<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>My responses are in red<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-signature">Bien reçu votre message.
MERCI.
Cordialement.
M. Godron</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 08/07/2016 à 14:42, Pedro C.
Marijuan a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f5aed2fc-67e2-4020-eb39-77f0f017e2b8@aragon.es"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear FIS Colleagues,<br>
<br>
Some brief responses to the different parties:<br>
<br>
Marcus: there were several sessions dealing with info physics,
where I remember some historical connotations with mechanics
emerged. Mostly 1998 and 2002 chaired by Koichiro Matsuno and
2004 by Michel Petitjean. Afterwards the theme has surfaced
relatively often. About the present possibilities for a UTI, my
opinion is that strictly remaining within Shannon's and
anthropocentric discourse boundaries there is no way out. </div>
</blockquote>
<font color="#ff0000">Yes, but it is not the same with Brillouin's
information : I could send to you a text in French which gives a
demonstration of the convergence between that information and
thermodynamical neguentropy. Since twenty years, I did not find an
english review which was interested by this problem, because I am
biologist and the biological reviews were not interested. </font><br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f5aed2fc-67e2-4020-eb39-77f0f017e2b8@aragon.es"
type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">I do not think that machine
communication is going to advance the generalization either (but
who knows? In conjunction with computational neuroscience and
the "Bayesian" brain we may have surprises). Actually, my
personal bet is for reconsidering the evolutionary origins,
attending to the infrastructure of our cellular communication
and to the bacterial origins of everything. I think we share
some parts along this exploratory way, at least the curiosity.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<font color="#ff0000">Yes, </font><font color="#ff0000">the
bacterial origins of everything is clear, but it is possible to
work with the Brillouin's information present at others scales, It
was used in an imperfect way in Forman & Godron <i>Landsca</i><i>pe
</i><i>ecology</i> (1986, Wiley). </font><br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f5aed2fc-67e2-4020-eb39-77f0f017e2b8@aragon.es"
type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> <br>
To Loet, bacteria never apologize (not much different from some
humans, eg politicians) but chimps often do ("grooming" after
conflicts, with the winner offering peace to the defeated). The
restrictive use of the term communication as proposed is
contrary to the existing body of research, not only in biology.
That "biology as a science itself is communication" is a strange
argument. </div>
</blockquote>
<font color="#ff0000">Perhaps, but "Life is a transmission of
information" is not strange and may be explained.</font><br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f5aed2fc-67e2-4020-eb39-77f0f017e2b8@aragon.es"
type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">For the same token it is also
observation, reflection, action, learning, experiment,
tradition... and biology, and whatever science, is also a form
of knowledge necessarily performed by a living subject--so all
science is "biology" following with that strange argument.
Finally, talking about "priorities" or hierarchies in mutual
relationships between bodies of knowledge is out of our times;
priorities have to be won by cooperation/competence within the
global knowledge-recombination markets of science. Rather than
closing doors, establishing multidisciplinary teams and
directions is the new mantra. <br>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<font color="#ff0000">I fully agree !</font><br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f5aed2fc-67e2-4020-eb39-77f0f017e2b8@aragon.es"
type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"> To Jerry, given that explicitly my
approach to biological information /communication is based on
molecular recognition, your generative approach to the nature of
molecular information under the banner of electrical fields and
atomic numbers looks congruent. It is a pity that so few
biophysical approaches have been devoted to the general
problematic of molecular recognition and molecular complexity. </div>
</blockquote>
<font color="#ff0000">I fully agree !</font><br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:f5aed2fc-67e2-4020-eb39-77f0f017e2b8@aragon.es"
type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">The way living cells rely on
different informational architectures is a showcase of amazing
multiplicity achieved from a few model-patterns. But it is very
difficult establishing appropriate ontologies on the enormous
functional complexity that emerges. It relates to the last
question of your message, I think.<br>
<br>
To Francesco, thanks, I also believe that the relationship
between economic and biomolecular "currencies" share a similar
inner logic. Information has "value", indeed... And finally I
should clarify that the universals scheme proposed around
bacterial communication is a mere initial draft --it will get
worst! Actually it crystallized during the first days of these
discussions, thinking about the limits of the present
mechanical-Shannonian communication paradigm.<br>
<br>
Again, thanking the patience<br>
--Pedro<font size="+2"><br>
</font> <font size="+2"><br>
<br>
</font>El 07/07/2016 a las 18:44, Francesco Rizzo escribió:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEvKwyQpKoP2Fdoh9VjsbagMZ9shitEd+mHNF2obQ_pgGsEeDA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div dir="ltr">Caro Pedro,
<div>ho apprezzato moltissimo quella magnifica sintesi tra
vita, auto-riproduzione e comunicazione con l'ambiente nella
prospettiva o logica della moneta biologica. Problematica
che ho affrontato più volte anch'io dal punto di vista della
"Nuova economia". Le pagine 120-130 di "Valore e
valutazioni" (FrancoAngeli, Milano, 1999) ne sono una
testimonianza.</div>
<div>Grazie e buone vacanze a Te e a Tutti.</div>
<div>Francesco </div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2016-07-07 13:53 GMT+02:00 Pedro C.
Marijuan <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es" target="_blank">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Dear FISers,</p>
<p>[NOTE: I have just seen the new post from Marcus
right now: I should modify parts of the discussion
below, but it is too much work! Better left for a
future exchange...]<br>
</p>
<p>About the a priori modeling of information --and
meaning-- which was the focus of Marcus' presentation,
putting together Shannon, Bateson, and Darwin, I am
not sure how that scheme would translate into the
"real" living stuff. Mostly thinking on the work my
team has done on bacterial communication for years, I
mentioned days ago three basic points about that:
universals, species-specificity, and essential cores.
<br>
</p>
<p>How a plurality of those information universals could
be wrapped or articulated around an essential core?
That's the toughest point in my opinion. It becomes a
matter for freewheeling speculation, badly needed of
Schrodinger's disclaimer. Well, let us consider that
communication and self-production are but the two
inseparable sides of the bio "coin" --in order to
self-produce the living has to communicate with the
environment, and in order to communicate the living
needs its flexible self-production processes... (just
to fabricate the meaning!)<br>
</p>
<p>In bacteria, the side of communication might be seen
as implying:</p>
<p>--<b>Communication for self-production</b>: detection
and introjection/ejection of environmental substances
(water, anions, cations, minerals, nutrients,
metabolites, waste, and toxics). In bacteria this is
crucial. Most of it, apart from the spontaneous
membrane permeability, is done by around one hundred
different ONE-COMPONENT SYSTEMS (1CS) and a variety of
channels and transporters. <br>
</p>
<p>--<b>Communication </b><b>with</b><b> </b><b>con-specifics</b>:
in reproduction (sex exchanges, plasmid exchanges); in
social structures (colonies and biofilms); in
"differentiation" (sporulation, occasional
differentiated types). Around 10-20 TWO-COMPONENT
SYSTEMS (2CS) may be in charge, although amply
swapping their functions with the previous 1CSs.<br>
</p>
<p>--<b>Ecosystem communication</b>: cooperation and
competition with other species in ecosystems; chemical
arm races with fungi, viruses, other bacteria,
protists, etc.; symbiosis, cooperation and parasitism
with multicellular hosts; pathogenic switching... We
may find tools such as 1CS, 2CS, 3CS, special protein
kinases, and very complex apparatuses for
pathogenesis, predation, and chemical arm races.</p>
<p>Not much emphasis needed in that those three items
are universals, species specific, and more or less
differentiated/entangled within the mentioned
communication side of the bio core. <br>
</p>
<p>Thereafter, thinking about the universals side of
self-production, could we terribly simplify our
informational view of self-production, as Francis
Crick's mandated with h<span>is Central Dogma of
molecular biology? Nonetheless it was the first
cogent explanation of the flow of genetic
information within a biological system. In any case,
what we find is different informational
architectures --membranes and cytoskeleton
rudiments, nucleic acids, processing enzymes-- which
are respectively based on identity, complementarity,
and supplementarity principles (Shu-Kun Lin). They
are playing together the <b>replication, </b><b>transcription,</b>
<b>translation, </b><b>house-keeping</b>, and <b>degradation</b>
functions that apparently integrate the bulk of
self-production... <br>
</span></p>
<p><span>Summing up the obtained items, and just to </span><span>close
the present speculation, </span><span>we might have
found three universals of communication and another
five of self-production. Indeed they look very
densely entangled within an essential core. </span><span>At
stake is whether they are sufficiently congruent and
ontologically robust. </span><span>Perhaps the most
interesting aspect is that herein it becomes
relatively easy to upend meaning, value,
knowledge-recombination and other members of the
conceptual cluster that usually accompanies
information.</span></p>
<p><span>Thanking in advance for the patience!</span></p>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<p><span>--Pedro</span><span><br>
</span> </p>
</font></span></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Fis mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
-------------------------------------------------
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/">http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/</a>
-------------------------------------------------
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Fis@listas.unizar.es">Fis@listas.unizar.es</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis">http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>