[Fis] [External] Re: "express matter and energy in terms of information"

[Karl Javorszky]

Checklist 2024 02 27



Dear Colleagues,



We are making big progress.

Alex has pointed out that the logical language needs to be updated.

Lou offers an open and receptive attitude of mathematics towards
improvements and updates.



In the last summary, several authors address several points. For brevity,
citations have been edited, if anyone feels wronged, please correct.



The present context is that we are progressing toward a rational definition
of information, and now we wish to be able to clearly distinguish
information’s ‘material’, as opposed to logical, perceptional properties.
To bring clarity, sanity, reason and order into the discussion what is
information, a working model has been evolved. The Learned Friends are all
familiar with the concept, namely that a finite automat can help
understanding our problems. This finite automat is an etalon collection of *136
*pairs of *(a,b)*, which we keep sorting and resorting. We observe
specifically the cycles that appear as linear collections of successions.
The learned friends may have ordered 12 books on their table to deeper
investigate the idea.



Now to the dichotomy: physical (real, factual) vs. metaphysical (logical,
abstract, ideas, plans). The tin soldiers that are our logical primitives,
move according to their belonging to cycles, in a perfectly predictable
fashion. (There will appear by its nature inevitable conflicts: these we
shall discuss after we have agreement on the vocabulary.) As we move the
tin soldiers of *(a,b)* in a geometry during a reorder, we have the sense
of touching the pair of *(a,b)*. This mental picture comes to the next to
an idea of physical, real, factual, in model building. By using our eyes
and our memory, not our fingers, we foresee the tiles that follow in
patterns of tiles. On this level, we do not touch the tin soldiers. Rather
we discuss the future. The successors within a cycle are a given. Whether
they will actually come to pass, is a different question.



* 'latent information' exists: waiting to be *discovered* … waiting to be
*invented* as new views,*

Those members of the cycle that will follow are comparable to this idea.

*the world as ”potential information” (in the sense of Aristotle’s
potentiality) *

Those parts of the reorder that have not yet come to pass, are still a part
of the reorder that takes place.

*In the Aristotelian sense, potentiality is in the world.*

Whatever is periodic, is a reorder and decomposes into cycles.

*The real world, for Plato, is a non-physical realm that consists of ideal
forms or ideas. I think we can safely say that the Platonic ideal world is
in our heads.*

Not only in our heads. Animals can foresee dangers and avoid such
locations, in which a realization of the future would be dangerous. If the
same ability to foresee the future is at work both in my and in a rhino’s
brain, the Platonic (better: Pythagorean) idea is out there in the world as
a generality, and we both have particularities of the same thing, built in
our respective brains.

*So can we define a notion in which something is not directly observed
(yet) but*

*does exert some kind of “influence” in the world before it is directly*

*embodied/perceived? Can Observers be influenced by things they haven’t*

*yet observed (but are putting themselves in a position to be able to*

*observe)?*

As Pawlow has shown, imagination of a wurst has almost the same hormonal
effects as the perception of a wurst. Those members of cycles that are yet
to follow are at our disposition as something we remember.

*Is it possible to formalize the idea of a subtle influence*

*Currently, I am not aware of such a framework to express the contents of
our heads.*

Both the tin soldiers and their maneuver paths are in our head. We
distinguish the two levels: which tin soldier is on which spot, against:
which reorder is taking place and how far is it progressed. (Using Google
on “Update on a+b=c”, presents a framework for meditations on contents of
our heads.)

*When can you trace a causal chain back to something that*

**doesn’t* physically exist? do thoughts that haven’t been thought yet*

*contribute to the shape of an agent’s cognitive landscape?*

The recognition of an object based on parts of the picture is measured in
the Picture Fragmentation Test. The double accounting in the tautomat
contrasts the facts on the ground (which peg is in which hole) with the
requirements of periodic changes. The term “being ready” has two readings:
1. The cycles need to be complete, 2. The reorder needs to be complete. A
reorder consists of cycles, the cycles consist of peg-hole matches.

One can formulate the question as a general one, regarding the relations
between parts and wholes. Predicting the properties of a whole, based on
properties of parts, and predicting properties of parts, based on
properties of the whole meet in the gearbox of cycles. Observe, that in
both directions of predicting, there necessarily remains in existence an
extent of unfinished business. It could be that learned friends mean this
part, if they speak about incompleteness.

*is that what cognitive agents are - transducers (bridges) from the latent
space to*

*the physical space, which collapse or amplify potentialities from that*

*space into our world?*

The elements, members of the etalon collection, aka logical primitives have
manifold relations among each other. We apportion the aggregate value of a
cycle to its members, thus crediting each member with its parts of the
liens that bind members of a cycle (the “strength/length/diversity etc. of
the cycle”). Of the liens that bind each member to one cycle per reorder,
emerges a system of *liaisons *over all reorders. The succession is an
economical value, whether other liaisons offer better liens. There is a
busy marketplace called *bazaar *that utilizes a very small combinatorial
deviation between number of sequences vs groups that can be established on *n
*objects (cf oeis.org/A242615). You can barter in the bazaar eg distances
against numbers or qualities of objects.

*They surely are. They are processing actual information on the level of
language plus the potential information which can under certain conditions
become actual for an agent.*

There is nothing magical in learning that periodically returning states of
the world are periodically returning and therefore predictable. The ability
of our brain to recognize recurrent patterns is given (made possible,
supported by) by the existence of recurrent patterns, which are an immanent
feature of a non-Sumerian symbol set. The recurrent patterns belong to the
furniture of the habitat of the logical primitives.

*But there is a potential information both in the world and embodied in
cognizing agents.*

The same logical and numerical principles are at work in the world and in
the brain of an observer. If the observer would not operate according to
the rules of the world surrounding them, they would immediately cease to
live. Information being the extent of being otherwise than expected, it is
highly debatable whether during a natural process (eg tsunami, earthquake,
water being brought to the boil, etc.) any information is generated. Nature
does strictly that what is expected of her (she herself expects of
herself), she does not generate any information because she always was and
is and will be such as was expected based on the situation her predecessor
state has been in.



Hope that this catalogue helps in coming to a common vocabulary.

PS. Lou: How about writing a primer: Non-Sumerian Algebra?





Best wishes, till next week.

Karl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20240227/d6648be0/attachment-0001.html>