<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Dear Colleagues - Using the terms communication and information to talk about the interaction of quarks and all non-sentient particles for that matter is strictly metaphoric and as a teacher of the poetry of physics how could I object. I do not but at the same time I want to invoke my relativity of information principle so that we are clear about the terms communication and information applied to quarks and other non-sentient particles as opposed to the sentient folks who can read this post unlike any quark on the face of the universe. In a paper I co-authored with Stuart Kauffman and others including R. Este, R. Goebel, D. Hobill and I. Shmulevich entitled
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:
EN-US">Propagating Organization: An Enquiry </span></b> we invoked the principle of the relativity of information, namely that the word information refers to many different phenomena and that its meaning depends on the context in which the word is used. </div></span></span>
</div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>best wishes - Bob Logan </div><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>PS Here is the abstract:</div><div><br></div><div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal.dotm</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>427</o:Words>
<o:Characters>2435</o:Characters>
<o:Company>tt</o:Company>
<o:Lines>20</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>4</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>2990</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>12.0</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment--><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;tab-stops:28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 252.0pt 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt;
mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">Abstract <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;tab-stops:28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 252.0pt 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt;
mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Cambria; ">Our aim in
this article is to attempt to discuss propagating organization of process, a
poorly articulated union of matter, energy, work, constraints and that vexed
concept, “information”, which unite in far from equilibrium living physical
systems. Our hope is to stimulate discussions by philosophers of biology and
biologists to further clarify the concepts we discuss here. We place our
discussion in the broad context of a “general biology”, properties that might
well be found in life anywhere in the cosmos, freed from the specific examples
of terrestrial life after 3.8 billion years of evolution. By placing the
discussion in this wider, if still hypothetical, context, we also try to place
in context some of the extant discussion of information as intimately related
to DNA, RNA and protein transcription and translation processes. While
characteristic of current terrestrial life, there are no compelling grounds to
suppose the same mechanisms would be involved in any life form able to evolve
by heritable variation and natural selection. In turn, this allows us to
discuss at least briefly, the focus of much of the philosophy of biology on
population genetics, which, of course, assumes DNA, RNA, proteins, and other
features of terrestrial life. Presumably, evolution by natural selection – and
perhaps self-organization - could occur on many worlds via different causal
mechanisms.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;tab-stops:28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 252.0pt 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt;
mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">Here we seek
a non-reductionist explanation for the synthesis, accumulation, and propagation
of information, work, and constraint, which we hope will provide some insight
into both the biotic and abiotic universe, in terms of both molecular self
reproduction and the basic work energy cycle where work is the constrained
release of energy into a few degrees of freedom. The typical requirement for
work itself is to construct those very constraints on the release of energy
that then constitute further work. Information creation, we argue, arises in
two ways: first information as natural selection assembling the very
constraints on the release of energy that then constitutes work and the
propagation of organization. Second, information in a more extended sense is
“semiotic”, that is <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">about</i> the world
or internal state of the organism and requires appropriate response. The idea
is to combine ideas from biology, physics, and computer science, to formulate
explanatory hypotheses on how information can be captured and rendered in the
expected physical manifestation, which can then participate in the propagation
of the organization of process in the expected biological work cycles to create
the diversity in our observable biosphere.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;tab-stops:28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 252.0pt 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt;
mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">Our
conclusions, to date, of this enquiry suggest a foundation which views
information as the construction of constraints, which, in their physical
manifestation, partially underlie the processes of evolution to dynamically
determine the fitness of organisms within the context of a biotic universe.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;tab-stops:28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 252.0pt 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt;
mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">The whole article is available at: <a href="https://www.academia.edu/783503/Propagating_organization_an_enquiry">https://www.academia.edu/783503/Propagating_organization_an_enquiry</a></span></p><div><br></div><div><b>And here is the section on the relativity of information:</b></div><div><br></div><div>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Template>Normal.dotm</o:Template>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>970</o:Words>
<o:Characters>5534</o:Characters>
<o:Company>tt</o:Company>
<o:Lines>46</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>11</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>6796</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>12.0</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves>false</w:TrackMoves>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridHorizontalSpacing>
<w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>18 pt</w:DrawingGridVerticalSpacing>
<w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayHorizontalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>0</w:DisplayVerticalDrawingGridEvery>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:DontAutofitConstrainedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
</w:Compatibility>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="276">
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment--><p class="MsoNormal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-hansi-theme-font:
minor-latin">Section 4. The Relativity of Information<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">In Sections 2 we have argued that the Shannon
conception of information are not directly suited to describe the information
of autonomous agents that propagate their organization. In Section 3 we have
defined a new form of information, instructional or biotic information as the
constraints that direct the flow of free energy to do work. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">The reader may legitimately ask the question
“isn’t information just information?”, i.e., an invariant like the speed of
light. Our response to this question is <u>no</u>, and to then clarify what
seems arbitrary about the definition of information. Instructional or biotic
information is a useful definition for biotic systems just as Shannon
information was useful for telecommunication channel engineering, and
Kolmogorov (Shiryayev 1993) information was useful for the study of information
compression with respect to Turing machines.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">The definition of information is relative and
depends on the context in which it is to be considered. There appears to be no
such thing as absolute information that is an invariant that applies to all
circumstances. Just as Shannon defined information in such a way as to
understand the engineering of telecommunication channels, our definition of
instructional or biotic information best describes the interaction and
evolution of biological systems and the propagation of organization.
Information is a tool and as such it comes in different forms. We therefore
would like to suggest that information is not an invariant but rather a
quantity that is relative to the environment in which it operates. It is also
the case that the information in a system or structure is not an intrinsic
property of that system or structure; rather it is sensitive to history and
environment. To drive home this point we will now examine the historic context
in which Shannon (1948) information emerged.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">Before delving into the origin of Shannon
information we will first examine the relationship of information and materiality.
Information is about material things and furthermore is instantiated in
material things but is not material itself. Information is an abstraction we
use to describe the behavior of material things and often is thought as
something that controls, in the cybernetic sense, material things. So what do
we mean when we say the constraints are information and information is
constraints as we did in Section 3. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">“The constraints are information” is a way to
describe the limits on the behavior of an autonomous agent who acts on its own
behalf but is nevertheless constrained by the internal logic that allows it to
propagate its organization. This is consistent with Hayle’s (1999, p. 72)
description of the way information is regarded by information science: “It
constructs information as the site of mastery and control over the material
world.” She claims, and we concur, that information science treats information
as separate from the material base in which it is instantiated. This suggests
that there is nothing intrinsic about information but rather it is merely a
description of or a metaphor for the complex patterns of behavior of material
things. In fact, the key is to what degree information is a completely vivid
description of the objects in question.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">This understanding of the nature of
information arises from Shannon’s (1948) original formulation of information,
dating back to his original paper:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style="margin-top: 0cm; margin-right: 18pt; margin-left: 18pt; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">The
fundamental problem of communication is that of reproducing at one point either
exactly or approximately a message selected at another point. Frequently the
messages have meaning; that is they refer to or are correlated according to
some system with certain physical or conceptual entities. These semantic
aspects of communication are irrelevant to the engineering problem. The
significant aspect is that the actual message is one selected from a set of
possible messages. The system must be designed to operate for each possible
selection, not just the one that will actually be chosen since this is unknown
at the time of design. If the number of messages in the set is finite then this
number or any monotonic function of this number can be regarded as a measure of
the information produced when one message is chosen from the set, all choices
being equally likely.<o:p></o:p></span></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">A number of problems for biology emerge from
this view of information. The first is that the number of possible messages is
not finite because we are not able to prestate all possible preadaptations from
which a particular message can be selected and therefore the Shannon measure
breaks down. Another problem is that for Shannon the semantics or meaning of
the message does not matter, whereas in biology the opposite is true. Biotic
agents have purpose and hence meaning. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">The third problem is that Shannon information
is defined independent of the medium of its instantiation. This independence of
the medium is at the heart of a strong AI approach in which it is claimed that
human intelligence does not require a wet computer, the brain, to operate but
can be instantiated onto a silicon-based computer. In the biosphere, however,
one cannot separate the information from the material in which it is
instantiated. The DNA is not a sign for something else it is the actual thing
in itself, which regulates other genes, generates messenger RNA, which in turn
control the production of proteins. Information on a computer or a
telecommunication device can slide from one computer or device to another and
then via a printer to paper and not really change, McLuhan’s “the medium is the
message” aside. This is not true of living things. The same genotype does not
always produce the same phenotype.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">According to the Shannon definition of
information, a structured set of numbers like the set of even numbers has less
information than a set of random numbers because one can predict the sequence
of even numbers. By this argument, a random soup of organic chemicals has more
information that a structured biotic agent. The biotic agent has more meaning
than the soup, however. The living organism with more structure and more
organization has less Shannon information. This is counterintuitive to a
biologist’s understanding of a living organism. We therefore conclude that the
use of Shannon information to describe a biotic system would not be valid.
Shannon information for a biotic system is simply a category error.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin">A living organism has meaning because it is
an autonomous agent acting on its own behalf. A random soup of organic
chemicals has no meaning and no organization. We may therefore conclude that a
central feature of life is organization—organization that propagates. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Cambria;mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<!--EndFragment--></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination:none;tab-stops:28.0pt 56.0pt 84.0pt 112.0pt 140.0pt 168.0pt 196.0pt 224.0pt 252.0pt 280.0pt 308.0pt 336.0pt;
mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin"><br></span></p>
<!--EndFragment--></div>
<br><div><div>On 2016-01-18, at 11:06 PM, Xueshan Yan wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<title></title>
<meta content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588">
<div><!-- Converted from text/plain format --><p><font size="4">Dear colleagues,<br><br>The issue “Quark Communication” raised
by Bob and Howard etc. is interesting and radical; it can help us to clarify
that if there is a universal physical information problem besides black hole
information that only is studying by a few astrophysicists such as Stephen
Hawking etc. Here I provide some reference about “messenger particles” extracted
from Wikipedia under the term: “Force carrier” to this question:<br></font><font size="4"><br>The concept of messenger particles dates back to the 18th century
when the French physicist Charles Coulomb showed that the electrostatic force
between electrically charged objects follows a law similar to Newton's Law of
Gravitation. In time, this relationship became known as Coulomb's law. By 1862,
Hermann von Helmholtz had described a ray of light as the "quickest of all the
messengers". In 1905, Albert Einstein proposed the existence of a light-particle
in answer to the question: "what are light quanta?"</font></p><p><font size="4">In 1923, at the Washington University in St. Louis, Arthur Holly
Compton demonstrated an effect now known as Compton scattering. This effect is
only explainable if light can behave as a stream of particles and it convinced
the physics community of the existence of Einstein's light-particle. Lastly, in
1926, one year before the theory of quantum mechanics was published, Gilbert N.
Lewis introduced the term "photon", which soon became the name for Einstein’s
light particle. From there, the concept of messenger particles developed
further.</font></p><p><font size="4"><br></font><font size="4">Best
wishes,<br><br>Xueshan<br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From:
<a href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es">fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</a> [</font><a href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es"><font size="4">mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es</font></a><font size="4">] On Behalf Of
Pedro C. Marijuan<br>Sent: Monday, January 18, 2016 7:51 PM<br>To:
'fis'<br>Subject: Re: [Fis] Cho 2016 The social life of quarks<br><br>Dear
Howard and colleagues,<br><br>OK, you can say that quarks communicate, but
immediately we need to<br>create another term for "real" communication. I mean,
there are quarks<br>(fermions) and bosons (particle forces) everywhere: planets,
stars,<br>galaxies, etc. Their multiple interactions constitute most of
the<br>contents of physics. If you want to term "communication" to some
basic<br>categories of physical interactions based on force exchange --of some
of<br>the 4 fundamental forces, whatever-- we run into difficulties
to<br>characterize the communication that entails signals, agents
and<br>meanings, and responses. That's the "real" communication we find
after<br>the origins of that singular organization we call life --essential
then<br>for the later emergence of superorganisms, peaking order, memes,
etc.<br>You have oceans of interacting fermions and bosons around, but the
new<br>communicating phenomenology is only found in our minuscule
planet.<br><br>As an explanatory metaphor, it is not a good idea, almost wrong I
dare<br>say. But as a free-wheeling, literary metaphor it belongs to
the<br>author's choice. The problem is that both realms of information, so
to<br>speak, have relatively overlapping components, depending on
the<br>explanatory framework used (see the ongoing exchanges by Stan,
John,<br>Terry, etc.) And that kind of apparent homogenization blurs the
effort<br>to establish the distinctions and advance in a unifying perspective
(I<br>think!!). In any case, it deserves more discussion. In your Jan.
14th<br>message you ad more elements--I will think twice!.<br><br>All the
best--Pedro<br><br>PS. Clarifying the two messages per week rule (responding to
offline<br>quests): the two messages should be counted along the
"international<br>business week": starting on Monday until the end of Sunday,
Greenwich<br>Time. Thanks to all for respecting this "boundary
condition"!<br><br><a href="mailto:HowlBloom@aol.com">HowlBloom@aol.com</a> wrote:<br>> re:
quarks<br>> <br>> the big question for FIS is this: do quarks
communicate? and can<br>> their communications be called
informational?<br>> <br>> are quarks more than just the first bits of
matter in the cosmos? are<br>> they also the first
socializers? the first
team-makers?<br>> <br>> with oomph--howard<br>>
____________<br>> Howard Bloom<br>> Author of: /The Lucifer Principle: A
Scientific Expedition Into the<br>> Forces of History/ ("mesmerizing"-/The
Washington Post/),<br>> /Global Brain: The Evolution of Mass Mind From The
Big Bang to the<br>> 21st Century/ ("reassuring and sobering"-/The New
Yorker)/,<br>> /The Genius of the Beast: A Radical Re-Vision of Capitalism/
("A<br>> tremendously enjoyable book." James Fallows, National
Correspondent,<br>> /The Atlantic/),<br>> /The God Problem: How A Godless
Cosmos Creates/ ("Bloom's argument<br>> will rock your world." Barbara
Ehrenreich),<br>> /How I Accidentally Started the Sixties/ ("Wow! Whew!
Wild!<br>> Wonderful!" Timothy Leary), and<br>> /The Mohammed Code/ ("A
terrifying book…the best book I've read on<br>> Islam." David Swindle,/ PJ
Media/).<br>> <a href="http://www.howardbloom.net">www.howardbloom.net</a><br>> Former Core Faculty Member, The
Graduate Institute; Former Visiting<br>> Scholar-Graduate Psychology
Department, New York University.<br>> Founder: International Paleopsychology
Project; Founder, Space<br>> Development Steering Committee; Founder: The
Group Selection Squad;<br>> Founding Board Member: Epic of Evolution Society;
Founding Board<br>> Member, The Darwin Project; Founder: The Big Bang Tango
Media Lab;<br>> member: New York Academy of Sciences, American Association
for the<br>> Advancement of Science, American Psychological Society, Academy
of<br>> Political Science, Human Behavior and Evolution Society,
International<br>> Society for Human Ethology, Scientific Advisory Board
Member, Lifeboat<br>> Foundation; Editorial Board Member, Journal of Space
Philosophy; Board<br>> member and member of Board of Governors, National
Space Society.<br>> <br>> In a message dated 1/16/2016 11:48:34 A.M.
Eastern Standard Time,<br>> <a href="mailto:logan@physics.utoronto.ca">logan@physics.utoronto.ca</a>
writes:<br>><br>> Stan et al - you honour me by
asking the question. We know that<br>> matter (and
here I do not include dark matter or dark energy)
is<br>> made up of a small number of quarks and
gluons. As we go higher<br>> and higher energy we
will continue to create these "freaks of<br>> nature"
freaks in the sense that we create the conditions for
them<br>> to come into existence using our high
energy colliders. I am sure<br>> they sometimes occur
naturally in stars from time to time but they<br>> do
not have any long term effects - they are a passing fancy,
a<br>> novelty, and an amusing one at that. Perhaps
they will help us<br>> understand the quark gluon
interaction. The analogy I see with the<br>>
transition from prokaryotes to eukaryotes that I sent to
Malcolm<br>> was my indulging in scientific based
poetry. BTW I teach an<br>> undergrad course since
1971 called the Poetry of Physics (also the<br>>
title of a book available on Amazon) to teach physics
to<br>> humanities students without using math to
promote science literacy<br>> among
humanists.<br>><br>> Another analogy that came to
mind was that of proliferation of<br>> nucleic acids
made up of the same 4 elements: C, G, A, and
T.<br>> They are the quarks of biology and
their chemical bonds the gluons. <br>><br>>
Metaphorically your - Bob Logan<br>>
______________________<br>><br>> Robert K.
Logan<br>> Prof. Emeritus - Physics - U. of
Toronto<br>> Fellow University of St. Michael's
College<br>> Chief Scientist - sLab at
OCAD<br>> </font><a href="http://utoronto.academia.edu/RobertKLogan"><font size="4">http://utoronto.academia.edu/RobertKLogan</font></a><br><font size="4">>
<a href="http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan">www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan</a><br>>
<</font><a href="http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan"><font size="4">http://www.physics.utoronto.ca/Members/logan</font></a><font size="4">><br>>
<a href="http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications">www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications</a><br>>
<</font><a href="http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications"><font size="4">http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert_Logan5/publications</font></a><font size="4">><br>><br>> On 2016-01-16, at 10:33 AM,
Stanley N Salthe wrote:<br>><br>>> One way to
complicate anything is to smash it into bits.
I<br>>> wonder, Bob, if you would comment on this
point as a former<br>>> particle
physicist!<br>>><br>>>
STAN<br>>><br>>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at
11:13 PM, Malcolm Dean<br>>>
<<a href="mailto:malcolmdean@gmail.com">malcolmdean@gmail.com</a> <</font><a href="mailto:malcolmdean@gmail.com"><font size="4">mailto:malcolmdean@gmail.com</font></a><font size="4">>>
wrote:<br>>><br>>>
Yes. I don't know enough about Biology, but I noticed the
3+2<br>>> business some
time ago. I'm automatically suspicious
of<br>>> theories which
are "vexingly complex" (QCD) and
only<br>>> "beautiful"
(String Theory) to a few people with certain
math<br>>> backgrounds.
But the Two and the Three have been important
to<br>>> humans for
thousands of years. I think Nature is
actually<br>>> very
simple, but we get overwhelmed and confused by
its<br>>> enormous scales
and by our attempts to manage observation
by<br>>> (necessarily)
creating over-simplified
Objects.<br>>><br>>>
M.<br>>><br>>>
*Malcolm Dean*<br>>>
/Member/, Higher Cognitive Affinity Group,
BRI<br>>> <</font><a href="http://www.bri.ucla.edu/research/affinity-groups/higher-cognitive-function-in-neural-integration-affinity-group"><font size="4">http://www.bri.ucla.edu/research/affinity-groups/higher-cognitive-function-in-neural-integration-affinity-group</font></a><font size="4">><br>>>
/Research Affiliate/, Human Complex Systems,
UCLA<br>>> <</font><a href="http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Malcolm_Dean"><font size="4">http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Malcolm_Dean</font></a><font size="4">><br>>>
/Member/, BAFTA/LA <</font><a href="http://baftala.org/"><font size="4">http://baftala.org/</font></a><font size="4">><br>>> /On
Google Scholar<br>>>
<</font><a href="http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZopY3eQAAAAJ&hl=en"><font size="4">http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZopY3eQAAAAJ&hl=en</font></a><font size="4">>/<br>>><br>>>
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 6:47 PM, Bob
Logan<br>>>
<<a href="mailto:logan@physics.utoronto.ca">logan@physics.utoronto.ca</a><br>>>
<</font><a href="mailto:logan@physics.utoronto.ca"><font size="4">mailto:logan@physics.utoronto.ca</font></a><font size="4">>>
wrote:<br>>><br>>>
eukaryote came about by two prokaryotes joining
together<br>>>
and 5 quark combo can be thought of as a nucleon
(3<br>>>
quarks) and a meson(2quarks) combining and the 4
quqrk<br>>>
state as 2 mesons combining. By this logic perhaps
there<br>>>
will be 6 quark beast if 2 nucleons
combine.<br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>>
On 2016-01-15, at 4:17 PM, Malcolm Dean
wrote:<br>>><br>>>>
Could you specify the
relata?<br>>>><br>>>>
Malcolm<br>>>><br>>>>
On Jan 15, 2016 5:31 AM, "Bob
Logan"<br>>>>
<<a href="mailto:logan@physics.utoronto.ca">logan@physics.utoronto.ca</a><br>>>>
<</font><a href="mailto:logan@physics.utoronto.ca"><font size="4">mailto:logan@physics.utoronto.ca</font></a><font size="4">>>
wrote:<br>>>><br>>>>
Hi Malcolm - thanks for this article that
supports<br>>>>
my notion that my former field of particle
physics<br>>>>
is becoming like biology. The 4 and 5 quark
combos<br>>>>
represent an analogy of the transition in
biology<br>>>>
from prokaryotes to eukaryotes. :-) -
Bob<br>>>><br>>>><br>>>>
On 2016-01-14, at 7:39 PM, Malcolm Dean
wrote:<br>>>><br>>>>>
</font><a href="http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6270/217.summary"><font size="4">http://science.sciencemag.org/content/351/6270/217.summary</font></a><br><font size="4">>>>>
Science 351(6270):217-219, 15 January 2016;
DOI:<br>>>>>
10.1126/science.351.6270.217<br>>>>>
*The social life of
quarks*<br>>>>>
Adrian
Cho<br>>>>><br>>>>>
Particle physicists at Europe's CERN laboratory
in<br>>>>>
Switzerland say they have observed bizarre
new<br>>>>>
cousins of the protons and neutrons that make
up<br>>>>>
the atomic nucleus. Protons and neutrons consist
of<br>>>>>
other particles called quarks, bound by the
strong<br>>>>>
nuclear force. By smashing particles at
high<br>>>>>
energies, physicists have blasted into
fleeting<br>>>>>
existence hundreds of other
quark-containing<br>>>>>
particles. Until recently, all contained either
two<br>>>>>
or three quarks. But since 2014,
researchers<br>>>>>
working with CERN's Large Hadron Collider have
also<br>>>>>
spotted four- and five-quark particles.
Such<br>>>>>
tetraquarks and pentaquarks could
require<br>>>>>
physicists to rethink their understanding
of<br>>>>>
quantum chromodynamics, or they could have
less<br>>>>>
revolutionary implications. Researchers hope
that<br>>>>>
computer simulations and more collider studies
will<br>>>>>
reveal how the oddball newcomers are put
together,<br>>>>>
but some wonder whether experiments will
ever<br>>>>>
provide a definitive
answer.<br>>>>><br>>>>>
...<br>>>><br>>>><br>>>><br>>>><br>>><br>>><br>>><br>><br>>
=<br>><br>>
_______________________________________________<br>>
Fis mailing list<br>>
<a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>> </font><a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis"><font size="4">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</font></a><br><font size="4">><br><br><br>--<br>-------------------------------------------------<br>Pedro
C. Marijuán<br>Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group<br>Instituto
Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud<br>Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón
(CIBA)<br>Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X<br>50009 Zaragoza, Spain<br>Tfno.
+34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)<br><a href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a><br></font><a href="http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/"><font size="4">http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/</font></a><br><font size="4">-------------------------------------------------<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Fis
mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br></font><a href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis"><font size="4">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</font></a><br></p></div>
_______________________________________________<br>Fis mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>