[Fis] "Percepts" and self-reference and meaning
Prof. Dr. Thomas Görnitz
goernitz at em.uni-frankfurt.de
Mon Jan 20 14:23:34 CET 2025
Dear Eric, dear all,
Werner Heisenberg titled one of his books “The Part and the Whole”.
The book concludes with a conversation between Heisenberg, Carl
Friedrich v. Weizsäcker and Heisenberg's wife Elisabeth, which took
place between 1961 and 1965. Here is an excerpt:
Carl Friedrich was only half satisfied: “Yes, those are very nice
general philosophical thoughts, but I would like to know more
precisely. I actually hope that in this way we will arrive at the real
laws of nature. Your field equation, which we don't yet know for sure
represents nature correctly, looks as if it could arise from this
philosophy of alternatives. But in the end, it should be possible to
prove this with the degree of rigor that is usual in mathematics. “
“So you want,” I added, “to build the elementary particles, and thus
ultimately the world, in the same way from alternatives, just as Plato
wanted to build his regular solids and thus also the world from
triangles. Alternatives are no more matter than the triangles in
Plato's 'Timaeus' are. But if you take the logic of quantum theory as
a basis, the alternative is a basic form from which more complicated
basic forms arise through repetition. So, if I understand you
correctly, the path should lead from the alternative to a symmetry
group, that is, to a property; the mathematical forms that represent
the elementary particles are the representations of one or more
properties; they are, so to speak, the ideas of the elementary
particles, to which the object of the elementary particles then
ultimately corresponds. This general construction is perfectly
comprehensible to me. And the alternative is certainly a much more
fundamental structure of our thinking than the triangle.
/But I imagine that the exact implementation of your program is
extremely difficult. Because it will require a thinking of such a high
level of abstraction as has never occurred before, at least in
physics. It would certainly be too difficult for me./ /But the younger
generation has an easier time thinking abstractly. So you should
definitely try it with your colleagues./”
Elisabeth, who had been listening from afar, now intervened in the
conversation:
“Do you think you can interest the young generation in such difficult
problems that involve the big picture? If I go by what you
occasionally tell about physics in the big research centers here or in
America, it seems as if the interest of the younger generation in
particular is almost exclusively directed towards the details, as if
the big picture is almost a kind of taboo. They should not be spoken
of. Could it not be the same here as in the late antiquity of
astronomy, when people were quite content to calculate the next solar
and lunar eclipses with superimposed cycles and epicycles, and forgot
about the heliocentric planetary system of Aristarchus? Could it not
happen that interest in your general questions fades away completely?”
But I did not want to be so pessimistic here and objected. “Interest
in the details is good and necessary, because after all we want to
know what is really the case. And you remember that Niels [Bohr] also
liked to quote the verse: ‘Only abundance leads to clarity’. I am not
at all dissatisfied with the taboo either. For a taboo is not imposed
to forbid what is not to be spoken of, but to protect it from the
chatter and ridicule of the many. From time immemorial, the
justification for a taboo has been as in Goethe: 'Tell no one, only
the wise, because the crowd immediately ridicules... ‹ So you
shouldn't fight the taboo. There will always be young people who think
about the big picture, if only because they want to be completely
honest, and then it doesn't matter how many there are.«
If you have only been taught quantum theory as a theory about the
smallest particles, the title of the book could be a little confusing.
The fact that quantum theory is above all a theory of wholes is rarely
explained clearly. But it is precisely for this reason that quantum
theory can shed light on the problem of self-reference.
If I see it right, the problem of self-reference is connected with the
problem that a part of a whole can grasp this whole.
That a part can become equally powerful as the whole is only
conceivable for infinite sets. The square numbers are much rarer than
the natural numbers. The square numbers are a proper subset of the
natural numbers. Nevertheless, there is a square for every natural
number, so that the power of the natural numbers and that of the
square numbers is identical.
Of course, with finite sets, a one-to-one assignment of a part to the
whole is not possible. However, this does not mean that an essential
infinity must be immediately recognizable as such. It is probably
sufficient if infinity can be understood as a possibility.
This brings me to Eric's comment.
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God.
In addition, some remarks on the Greek term λόγος from the German Wikipedia:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos*cite_ref-1__;Iw!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RXFR1jwLiFNXBZCIaDPtmvh3-xiOy5A9tEsds0dE8ZKgan4BNCpI-WecgpNItufA8QJjALUenx_Bcdca4tkFkeD5vbv7kA$
“A pertinent dictionary[1] gives the following translations, among
others: speaking, oral communication, word, speech, narration,
message, rumor, (grammatical) sentence, saying of God (NT), command
(NT), prophecy (NT), teaching (NT), permission to speak, eloquence,
proposition, assertion, dogma, definition, concept, the subject of
discussion, thing, object, calculation, reckoning, consideration,
estimation, relationship, reason, intention.”
So if λόγος in ancient Greece had the meanings, among others,
“assertion, definition, object, calculation”,
, then it is perhaps not very presumptuous to write today:
“IN THE BEGINNING WAS INFORMATION.”
One could also say: the cosmos does not begin with a bang, but with a
single quantum of action, a quantum bit.
Why I find this very reasonable from a scientific point of view is
something I have explained in publications.
[e.g. Görnitz T, Schomäcker U (2021) Quantumbit Cosmology explains
Effects of Rotation Curves of Galaxies, /Foundations of Science/,
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-021-09808-y__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RXFR1jwLiFNXBZCIaDPtmvh3-xiOy5A9tEsds0dE8ZKgan4BNCpI-WecgpNItufA8QJjALUenx_Bcdca4tkFkeDuYlYsGQ$ ]
In my view, religion begins a few verses later, in John 1:14:
“And the λόγος was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his
glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace
and truth.”
Back to science:
A quantum bit is a possibility, and possibilities generate new
possibilities. In physical terms, this means that the cosmos is
expanding.
A quantum bit is represented by a wave function whose wavelength is of
the order of the cosmic curvature radius. Only many quantum bits can
generate something as small as a quantum particle.
From many quantum bits, the particles of relativistic quantum
mechanics can be mathematically represented by irreducible
representations of the Poincaré group.
[Görnitz T, Graudenz D, Weizsäcker C F v (19923) Quantum Field Theory
of Binary Alternatives; /Intern. J. Theoret. Phys/. 31, 1929-1959
Görnitz T, Schomäcker U (2012) Quantum Particles from Quantum
Information, /Journal of Physics: Conference Series 380/; 012025
doi:10.1088/1742-6596/380/1/012025]
In my experience, a major conceptual difficulty lies in the fact that
a cosmic quantum bit, an AQI, is still completely abstract, that it
still has to be understood as something purely physical, as something
still completely “meaning-free”.
Heisenberg had said at the time that he could not think as abstractly
as Weizsäcker's approach requires. When I began to study Weizsäcker's
ideas mathematically more than four decades ago, it became clear to me
that one had to think even more abstractly than Weizsäcker. For
Weizsäcker, information was always thought of as meaningful. But you
can't work with that in physics. That is why the transition from
Weizsäcker's Ur-alternatives to the AQIs was necessary.
(QUANTUM) INFORMATION CAN ONLY BECOME MEANINGFUL IN COSMIC EVOLUTION
WITH THE EMERGENCE OF LIFE. #
For a star, a planet or a stone, energy must be used to bring about a change.
But living things can be influenced by mere information. In such a
case of “causing an effect” (which, for example, can also consist of
not following a reflex), the information takes on a meaning for that
living being.
Such information must be able to act locally for a localized living
being; it therefore appears as meaningful information as a property of
an energetic (photons) or material (ATP, other molecules, nerve
structures, solids) carrier. (These carriers are themselves formations
of AQIs.)
However, the importance of the carriers disappears behind the meaning
that the information takes on for the living being in question. An
equal amount of meaning can be evoked in completely different ways by
completely different carriers. For example, you can read a text or you
can listen to it.
Even if a quantum bit has only two orthogonal states, there are an
infinite number of other possibilities between these two, so to speak
between yes or no. Perhaps this helps with considerations regarding
self-reference.
On the one hand, there is an activation of memory content from the
unconscious that matches or could match the information currently
being consciously processed. Part of human creativity is produced by
the fact that during such activations, content is also brought into
consciousness that is not immediately apparent as logical reasons. On
the other hand, one is able to use one's consciousness to reflect on
what has just been consciously thought.
Consciousness as a very large amount of interrelated quantum
information is at least approximately capable of allowing a part of
it, i.e. our conscious thoughts, to reflect on the whole. In living
beings, the factual equality (as in mathematics between natural
numbers and square numbers) is replaced by a possible equality in a
temporal succession. A self-reference refers to what has just been
thought.
All the best
Thomas
Werner Heisenberg hat einem seiner Bücher den Titel „Der Teil und das
Ganze“ gegeben. Das Buch schließt mit der Schilderung eines Gespräches
zwischen Heisenberg, Carl Friedrich v. Weizsäcker und Heisenbergs
Ehefrau Elisabeth, welches zwischen 1961 und 1965 stattfand. Davon ein
Auszug:
Carl Friedrich war nur halb zufrieden: »Ja, das sind so ganz schöne
allgemeine philosophische Gedanken, aber ich möchte das doch genauer
wissen. Ich hoffe eigentlich, daß man in dieser Weise genau zu den
wirklichen Naturgesetzen kommt. Eure Feldgleichung, von der man ja
noch nicht sicher weiß, ob sie die Natur richtig darstellt, sieht so
aus, als könnte sie aus dieser Philosophie der Alternativen entstehen.
Aber das muß man doch mit dem Grad der Strenge, der in der Mathematik
üblich ist, schließlich herausbringen können.«
»Du möchtest also«, fügte ich ein, »die Elementarteilchen, und damit
schließlich die Welt, in der gleichen Weise aus Alternativen aufbauen,
wie Plato seine regulären Körper und damit auch die Welt aus Dreiecken
aufbauen wollte. Die Alternativen sind ebensowenig Materie wie die
Dreiecke in Platos ›Timaios‹. Aber wenn man die Logik der
Quantentheorie zugrunde legt, so ist die Alternative eine Grundform,
aus der kompliziertere Grundformen durch Wiederholung entstehen. Der
Weg soll also, wenn ich dich richtig verstanden habe, von der
Alternative zu einer Symmetriegruppe, das heißt zu einer Eigenschaft
führen; die Darstellenden einer oder mehrerer Eigenschaften sind die
mathematischen Formen, die die Elementarteilchen abbilden; sie sind
sozusagen die Ideen der Elementarteilchen, denen dann schließlich das
Objekt Elementarteilchen entspricht. Diese allgemeine Konstruktion ist
mir durchaus verständlich. Auch ist die Alternative sicher eine sehr
viel fundamentalere Struktur unseres Denkens als das Dreieck.
/Aber die exakte Durchführung deines Programms stelle ich mir doch
außerordentlich schwierig vor. Denn sie wird ein Denken von so hoher
Abstraktheit erfordern, wie sie bisher, wenigstens in der Physik, nie
vorgekommen ist. Mir wäre das sicher zu schwer. Aber die jüngere
Generation hat es ja leichter, abstrakt zu denken. Also solltest du
das mit deinen Mitarbeitern unbedingt versuchen./«
Hier schaltete sich Elisabeth in das Gespräch ein, die von ferne
zugehört hatte:
»Glaubt ihr denn, daß ihr die junge Generation für solche schwierigen
Probleme interessieren könnt, die den großen Zusammenhang betreffen?
Wenn ich von dem ausgehe, was ihr gelegentlich von der Physik in den
großen Forschungszentren hier oder in Amerika erzählt, so sieht es
doch so aus, als ob sich das Interesse gerade bei der jüngeren
Generation fast nur den Einzelheiten zuwendet, als ob die großen
Zusammenhänge beinahe einer Art von Tabu unterliegen. Man soll von
ihnen nicht sprechen. Könnte es hier nicht so gehen, wie im
ausgehenden Altertum mit der Astronomie, als man sich durchaus damit
begnügte, die nächsten Sonnen- und Mondfinsternisse mit überlagerten
Zyklen und Epizykeln auszurechnen, und das heliozentrische
Planetensystem des Aristarch darüber vergaß? Könnte es nicht
geschehen, daß das Interesse für eure allgemeinen Fragen völlig
erlischt?«
Aber ich wollte hier nicht so pessimistisch sein und widersprach. »Das
Interesse für die Einzelheiten ist gut und notwendig, denn wir wollen
ja schließlich wissen, wie es wirklich ist. Und du erinnerst dich, daß
auch Niels [Bohr] immer gern den Vers zitiert hat: ›Nur die Fülle
führt zur Klarheit‹. Auch mit dem Tabu bin ich gar nicht so
unzufrieden. Denn ein Tabu wird ja nicht verhängt, um das zu
verbieten, von dem man nicht sprechen soll, sondern um es gegen das
Geschwätz und den Spott der vielen zu schützen. Von jeher hat die
Begründung eines Tabus doch so gelautet wie bei Goethe: ›Sagt es
niemand, nur den Weisen, weil die Menge gleich verhöhnet... ‹ Gegen
das Tabu soll man sich also nicht wehren. Es wird immer wieder junge
Menschen geben, die auch über die großen Zusammenhänge nachdenken,
schon weil sie bis zum Letzten ehrlich sein wollen, und dann kommt es
ja nicht darauf an, wie viele es sind.«
Wenn man die Quantentheorie lediglich als eine Theorie über kleinste
Teilchen gelehrt bekommen hat, könnte der Titel des Buches etwas
irritieren. Dass die Quantentheorie vor allem eine Theorie über
Ganzheiten ist, das wird selten deutlich erklärt. Aber genau deshalb
kann die Quantentheorie ein Licht auf das Problem der Selbstreferenz
werfen.
Das Problem des Selbstreferenz hängt, wenn ich es richtig sehe, mit
dem Problem zusammen, dass ein Teil einer Ganzheit diese Ganzheit
erfassen kann.
Dass ein Teil gleichmächtig mit dem Ganzen wird, das ist nur für
unendliche Mengen vorstellbar. Zwar sind die Quadratzahlen sehr viel
seltener als die natürlichen Zahlen. Die Quadratzahlen sind eine echte
Teilmenge der natürlichen Zahlen. Trotzdem gibt es zu jeder
natürlichen Zahl deren Quadrat, so dass die Mächtigkeit der
natürlichen Zahlen und diejenige der Quadratzahlen identisch ist.
Mit endlichen Mengen ist eine eineindeutige Zuordnung eines Teils zum
Ganzen natürlich nicht möglich. Das bedeutet allerdings nicht, dass
eine notwendige Unendlichkeit als solche auch unmittelbar erkennbar
werden muss. Wahrscheinlich genügt es, wenn die Unendlichkeit als
Möglichkeit verstanden werden kann.
Das damit komme ich Erics Anmerkung.
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God.
Dazu einige Bemerkungen zum griechische Term λόγος aus der deutschen
Wikipedia:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos*cite_ref-1__;Iw!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RXFR1jwLiFNXBZCIaDPtmvh3-xiOy5A9tEsds0dE8ZKgan4BNCpI-WecgpNItufA8QJjALUenx_Bcdca4tkFkeD5vbv7kA$
„Ein einschlägiges Wörterbuch[1] nennt u. a. die Übersetzungen
Sprechen, mündliche Mitteilung, Wort, Rede, Erzählung, Nachricht,
Gerücht, (grammatikalischer) Satz, Ausspruch Gottes (NT), Befehl (NT),
Weissagung (NT), Lehre (NT), Erlaubnis zum Reden, Beredsamkeit,
aufgestellter Satz, Behauptung, Lehrsatz, Definition,
Begriffsbestimmung, wovon die Rede ist, Sache, Gegenstand, das
Berechnen, Rechenschaft, Rechnung, Rücksicht, Wertschätzung,
Verhältnis, Vernunft, Absicht.“
Wenn also λόγος im alten Griechenland unter anderem die Bedeutungen:
„Behauptung, Begriffsbestimmung, Gegenstand, Rechnung“
hatte, so ist es vielleicht nicht sehr vermessen, heute zu schreiben:
»IM ANFANG WAR DIE INFORMATION.«
Man könnte auch sagen: der Kosmos beginnt nicht mit einem Knall,
sondern mit einem einzigen Wirkungsquantum, einem Quantenbit.
Warum ich das aus naturwissenschaftlicher Sicht sehr vernünftig
empfinde, habe ich in vielen Publikationen erläutert.
In meinen Augen beginnt die Religion einige Zeilen später, bei John 1,14:
»And the λόγος was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his
glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace
and truth.«
Zurück zur Naturwissenschaft:
Ein Quantenbit ist eine Möglichkeit, und Möglichkeiten erzeugen neue
Möglichkeiten. Physikalisch gesprochen heißt das: der Kosmos expandiert.
Ein Quantenbit wird dargestellt durch eine Wellenfunktion, deren
Wellenlänge von der Größenordnung des kosmischen Krümmungsradius ist.
Erst viele Quantenbits können so etwas Kleines wie ein Quantenteilchen
erzeugen.
Aus vielen Quantenbits können die Teilchen der relativistischen
Quantenmechanik mathematisch repräsentiert werden durch irreduzible
Darstellungen der Poincaré-Gruppe.
[Görnitz T, Graudenz D, Weizsäcker C F v (19923) Quantum Field Theory
of Binary Alternatives; /Intern. J. Theoret. //Phys/. 31, 1929-1959
Görnitz T, Schomäcker U (2012) Quantum Particles from Quantum
Information, /Journal of Physics: Conference Series 380/; 012025
doi:10.1088/1742-6596/380/1/012025]
Eine große gedankliche Schwierigkeit liegt nach meiner Erfahrung
darin, dass ein kosmisches Quantenbit, ein AQI, noch völlig abstrakt
ist, dass es noch als etwas rein Physikalisches, als noch völlig
„bedeutungs-frei“ verstanden werden muss.
Heisenberg hatte damals gemeint, dass er nicht so abstrakt denken
könne, wie es Weizsäckers Ansatz erforderlich macht. Als ich vor mehr
als vier Jahrzehnten begann, mich mathematisch mit Weizsäckers
Überlegungen zu befassen, wurde mir klar, dass man noch abstrakter
denken musste als Weizsäcker. Bei Weizsäcker wurde Information immer
als bedeutungsvoll gedacht. Damit kann man aber in der Physik nicht
arbeiten. Deshalb wurde der Übergang von Weizsäckers Ur-Alternativen
zu den AQIs notwendig.
(Quanten-)Information kann in der kosmischen Evolution erst mit der
Entstehung des Lebens auch bedeutungsvoll werden.
Bei einem Stern, einem Planeten oder einem Stein muss man für eine
Veränderung Energie einsetzen.
Aber Lebendiges kann durch bloße Information beeinflusst werden. In
einem solchen Fall des „Hervorrufens einer Wirkung“ (die
beispielsweise auch darin bestehen kann, einem Reflex nicht zu folgen)
erlangt die Information für dieses Lebewesen eine Bedeutung.
Solche Information muss für ein lokalisiertes Lebewesen lokal wirken
können, sie erscheint als bedeutungsvolle Information daher als
Eigenschaft eines energetischen (Photonen) oder materiellen Trägers
(ATP, andere Moleküle, Nervenstrukturen, Festkörper). (Diese Träger
sind selbst Formungen aus AQIs.)
Die Wichtigkeit der Träger verschwindet aber hinter der Bedeutung,
welche die Information für das betreffende Lebewesen erhält. Die
gleiche Bedeutung kann auf völlig unterschiedliche Weise durch völlig
unterschiedliche Träger hervorgerufen werden. Beispielsweise kann man
einen Text lesen oder anhören.
Auch wenn ein Quantenbit nur zwei orthogonale Zustände hat, gibt es
zwischen diesen beiden, sozusagen zwischen ja oder nein, noch
unendlich viele andere Möglichkeiten. Vielleicht hilft das bei
Überlegungen bezüglich der Selbstreferenz.
Einerseits gibt es aus dem Unbewussten eine Aktivierung von
Gedächtnisinhalten, die zu der aktuell bewusst verarbeiteten
Information passend sind oder passend sein können. Ein Teil der
menschlichen Kreativität wird dadurch hervorgebracht, dass bei solchen
Aktivierungen auch Inhalte ins Bewusstsein getragen werden, die nicht
unmittelbar als logischen Gründen naheliegend sind. Andererseits ist
man mit seinem Bewusstsein in der Lage, auf das soeben bewusst
Gedachte zu reflektieren.
Bewusstsein als eine sehr große Menge von miteinander verschränkter
Quanteninformation ist zumindest näherungsweise in der Lage, dass ein
Teil davon, also unsere bewussten Gedanken, das Ganze reflektieren
kann. Bei Lebewesen wird die faktische Gleichmächtigkeit (wie in der
Mathematik zwischen natürlichen Zahlen und Quadratzahlen) abgelöst
durch eine mögliche Gleichmächtigkeit bei einem zeitlichen
Nacheinander. Eine Selbstbezüglichkeit bezieht sich auf das soeben
Gedachte.
Quoting Eric Werner <eric.werner at oarf.org>:
> The problem with with a religion. It’s not very practical for many
> use cases it’s meant for tho eternal. In the beginning, it was
> the word and the word was God
> Sound familiar?
> Eric
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>> On Jan 19, 2025, at 16:01, Jason Hu <jasonthegoodman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>
>> I second Joe strongly here, " THEY ARE A
>> POSSIBLY MISLEADING WAY OF DESCRIBING NATURAL PHYSICAL PROCESSES,
>> INCLUDING AND ESPECIALLY COGNITION. "
>>
>> I used to be a fan of Hofstadter's "Gedel, Escher, Bach" in
>> my younger years, but gradually started realizing that type of
>> thoughts might be an intellectual trap - an endless rabbit hole
>> that leads to just self-entertainment or self-glory but no useful
>> actions, no tools for handyman to do everyday work to benefit
>> normal people.
>>
>> Well, "I HAVE JUST WRITTEN MAY NOT BE COMPLETELY CORRECT
>> (WHAT IS?)" so I welcome any of you to prove me wrong or even
>> change my mind, by offering some solid example of how GSB thinking
>> has been beneficial to solve/resolve/dissolve the huge conflicts
>> going on in the Middle East, or the deep divide among the Americans
>> between Trump supporters and Trump haters, or the chaotic social
>> issues in the U.K. and the Europe. If no such examples exist so
>> far, at least point out to me how it could be, under what conditions?
>>
>> Best regards - Jason
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 3:29 AM <joe.brenner at bluewin.ch> wrote:
>>
>>> _Dear Lou and All, _
>>> _ _
>>> _Just some comments to explain my resistence to GSB and
>>> much of Lou's otherwise essential work: the diagrams used do not
>>> nove; they are "eternal". They accurately reflect /only epistemic
>>> self-reference/ and not recursion or ontic hetero-reference.
>>> Therefore, they are a possibly misleading way of describing
>>> natural physical processes, including and especially cognition.
>>> Information applies to the content of the diagram below, but the
>>> mental "movement" from figure to ground and back, and its logic,
>>> is at a low level of complexity. Information more broadly.
>>> however, is easily seen as a dynamic phenomenon, embodying and
>>> describing /change./ _
>>> _ _
>>> _I submit that what I have just written may not be
>>> completely correct (what is?), but that it has received
>>> insufficient serious attention. _
>>> _ _
>>> _Thank you and best wishes, _
>>> _Joseph _
>>>
>>>> _Le 19.01.2025 02:08 CET, Louis Kauffman <loukau at gmail.com> a écrit : _
>>>> _ _
>>>> _ _
>>>> _Dear Karl, _
>>>> _<VasesFaces copy.png>_
>>>>
>>>> _ _
>>>> _Background. _
>>>> _Figure and Ground. _
>>>> _Yes. _ _And in starting with the idea of a
>>>> distinction one needs to have an unfettered notion of background.
>>>> _ _That notion is emptiness. _
>>>> _The empty set is placed against a background of
>>>> non-membership and it has no members. _
>>>> _
>>>> { } _
>>>> _The GSB mark is a relative of the empty set and
>>>> stands for a distinction and for that state obtained by crossing
>>>> from emptiness _
>>>> _(the first distinction, if you will.) _
>>>> _<Mark.png>_
>>>>
>>>> _As soon as one fixes on a representation of a
>>>> concept, that representation has more properties, more inherent
>>>> and indicated distinctions, than the concept “itself”. _
>>>> _Thus the curly brackets of the representation of the
>>>> empty set, { }, are not necessary for the concept. And the right
>>>> angle bracket is not necessary for the mark. _
>>>> _We sometimes use < > for the mark as it is useful in
>>>> typing, but execrable as an icon since < > is two characters
>>>> representing one distinction. And so it goes. _
>>>> _ _
>>>> _It is in fact very powerful to understand the
>>>> backgrounds that are appropriate for discourse and keep them as
>>>> minimal as possible. _
>>>> _In LOF, GSB uses the notational plane as a
>>>> background, not the line. _
>>>> _This has some eplstemological advantages and some
>>>> drawbacks. _
>>>> _After studying any indication set-up it is useful to
>>>> examine what kind of background is being used. _
>>>> _Mathematical advances and scientific advances have
>>>> resulted from such scrutiny. _
>>>> _At the level of the Heart Sutra the concept of
>>>> emptiness can be the basis for (everything). _
>>>> _Very best, _
>>>> _Lou _
>>>> _ _
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> _On Jan 18, 2025, at 3:55 PM, Karl Javorszky
>>>>> <karl.javorszky at gmail.com> wrote: _
>>>>> _Remark: this is usually called
>>>>> BACKGROUND. _
>>>>>
>>>>> _Louis Kauffman
>>>>> <loukau at gmail.com> schrieb am Sa., 18. Jän. 2025, 22:43: _
>>>>>
>>>>>> _Dear Pedro, _ _It depends on
>>>>>> how you look at it. _
>>>>>> _Consider the Heart Sutra. _
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _In Mathematics, all forms are brought forth from emptiness. _
>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>> _{ } _
>>>>>> _{{}} _
>>>>>> _{{},{{}}} _
>>>>>> _… _
>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>> _Emptiness can mean “that which is not
>>>>>> (yet) articulated or indicated”. _
>>>>>> _At the bottom of what is indicated is what
>>>>>> is not indicated. _
>>>>>> _What is not indicated is not marked. _
>>>>>> _Emptiness is a word for what is not marked. _
>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>> _Very best, _
>>>>>> _Lou _
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _On Jan 18, 2025, at 3:05 PM, Pedro C. Marijuán
>>>>>>> <pedroc.marijuan at gmail.com> wrote: _
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _Dear Lou and List, _
>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>> _Thanks to you (and Eric) for the
>>>>>>> thought-provoking exchange. Along it, I was reminded of a
>>>>>>> maverick approach to distinctions I read long ago. It was
>>>>>>> pointing to a set with N elements carrying multiple "signs" or
>>>>>>> "marks". The distinctions between these elements carrying
>>>>>>> heterogeneous signs within the set were expressed by means of
>>>>>>> partitions, actually multidimensional partitions. Other
>>>>>>> related authors tried to systematically obtain and compile
>>>>>>> those multidimensional partitions via a few 'logical'
>>>>>>> principles (economy, parsimony, symmetry) applied to the
>>>>>>> pruning of redundant signs, and subsequently the 'canonical'
>>>>>>> multid.partitions could be obtained 'almost' algorithmically
>>>>>>> (at least for small N)... etc. etc. At least, in my
>>>>>>> non-mathematical mind I could make some practical sense of
>>>>>>> this distinctional stuff (in which I was interested regarding
>>>>>>> cellular signaling systems and the way receptors combinations
>>>>>>> were occupied by different signaling molecules). _
>>>>>>> _I disagree with the closing statement
>>>>>>> (THE FORM WE TAKE TO EXIST ARISES FROM FRAMING NOTHING),
>>>>>>> because it situates itself above the conditions of any
>>>>>>> previous kind of existence. IMO it is a Barón of Münchhausen's
>>>>>>> type of statement. Maths as I pointed days ago inherit the
>>>>>>> inner dynamics of our sensorimotor transformations from which
>>>>>>> language developed. Maths, as it has often been recognized, is
>>>>>>> a particular form of collective language. It partakes of an
>>>>>>> enormous historical accumulation of thought-experimentation
>>>>>>> and pruning, particularly trying to capture the
>>>>>>> transformations of the external world. The implicit subject is
>>>>>>> always "us", the writer plus the concerned learned community
>>>>>>> of 'practitioners' of that particular math 'dialect'. And
>>>>>>> concerning distinctions, it obviously includes the possibility
>>>>>>> of entering into the scheme of other subjects (as Eric points)
>>>>>>> endowed with genuine distinctional capability--from living
>>>>>>> cells to... _
>>>>>>> _Anyhow, in spite of the disagreement,
>>>>>>> your message was a great reading. Thanks for those GSB
>>>>>>> quotations. _
>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>> _Concerning Kate's recent emphasis on
>>>>>>> E. coli's two component system in charge of motion control,
>>>>>>> the discoveries on prokaryotic signaling during last two
>>>>>>> decades have left a richer panorama. For instance, E. coli
>>>>>>> counts with about 100 one-component-systems (1CSs), 28 of the
>>>>>>> 2 CSs class, and just two of the 3 CSs (actually one of them
>>>>>>> is the motion control). The 1CSs are more simple and primitive
>>>>>>> (evolutionarily), and slower, with respect to the faster, more
>>>>>>> specific, and more evolved 2CSs, which in their turn are less
>>>>>>> complex and sophisticate than 3CSs, which are applied to the
>>>>>>> treatment of very important signals than need a further layer
>>>>>>> of intervening processes. It always depend on the whole
>>>>>>> advancement of the cell cycle, or life history, which
>>>>>>> endowment the bacterium will contain... Anyhow, the whole
>>>>>>> signaling panorama of 'primitive' cells is fascinating--it is
>>>>>>> indeed the beginning of biological sensing & communication. _
>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>> _By the way, Jason, thanks for that
>>>>>>> amazing report on the proton innards. _
>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>> _Greetings to all, _
>>>>>>> _--Pedro _
>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>> _El 17/01/2025 a las 21:57, Louis
>>>>>>> Kauffman escribió: _
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _Dear Eric, _
>>>>>>>> _There is a confusion here that is quite natural. _
>>>>>>>> _LOF is a book of mathematics and
>>>>>>>> philosophy. It discusses the idea of a distinction. _
>>>>>>>> _When one takes a mathematical
>>>>>>>> approach one attempts to begin with very simple structures
>>>>>>>> and _
>>>>>>>> _explore outward into complexity.
>>>>>>>> LOF dwells on the possibility of one distinction throughout
>>>>>>>> the whole book. _
>>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>> _“We take as given the idea of
>>>>>>>> distinction and the idea of indication _
>>>>>>>> _and that one cannot make an
>>>>>>>> indication without drawing a distinction. _
>>>>>>>> _We take therefore the form of
>>>>>>>> distinction for the form.” _
>>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>> _As such LOF is not concerned with
>>>>>>>> where or how the distinction is made. _
>>>>>>>> _In the same way, a mathematics book
>>>>>>>> about number is not concerned with particular representations
>>>>>>>> of numbers. _
>>>>>>>> _Of course we have these concerns
>>>>>>>> and we want to understand more and more about numbers in
>>>>>>>> general _
>>>>>>>> _and we feel that some
>>>>>>>> representations will help and some ways to use signs and
>>>>>>>> symbols will help. _
>>>>>>>> _The same is the case with the idea
>>>>>>>> of distinction. _
>>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>> _GSB does have his ontology (or lack
>>>>>>>> thereof!). _
>>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>> _Some people are made a bit nervous
>>>>>>>> by declarations that the world is created from nothing. _
>>>>>>>> _But you can investigate this if you
>>>>>>>> are not annoyed by it. _
>>>>>>>> _What could ’things’ be ‘made of’? _
>>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>> _If you’re bothered, then you are bothered. _
>>>>>>>> _Mathematics is similarly annoying _
>>>>>>>> _as we have systematically shown _
>>>>>>>> _how to build it all from nothing _
>>>>>>>> _but the act of collecting/distinguishing _
>>>>>>>> _and the act of creating signs and
>>>>>>>> indications. _
>>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>> _Everyone has their niche of ideas
>>>>>>>> and ways that they want to continue to use. _
>>>>>>>> _In the approach of a big general
>>>>>>>> idea, what we already “know" looks too good be abandoned, _
>>>>>>>> _and so we keep demanding that the
>>>>>>>> other talk in our language. _
>>>>>>>> _GSB created new language. _
>>>>>>>> _Wittgenstein pointed out the
>>>>>>>> ontological consequences of the limitations of language. _
>>>>>>>> _Both are very challenging. _
>>>>>>>> _Neither are making religions. _
>>>>>>>> _These are anti-religions. _
>>>>>>>> _Best, _
>>>>>>>> _Lou _
>>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>> _THE FORM WE TAKE TO EXIST ARISES
>>>>>>>> FROM FRAMING NOTHING. _
>>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _On Jan 17, 2025, at 6:19 AM, Eric Werner
>>>>>>>>> <eric.werner at oarf.org> wrote: _
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _Dear Lou,_
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _To point 4. Yes, I admit it
>>>>>>>>> was sarcasm. To me a distinction requires a subject. And
>>>>>>>>> that subject's neuro-hardware or firmware or software limits
>>>>>>>>> the distinctions that that subject can make. For example,
>>>>>>>>> the distinctions made by an ant, a frog, a cat or a human
>>>>>>>>> may be quite different. _
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _I realize you are probably
>>>>>>>>> the world top expert on Spencer Brown so you probably have a
>>>>>>>>> reply. But my instinct is that GSB is claiming too much by
>>>>>>>>> using 'distinction' as an ONTOLOGICAL or metaphysical
>>>>>>>>> foundation for what requires a subjective capacity. OK, this
>>>>>>>>> last sentence is not fully clear, but I think GSB is
>>>>>>>>> confusing subject and being._
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _As for the sarcasm, it is a
>>>>>>>>> more personal emotional reaction having little to do with
>>>>>>>>> you. Although you may unknowingly have had a role in the
>>>>>>>>> matter through your publications. I have friends who study
>>>>>>>>> early Wittgenstein and GSB as if their texts were biblical
>>>>>>>>> texts. Going to the library every day to read the Tractatus
>>>>>>>>> and LOF like a disciple doing his or her religious studies. _
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _At the onset of puberty and
>>>>>>>>> the ability to consciously reason, my mother took each of us
>>>>>>>>> into the kitchen and taught us to be critical of the bible,
>>>>>>>>> both the old and new testament. We were raised Christian but
>>>>>>>>> there were also Jews in my mother's ancestry. Who knows why,
>>>>>>>>> but I have maintained my religious skepticism and hence my
>>>>>>>>> perhaps inappropriate reaction when I smell religiosity.
>>>>>>>>> Apologies dear Lou._
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _In spite of my critical
>>>>>>>>> attitude, I do believe there is more to the universe. There
>>>>>>>>> may be a God or Gods and angels. There may be life after
>>>>>>>>> death. Life is always surprising. So, I am open to that._
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _-Eric_
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _Fis mailing list
>>>>>>>> Fis at listas.unizar.eshttp://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-listasRecuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee. https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://listas.unizar.es----------__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RXFR1jwLiFNXBZCIaDPtmvh3-xiOy5A9tEsds0dE8ZKgan4BNCpI-WecgpNItufA8QJjALUenx_Bcdca4tkFkeBBfbs1Xg$
>>>>>>>> _
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _ _
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ________________________________________________
>>>>>>> Fis mailing list
>>>>>>> Fis at listas.unizar.es
>>>>>>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>>>>>> ----------
>>>>>>> INFORMACI�N SOBRE PROTECCI�N DE DATOS DE CAR�CTER PERSONAL
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo
>>>>>>> gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
>>>>>>> Puede encontrar toda la informaci�n 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 est� suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede
>>>>>>> darse de baja desde la propia aplicaci�n 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
>>>>>> ---------- _
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>> ----------_
>>
>> ________________________________________________
>> 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
>> ----------_
Prof. Dr. Thomas Görnitz
Fellow of the INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF INFORMATION STUDIES
Privat (für Postsendungen):
Karl-Mangold-Str. 13
D-81245 München
Tel: 0049-89-887746
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://goernitzunderstandingquantumtheory.com/__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!RXFR1jwLiFNXBZCIaDPtmvh3-xiOy5A9tEsds0dE8ZKgan4BNCpI-WecgpNItufA8QJjALUenx_Bcdca4tkFkeBC4xnSbg$
Fachbereich Physik
J. W. Goethe-Universität Frankfurt/Main
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20250120/6e6af527/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Fis
mailing list