[Fis] What is the (Information) Phenomenon? / ​Marijuán Navarro 2021 [ IMD ]

[Francesco Rizzo]

Cari Tutti,
Pedro dice bene quando ricorda com'è nata la bio-informatica, ma questo a
mio parere non significa che possiamo
assumere una disciplina scientifica a modello a cui tutti e tutto si
debbono ispirare. Nè, d'altra parte, bisogna fare un
 gioco o una gara di tipo "esclusivamente" specialistico, perchè altrimenti
ogni materia scientifica diventa auto-riflessiva
 o auto-referenziale. Questa sorta di auto-poiesi  fa a pugni con la
discussione o il dialogo tra diversi che non si
com-prendono più. Invece bisogna essere "inclusivi": ogni disciplina prende
dalle ( e dà alle) altre discipline.
Quindi, è necessario creare un basamento o camminamento
onto-epistemo-logico comune.  Solo dopo avere con-solidato
ciò che unisce - che non significa cercare un'unica teoria del tutto o
comune a tutti - è possibile  dare  un contributo legato alla propria
 esperienza scientifica, coordinando un dominio con-sensuale
concettuale-linguistico sulla base di quello che io chiamo
 "Il valore dei valori" (FrancoAngeli, Milano, 1990). Il valore dei valori
è fondato su una piattaforma secondo la quale la
realtà da indagare-conoscere è una unica  e si avvale di una pluralità di
approcci-sistemi cognitivi che portano, per
camminamenti o VIE diverse, alla percezione dell'armonia  meravigliosa che
governa il mondo.
La "legge delle leggi" equivalente a Il "valore dei valori" e che unifica
le scienze sociali-umane e naturali è l'INFORMAZIONE,
intesa come un processo che tende a dare forma ai valori sottesi dai
diversi "campi di forma". E tutto ciò, senza offesa per
 nessuno, non può fare a meno dell'ECONOMIA DEL PENSIERO o del
PENSIERO DELL' ECONOMIA, la "scienza delle scienze"
("Valore e valutazioni", FrancoAngeli, Milano, 1999) che SERVE, con una
modalità simile a quello della matematica, a
 scoprire-trovare-inventare la VIA che rende massimo il risultato (da
ottenere) e minimo il costo (da sostenere), con la massima
compressione o il minimo della ridondanza.
Un grazie sentito a Tutti voi che rendete la mia vecchiaia una fonte di
sogni che alimentano le  profezie dei giovani.
Francesco.
P.s.: come sta Terry Deacon, amico delle discussioni più liete?

Il giorno gio 27 gen 2022 alle ore 22:24 Pedro C. Marijuán <
pedroc.marijuan en gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Dear All,
>
> I am responding to Malcolm's interesting posting (offline, below) and to
> Jerry.
>
> My contention is that "disciplines" and "pluridisciplines", at least in
> natural science, are not logical bodies or "sequences of formalisms", but
> say "paradigmatic" realizations. They contain a lot of experimental and
> theoretical findings, usually in many disconnected areas, but responding to
> some commonality of thinking inspired by some seminal piece of work. It is
> in this sense that I was referring to those "founding phenomena" below.
> They are very good pieces of experimental work both of them that have
> attracted many other related works.
>
> With the above I also respond to Jerry, as I was insisting on the lack of
> that kind of seminal work in the biological-informational arena, a work
> capable of attracting attention, followers, funding, etc., so that later on
> people could say "yes, that's the bio-info kind of approach that was really
> started with this work". It is the realistic sense of "paradigms" as new
> foci for thought and action. The new information science paradigm recently
> proposed by our colleague Yixin Zhong could well be taken as an exemplar,
> tentative case.
>
> Further, pointing that "None of these are *fundamental* phenomena. They
> rest on other phenomena..." (by Malcolm, below) touches in my mind two
> keys. But first, let me state that the whole paragraph is quite rich and
> meaningful. My suggestion about biological info and the observer is that
> without a multitude of concrete evolutionary inventions, (that presumably
> revolve around signaling systems as privileged handlers of the information
> flow) there would be nothing, but a scum of  bacterian life in an isolated,
> barren planet.
>
> Well, the first key about that short sentence is that it may sound like
> the outdated reductionism of past decades. Why should physics or
> mathematical physics be more fundamental? They also rest on other phenomena
> and assumptions (social, philosophical, mathematical, metaphysical,
> methodological). And these sciences are ostensibly provisional, always in
> the making (e.g., suddenly "dark matter" and "dark energy" appear from
> nothing and fill everything!). The past century was a show of new, changing
> fundamentalities (superstrings, q. gravities, cosmic expansion...). So I do
> not buy that supposed fundamentality (except in a restricted, comparative
> sense). Metaphorically the sciences are not monarchic but republican.
>
> And the other key relates to the general interrelationships between
> sciences. John Dupré's work (1993) "The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical
> Foundations of the Disunity of Science"  rightly points, in my opinion, to
> the directions in which a richer conception might be developed. Like in all
> collective endeavors of humans, there could be "importance", "dominance",
> "relevance", etc. but probably the most important term should be "knowledge
> recombination." One of the troubles for the sciences involved in planetary
> sustainability is not having developed an adequate philosophy of science
> yet.
>
> And that was it. We are approaching the end of January... and of the NY
> Lecture.
>
> All the best
>
> --Pedro
>
> PS. To Jerry repeated tests, and to those who may need checking about the
> diffusion of their messages, they always can go to our fis list archives
> at: *http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/
> <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/>*
>
> El 23/01/2022 a las 3:38, Malcolm Dean escribió:
>
> Thanks Pedro,
>
> I applaud the valiant struggle of your recent paper
> <https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/21/11965>, having to cope with the
> broad and messy legacy of the Bio-sciences.
>
> What you have listed is a sequence of formalisms, each depending on a
> lower level. Chemistry, Molecular Physics, Natural Signals, define
> * biological* phenomena. The whole "Information flow" is connected with
> life cycles, multicellularity, and so on. These are all specialized fields
> with their own terminologies. Secret sauces include "life" and
> "consciousness."
>
> None of these are *fundamental* phenomena. They rest on other phenomena.
> Significantly, you base an important part of your argument on the ideas of
> S. K. Lin [Ref. 31], who explores *broken symmetry* in Thermodynamics and
> Information.
>
> Bohr believed that to be a phenomenon, there must be an irreversible act
> of amplification which carries an event to another level, where it is
> recorded and interpreted. Wheeler, his thesis student, generalized this
> insight in his Observer-Participator. *Distinction* is the fundamental
> phenomenon of Information processes (Bateson), and the *Count-as-One* is
> the core event (Leibniz, Badiou). Both comprise an *interaction*.
>
> You relate "information flow" with the observation that "every substance
> 'ingested' is first 'touched' or 'tasted.'" This to me is the most
> important assertion of Vladimir Lerner's Information Macrodynamic (IMD)
> formalism <https://books.google.com/books?id=oI9hwgEACAAJ>. IMD relates
> to *all* Information processes. From the quantum to the cosmic, IMD shows
> that natural  regularities (Kolmogorov) produce interactions which lead to
> the emergence of hierarchical structures, intelligence, and Observership.
> Each interaction "probes" the environment (action), returning pieces of
> Information (re-action) which are then processed as Hidden Information. In
> the biological realm, each cycle of touching and tasting is a probe,
> forming an Information (IMD) process in physical structure of the
> experiencing entity, the Observer-Participator.
>
> Best wishes for 2022,
>
> — Malcolm ]
>
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 11:34 AM Pedro C. Marijuán <
> pedroc.marijuan en gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Malcolm.
>>
>> *Bio-chemistry* was launched (say) after Whöler *inorganic synthesis* of
>> urea.
>> *Bio-physics* was launched after Meyerhof and Lohmann on ATP
>> phosphate-bond *energetics* (or more recently, Morowitz "energy flow in
>> the biosphere")
>> *Bio-information* was launched after... in my opinion after Ulrich and
>> Galperin recent works on prokaryotic (one-component) *signaling systems*.
>>
> Why? We may finally ascertain the whole "information flow", that *every
>> substance "ingested" is first "touched" or "tasted"* by the OCSs; and we
>> may connect this with the life cycle advancement, with multicellularity,
>> etc.
>>
>
>
>> So, that's the *defined biological phenomenon*. No more secret sauces!
>>
>> Best--Pedro
>>
>>
>> El 21/01/2022 a las 2:45, Malcolm Dean escribió:
>>
>> Without a defined phenomenon, there will be little progress.
>>
>> Often "Information" is used like a secret sauce.
>>
>> Malcolm
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:55:48 +0100
>> From: Pedro C. Mariju?n <pedroc.marijuan en gmail.com>
>> To: "'fis'" <fis en listas.unizar.es>
>> Subject: Re: [Fis] NEW YEAR LECTURE (Youri Timsit)
>> Message-ID: <8fe0691f-6d5f-7abe-d882-f2c2ed885378 en gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>>
>> Dear Youri and All,
>>
>> Gojng back to the Lecture theme, one of the things that worries me is
>> the biological disarray when having to deal with "the informational." I
>> mean, when you work with the relational properties of these fascinating
>> ribosomal proteins, apart of mathematical-statistical techniques and
>> algorithms to make sense of their interactions and evolutionary
>> co-adaptations, you have nothing else but to recur to the metaphor,
>> "molecular brains", neural like", etc.? It is fine, as you do not have
>> any consisting framework to refer to. It already happened to the
>> proponents of "bacterial intelligence", also forced to the metaphor
>> (Bray, Armitage...).
>>
>> In my view, tools from maths, statistics, computer science, etc. are
>> just that, tools. Ironically some of these tools themselves had
>> biological origins (genetic algorithms, neural networks, perceptrons).
>> So, my contention is that a new filed like bio-chemistry or bio-physics
>> would be needed concerning the biological-informational themes, a
>> bio-information discipline comparable to those just mentioned. According
>> to several authors? (me included), the prokaryotic cell should be
>> considered as the fundamental, basic unit of biological cognition.
>> Thereafter, there would be different ways to characterize its
>> informational processes, particularly along the "information flow"
>> conceptualization... interested parties may go to the recent
>> contribution of Jorge Navarro and mine:
>> https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/21/11965 , it is in the special issue
>> coordinated by Youri.? I also discuss that the from the informational
>> thinking one could find the ways and means to renew the outdated Modern
>> Synthesis.
>>
>> Otherwise, without a clearer disciplinary framework, am afraid the new
>> biology will be reduced to bioinformatics and experimental "omic"
>> disciplines. Just another (advanced, "very advanced") technology.
>>
>> Best wishes to All,
>> --Pedro
>>
>>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> Libre
> de virus. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> <#m_-356907412057753520_m_5750518132061709199_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220128/5d5fa605/attachment-0001.html>