy.
>
>
>
> To clarify the technical meaning of information, one will need a mental
> exercise. One should imagine oneself as a Neanderthal to whom the workings
> of a pocket watch are explained. The concepts that allow the construction
> of a pocket watch are not yet in the mental inventory of the noble savage.
> The idea is, that quite a few cycles interact like the wheels and cogs in a
> pocket watch. There are only a limited number of possible next moves once
> one is in the process of predicting the next move in a process that is
> steered by two periodic changes. The instances of *a+b=c *are being
> continuously re-sorted, being subject to two periodic changes in
> circumstances, always in a position to obey the requirements to both of the
> periodic changes impose. (If the day/night periodicity suggests: move to
> warmer area, and the tide changes suggest: move to area less turbulent, the
> element is in possession of a path, with areas from-to.) The concept of a
> move is comparable to one tick of the watch, and is 1/3 of the standard 3
> reorders that constitute a temporal and spatial moment with 3 rectangular
> axes. The moves happen by means of cycles. Arising from the fact of the
> elements being different among each other, the properties that
> differentiate the elements among each other transfer to these a linear,
> planar, and in some cases, spatial existence. The elements are by their
> properties joined in a wheel with other elements together with which they
> change place during a reorder. The mechanism of the pocket watch is
> comparable to an idealised Rubik cube, where concurrent wheels-cycles run,
> and the patterns on the faces of the cube are the appearances which one
> perceives and counts. Which combinations of elements can be contemporaneous
> is a solvable question, because the properties of the elements had given
> them places in linear sequences, positions on planes and at times spatial
> positions, too. The properties of the elements are like playing cards at
> the beginning of the game: not each of the possible impacts on the game of
> a property of an element will be necessarily played out. The point to make
> is, that a complete table could be generated which lists all possible games
> that can have taken place. We deal with a limited amount of being possibly
> different. The whole mechanism can be modelled by a limited number of
> wheels.
>
> Information in the technical sense is that part (those teeth) of the cog
> that is presently not in the clutch, is presently not engaged. In a Las
> Vegas machine: those symbols that are on the wheel but not presently in the
> window. This is the background, to which the assertive statement relates.
>
>
>
> The remaining alternatives are a part of the setup. Information is not
> generated, it has always been with us, the realised or realisable
> alternatives being an implication of the properties of the elements, the
> non-realised alternatives are as well a part of the package. The background
> to a logical statement is generated with the logical statement.
>
> Taking a closer look at the positions of *a+b=c* during periodic
> rearrangements, due to external circumstances influencing the habitat,
> would allow clarifying expectations vis a vis information. In its
> elementary form, information is simply the frame to the picture. As the
> sentences become more complex, the stage can be easily reached, where the
> inclusion, exclusion notation of group relations suddenly refers to the
> figures in the shadows: the truth and validity of sentences remains
> identical, whether they refer to states of the world in the foreground or
> in the background.
>
>
>
> Many more arguments could be put forward to encourage this learned society
> to investigate the patterns evolving when a collection of realisations
> of *a+b=c
> *is subjected to periodic rearrangements. A deeper understanding of the
> non-restrictive meanings ascribed to the word information can be achieved
> when these connotations are aligned to ideas of predictability and
> tenacity. There appears to exist a natural constant for truthfulness, inner
> consistence of a state of the assembly, which concept would sound
> interesting to philosophers, but to researchers in applied sciences, also.
>
>
>
> Best wishes wherever you are
>
> Karl
>
> Am Mo., 30. März 2020 um 14:11 Uhr schrieb Krassimir Markov <markov en foibg.com>:
>
> > Dear Annette and FIS Colleagues,
> >
> > The following question I had sent to Gordana offline due to the FIS limit
> > of number of posts per week.
> > I see it is still actual, so I resend it now.
> >
> > In line with the FIS discussion, I would kindly ask you to tell, in your
> > view, whether this useful simulation is information, data or something else?
> >
> > Be healthy and in good spirit!
> > Friendly greetings
> > Krassimir
> >
> >
> > *From:* annette.grathoff en is4si.org
> > *Sent:* Monday, March 30, 2020 12:46 PM
> > *To:* gordana.dodig-crnkovic en mdh.se ; fis en listas.unizar.es
> > *Subject:* Re: [Fis] Excellent simulation
> >
> >
> > Dear colleagues,
> >
> > Grant Sanderson (3blue1brown) did it again. Please do not tell me you
> > never heard of him and his excellent YouTube science-knowledge
> > visualization videos! He changed the interest of thousands of people for
> > abstract mathematical ideas, making them concrete and more tangible by his
> > excellent simulation videos. He originally came from the Khan Academy team
> > as you can read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3Blue1Brown.
> >
> > This I say as Annette Grathoff, not as the General secretary: My personal
> > opinion is that every scientist interested in informing curious people and
> > raising interest in scientific knowledge should know his videos. This is
> > how information about important concepts is enabled to spread many times
> > faster than when relying solely on the classical ways. It does science well
> > to spread channels like his, after you (not only) scientifically approved
> > of the content.
> >
> > Best wishes and stay healthy,
> >
> > Annette
> >
> > Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic wrote on 29.03.2020 12:17 (GMT +02:00):
> >
> > Dear colleagues,
> >
> >
> >
> > Please have a look at this excellent simulation:
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxAaO2rsdIs&feature=youtu.be
> >
> >
> >
> > which makes me think about how powerful thinking tools
> > that computation and information/data really offer.
> >
> >
> >
> > Stay safe and take care,
> >
> > Gordana
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fis mailing list
> > Fis en listas.unizar.es
> > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> > ----------
> > INFORMACISN SOBRE PROTECCISN DE DATOS DE CARACTER PERSONAL
> >
> > Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por
> > la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> > Puede encontrar toda la informacisn sobre como tratamos sus datos en el
> > siguiente enlace:
> > https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
> > Recuerde que si esta suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
> > baja desde la propia aplicacisn en el momento en que lo desee.
> > http://listas.unizar.es
> > ----------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fis mailing list
> > Fis en listas.unizar.es
> > http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
> > ----------
> > INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL
> >
> > Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por
> > la Universidad de Zaragoza.
> > Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el
> > siguiente enlace:
> > https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas
> > Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de
> > baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
> > http://listas.unizar.es
> > ----------
> >
>
>
>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20200414/c738afd7/attachment-0001.html>