[Fis] World Logic Day & Entropy as Degrees of Freedom

[Francesco Rizzo]

Caro Marcus,
definire due premi Nobel, quali Prigogine e Schodinger, unspecific (molto
vaghi), mi sembra molto discutibile.
Comunque, grazie degli auguri che ricambio.
Francesco
Dear Marcus, defining two Nobel laureates, such as Prigogine and
Schodinger, unspecific (very vague), seems very questionable to me. Anyway,
thanks for the good wishes that I reciprocate. Francesco

Il giorno gio 5 gen 2023 alle ore 13:47 Marcus Abundis <55mrcs en gmail.com>
ha scritto:

> Hey Pedro – thanks for your note! . . . and Happy New Year to you!
> Yes, I know about this use of degrees of freedom (DoF) in framing
> entropy, often in chemistry.
> But I have not seen this DoF concept extended very far (perhaps I am
> deficient in my reading?).
> For example, in seeking a unified approach to 'thermodynamic entropy' and
> 'signal entropy' (nomillay opposed views – 'disorder' vs. 'a specific'
> order), I thought variably mapped DoF might be a good way to cover that
> vast 'logical gap'.
> THAT is why I put my question to you, thinking/hoping you might have
> looked at DoF deeply.
> At one point, I thought about writing a paper for IS4SI 2019 –
> 'Information Science of Entropy Science?' exploring the topic, but I had
> not thought deeply about it (not sure I was even thinking DoF at that time)
> As I now focus on General and Super Intelligence (for AI modeling), I am
> revisiting the matter.
> At the risk of embarassing myself – I explore this DoF approach in an
> early draft, should you have interest.
>
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wNtaOib67CMsBe0SudNDl6ZVWrbXmdNw/view?usp=share_link__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Tyobm_cLK9Timzqnb7F_8NnaDfHzZuyAEW0jcc0rzAIYJ250nsWW8fak42DMq94tTK0J5ITM7oNNoMmDmQwrwPuiYnJC$ 
> DRAFT – Entropy, a scientific base for super-intelligence
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wNtaOib67CMsBe0SudNDl6ZVWrbXmdNw/view?usp=share_link__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!Tyobm_cLK9Timzqnb7F_8NnaDfHzZuyAEW0jcc0rzAIYJ250nsWW8fak42DMq94tTK0J5ITM7oNNoMmDmQwrwPuiYnJC$ >
>
> Dear Terry – I hope all is and has been going well for you, and Happy New
> Year to you as well!
> It often bothered me that I complained about you using 'thermodynamic
> entropy' as a base for 'teleodynamics' . . . but I never framed an
> alternative. I held an 'intuitive alternative' in my mind, but (as noted
> above) I had not yet thought deeply about it. In the above draft, I start
> to correct that lapse. So, perhaps this material may interest you. I also
> envision (not yet in the draft) how Natural DoF breaks would LOGICALLY
> point to differed operative levels (formal 'domains'), and 'constraints'
> tied to those domains . . . without having to name a specific
> as-yet-undiscovered 'scientific functions' to frimly detail what is an
> essential 'logical necessity'.
>
> Francesco – yes, I looked at Prigogine's work a long while back, but found
> it too unspecific.
> The same with Schrödinger's neg-entropy; and the same for various views of
> entropy exporting roles.
> Still, thanks for sharing your thoughts! And . . . Happy New Year to you
> too!
>  Marcus
>
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20230106/ce58aa8f/attachment-0001.html>