[Fis] It from bit: pseudo and real possibilities in a social context of AI agents

Mon Jan 22 16:42:31 CET 2024

Dear All,

Getting to a non QM view of information, say like playing a game of cards ( von Neumann again Game Theory and Economic Behavior), at a given point in time we have real possibilities and we have pseudo possibilities due to the ignorance of a players view of the game. 

Information in the game context is highly dynamic with possibilities changing in time. By the way Stu I did develop a theory of changing sets to make possible the formalization of changing possibilities.  Mathematics can be quite flexible if you give it a twist.  

Information gain can reduce pseudo possibilities, not sure at the moment if it can reduce real possibilities. One thing for sure is that information gain can increase what a player can do while the pseudo possibilities are reduced  (see my theory of information and ability of agents). Information in a game acts much like a quantum operator on a space of possibilities.  

In fact, I was inspired by QM to formalize communication theory between agents using operators on information states of those agents.  The main difference with QM is that the possibilities seem not to be epistemic (based on ignorance).  QM forces us out of the traditional box of how information is or can be formalized. 

Hypothesis: One could, perhaps view the quantum particle as an agent, that interferes with its own representation of its possibility space (e.g. the double slit). This might be the foundation of yet another interpretation of quantum mechanics. 

QM is one of the many desperate attempt by so many to understand consciousness, but in spite of all attempts it is still a mystery. Whenever, we don't understand something we jump into the latest mysterious physics (QM or Dark Matter or Black Holes) to magically give us understanding, even though we don't truly understand the nature mysterious science we are applying.  It is wrapping a mystery in a blanket [ Markov ;-) ]  and forgetting about it.  

 I have written extensively on the foundations of information and possibility spaces, but unfortunately they are all in handwritten form in bound journals. (old school) I find that in writing by the time you get to the end of the sentence you already have a better understanding of what you are thinking. Typing is a bit too fast. 

One strong link with Stu of some of my previous work  is work on higher order states of uncertainty. Fascinating and may also have implications to QM.  

The role of operators on information states, including intentional states is fundamental to understanding the observer-agent in the dynamic process of communication with other agents. The meaning of the message is in how the message transforms the representational states of the agents.  These representational states include representations of what is possible for the agent given his or her social and physical context.  It forms the basis of  cooperative action.  This can be implemented in AI inference networks making cooperative communication and action possible for AI based agents. 

All the best,

Eric

On 1/21/2024 3:04 PM, Stuart Kauffman wrote:
> Alex assuming time “flows” is a major assumption.. And how do we get from flowing time in QM to time as a dimension in GR?  Stu
> 
>> On Jan 20, 2024, at 9:52 PM, Alex Hankey <alexhankey at gmail.com>wrote:
>> 
>> RE: (One of) the mysteries of Quantum Mechanics: Which way information; null measurements; no facts of the matter between measurements (hence It from Bit); non-locality; why when one entangled variable is actualized the amplitudes of all the rest alter instantaneously. 
>> ME: Why do you consider 'Time, t' an objectively real variable? 
>> It's 'objectivity' is an unacknowledged assumption throughout physics, but 
>> no one has ever bothered to think through any of the good alternatives, 
>> and publish on the question. 
>> Alex 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 at 23:54, Stuart Kauffman <stukauffman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks Eric. The ontological reality of Potentia is critical. This interpretation by Heisenberg answers at least 5 or perhaps 6 of the mysteries of Quantum Mechanics: Which way information; null measurements; no facts of the matter between measurements (hence It from Bit); non-locality; why when one entangled variable is actualized the amplitudes of all the rest alter instantaneously. And maybe the Delayed Choice experiment.
>>> 
>>> If Res potentia and Res extensa is correct, it really does not inherit the Mind Body problem and it really does invite the hypothesis that Mind actualizes potentia.  This fits the recent results that almost rule out a physical cause of collapse of the wave function. A physical cause cannot convert a possible to an actual. And, as noted, Radin and others have experimental data using the two slit experiment that we can alter the outcome, data at 6.49 sigma. So: we all know that, “I choose between possiblities that are my options now, having decided I act. Thus I convert one of the Possibles in front of me into an Actual.”  Should we ignore this subjective data because it is not intersubjective? Given Radin’s data, why reject “I decide and act”, with responsible Free Will? Such a Responsible Will is ruled out in classical physics, and also QM if collapse of the wave function really is Random. But if Mind can influence the outcome, per Radin et al, responsible free will is not ruled out. So let’s get more data on this.
>>> 
>>> Another odd thought. Suppose we turn the responsible free will issue on its head? I have responsible free will. If rocks do not  have responsible free will, why not? The question provokes the start of at least a confused wondering:  A quartz crystal is a very simple system. My brain is made up of cells with thousands of different proteins, RNA, lipids, DNA. Both are simultaneously partly classical and partly quantum (decoherence is not complete). The quantum aspects of my brain must be more complex than that of a crystal. Do those facts matter? I find myself wondering: Do I have responsibility free will, but a crystal has a highly shackled free will? 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> And if the above is correct, what is Information?
>>> 
>>> Stu
>>> 
>>>> On Jan 20, 2024, at 9:07 AM, Eric Werner <eric.werner at oarf.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> And yet possibilities are real.  Perhaps more so than the actual 
>>>> Eric 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jan 20, 2024, at 15:54, Stuart Kauffman <stukauffman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Carlos and Lou. Hm. Res potentia and Res extensa is not a substance dualism because potentia are not substances. It is still a dualism I guess of "Possibles some of which become Actuals". In what sense do you think the same laws apply to both, QM vs Classical Physics. In one sense Yes: both live in the Newtonian Paradigm, and it is of real interest that there is the "Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics” here. Hm, Lou too, does that suggest that if the set of Possibilities are bounded and not open, mathematics can work in definable ways that it cannot work if the The Possible is open and growing and cannot be deduced?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Stu 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Jan 20, 2024, at 3:55 AM, Carlos Gershenson <cgershen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Stu,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> II.
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> Among the interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, consider that of Heisenberg, 1958. The quantum state is a “potentia hovering ghost-like between an idea and reality”.  Potentia are neither true nor false. From this, Ruth Kastner, Mike Epperson and I have taken, “Res potentia, ontologically real Possibles, and Res extensia, ontologically real Actuals.  Res potentia and Res Extensia does not inherit the Mind Body Problem.  This interpretation of QM is not Cartesian substance dualism because potenta are not substances. It is not neutral monism, which lacks potentia. It is not materialism which lacks potentia, and it is not Idealism, which lacks Res Extensa.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Just a comment on this: Wouldn’t res extensia be a type/subset of res potentia? In this sense, you avoid the dualism: both are information, only one possible (and infinite) and another actual (and finite), but the same laws should apply to both.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>> Carlos
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Fis mailing list
>>>>> Fis at 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
>>>>> ----------
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Fis mailing list
>>> Fis at 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
>>> ----------
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Alex Hankey M.A. (Cantab.) PhD (M.I.T.) DSc. (Hon Causa) 
>> Board Member Ayushman India (https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.ayushmanindia.in__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RwE0rxkB_DbiJJFsDezsTL5o2HU7BponcZ1wR-85Y3w0idhQkRvVPAzx5hE2cU6v9mGMPErdIYsmEbBWOMHkv1U$ )
>> Teacher Yoga Pratyahara and True Dhyana Meditation (50 years)
>> Professor Emeritus of Biology,
>> MIT World Peace University, 
>> 124 Paud Road, Pune, MA 411038 
>> Mobile (Intn'l): +44 7710 534195 
>> Mobile (India) +91 900 800 8789 
>> WhatsApp: as for Mobile, India
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 
>> 2015 JPBMB Special Issue on Integral Biomathics: Life Sciences, Mathematics and Phenomenological Philosophy
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at 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
> ----------

	Virus-free.https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.avg.com__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RwE0rxkB_DbiJJFsDezsTL5o2HU7BponcZ1wR-85Y3w0idhQkRvVPAzx5hE2cU6v9mGMPErdIYsmEbBWWaYVOLM$ 

Sent from my iPad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20240122/fec2ede2/attachment-0001.html>