[Fis] Summarising this weeks discussion. Another oxymoron

[Loet Leydesdorff]

Dear Koichiro.

Your email clarifies for me why I differ of opinion.

>If the temporal cohesion operates cumulatively as allowing the 
>preceding products to set the conditions for the subsequent production 
>[In the simulation this is recursion on a previous state; the direction 
>is forward and entropy is generated.] , it may enhance its own 
>specificity in time and look as goal-directed towards the durable. 
>[This may be incursion.] One excuse for circumventing an oxymoronic 
>charge on more precision [Against the arrow of time. Not entropy, but 
>redundancy is generated.] from more uncertainty could be to admit the 
>intervention of indexical agents in charge of temporal cohesion. [An 
>individual agent cannot take it beyond incursion.  The communication 
>among agents can be hyprer-incursive and stabilize the institutional 
>dynamic of reconstruction and innovation at the systems level.
>

Best, Loet
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Sunday, June 26, 2022 6:28 PM, Francesco Rizzo 
>13francesco.rizzo en gmail.com wrote;
>
>"quantum mechanics" and / or "quantum computing" are valid for all the 
>science of economics or the economics of science.
>
>
>
>Thanks. Let me have some time for figuring out what you have meant.
>
>
>
>
>
>Sunday, June 26, 2022 7:13 PM, Plamen plamen.l.simeonov en gmail.com 
>wrote;
>
>Are there any other (anticipated) forms of biocomputation languages 
>beyond the symbolical and indexing ones that can get mixed up at a 
>later point in time?
>
>
>
>My concern in this regard is to what extent we could be allowed to keep 
>indexical operations intact as they are in nature. It might be a 
>horrible idea to entertain that every computation should be symbolized 
>as the machine-learning strategy may suggest to us. At the least, we 
>can appreciate the generative capacity of biological computation of the 
>indexical origin if the undisciplined mixing of the symbolical and 
>indexical is avoided.
>
>
>
>
>
>Best,
>
>Koichiro
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From:joe.brenner en bluewin.ch <joe.brenner en bluewin.ch>
>Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 6:04 PM
>To: 'Koichiro Matsuno' <cxq02365 en nifty.com>; 'Andrei Igamberdiev' 
><a_igamberdiev en hotmail.com>; 'Gordana Dodig Crnkovic' 
><gordana.dodig-crnkovic en chalmers.se>; 'Nikita Shklovsky' 
><nikitashk en gmail.com>; fis en listas.unizar.es
>Subject: RE: [Fis] Summarising this weeks discussion. Another oxymoron
>
>
>
>Dear Koichiro,
>
>
>
>This statement is certainly valid. What Andrei and I have been trying 
>to say is that Heisenberg uncertainty is one of a larger group of 
>process descriptions characterized by uncertainty, imprecision, 
>‘diversity’, etc. Their elements, however. are always dual, 
>instantiating actuality and potentiality in a changing, reciprocal 
>relation. “Integration”, e.g., of symbolical and indexical is not 
>necessary if this would mean that the terms lose their identity. The 
>logic is a logic of dynamic coexistence.
>
>
>
>It is, at least for me, a measure of the validity of your approach that 
>what others might consider an oxymoron applies: uncertainty at the 
>origin of the precision of macromolecules as computing devices”. I 
>think Lupasco would have appreciated this formulation.
>
>
>
>Best,
>
>
>
>Joseph
>
>
>
>
>
>From: Fis <fis-bounces en listas.unizar.es> On Behalf Of Koichiro Matsuno
>Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2022 10:06 AM
>To: 'Andrei Igamberdiev' <a_igamberdiev en hotmail.com>; 'Gordana Dodig 
>Crnkovic' <gordana.dodig-crnkovic en chalmers.se>; 'Nikita Shklovsky' 
><nikitashk en gmail.com>; joe.brenner en bluewin.ch; fis en listas.unizar.es
>Subject: Re: [Fis] Summarising this weeks discussion
>
>
>
>Saturday, June 25, 2022 3:54 AM, Andrei Igamberdiev 
>a_igamberdiev en hotmail.com wrote;
>
>I suggested the idea that the Heisenberg uncertainty ratio 
>“energy-time” can explain the precision of operation of macromolecules 
>as computing devices in living systems
>
>
>
>Quantum mechanics has been an attempt for preventing us from falling 
>into a helpless abyss in case symbolical and indexical languages simply 
>got mixed up. QM regulation integrating both the symbolical and 
>indexical, e.g., conservation laws and measurements, as epitomized in 
>the uncertainty relation, is an instance of quantum computation, and 
>relevant to biology also.
>
>
>
>   Best,
>
>   Koichiro
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From: Andrei Igamberdiev <a_igamberdiev en hotmail.com>
>Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 3:54 AM
>To: Gordana Dodig Crnkovic <gordana.dodig-crnkovic en chalmers.se>; Nikita 
>Shklovsky <nikitashk en gmail.com>; Koichiro Matsuno <cxq02365 en nifty.com>; 
>joe.brenner en bluewin.ch; fis en listas.unizar.es
>Subject: Re: Summarising this weeks discussion
>
>
>
>Dear Gordana, Joseph, Koichiro and Nikita,
>
>In my opinion, the exchange between Joseph and Koichiro regarding the 
>transitions between the potential and the actual is very important as 
>this is the point where we can approach closer to the nature of 
>macromolecular (and biological) computation. The whole process of 
>computation is directly related to the aspects of “potentiality in 
>reality”. The advanced systems that developed complex behavior are able 
>to hold the potential for a prolonged time to make precise outputs 
>based on the choice of particular result that help the system to 
>navigate in the external world. This means that such holding the 
>potential corresponds to the abstracting capacity, which was clarified 
>in recent papers of Koichiro. This also corresponds to the duality of 
>actual entity and of abstract entity in the philosophy of A.N. 
>Whitehead.
>
>Many years ago, in my first paper of BioSystems (1993) I suggested the 
>idea that the Heisenberg uncertainty ratio “energy-time” can explain 
>the precision of operation of macromolecules as computing devices in 
>living systems in a way that the prolonged time of quantum measurement 
>corresponds to the minimum dissipation of energy in it, i.e. to the 
>precise result and thus represents the basis of natural computation 
>performed by macromolecular devices.  These devices operate as 
>molecular automata of the extremal quantum computer, and their set 
>maintains highly ordered robust coherent state, which precisely directs 
>actualizations in the course of natural computational process. During 
>this process, single events corresponding to realization of interacting 
>individual programs form a percolating network, and this leads to 
>concrete spatial patterns constructed using optimal coordinate scales.
>
>I am confident that this concept has a potential for development, and 
>it is grounded in the ideas expressed by Efim Liberman in his 
>conceptual approach to natural computation. Several concrete aspects of 
>the quantum biological computation were outlined in the works of 
>Koichiro Matsuno, including the estimation of actual energy dissipation 
>in the course of measurement accompanied by emitting quanta, each 
>carrying energy E at every time interval τ (Matsuno and Paton, 2000, 
>BioSystems 55: 39-46). The works of Yukio Gunji, of Andrei Khrennikov, 
>also earlier works of Howard Pattee and others, are particularly 
>important in this development, although we are still at the beginning 
>of this important paradigm of the “new science”.  In this development, 
>the paradigm of the new science will incorporate the ideas of 
>relational biology formulated by Robert Rosen, which will result in 
>overcoming their too abstract original representation.  Summarizing, I 
>would say that we have all prerequisites for the concept of natural 
>computation that can be applied to the real world, and the logic of 
>potentiality in reality is in the core of this paradigm. The real world 
>is tantot libre, tantot recherché (Beethoven words), and this is a 
>pledge of freedom, which is the basis of the existence of the world and 
>its evolution.
>
>All the best,
>
>Andrei
>
>
>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20220628/9962f7be/attachment-0001.html>