<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=content-type></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr bgColor=#ffffff text=#000000>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV><FONT size=4>Dear Sung, Pedro and FIS Colleagues,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>I think we all time discuss the same very important topic, but
from different points of view.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><FONT style="size: 4"><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">Planckian
distribution equation (PDE) is a very important step.
</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>In the paper of SUNGCHUL JI :</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>“PLANCKIAN INFORMATION (IP): A NEW MEASURE OF ORDER IN ATOMS,
ENZYMES, CELLS, BRAINS, HUMAN SOCIETIES, AND THE COSMOS”</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN
style="BACKGROUND-IMAGE: none; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: repeat; BACKGROUND-ATTACHMENT: scroll; BACKGROUND-POSITION: 0% 0%; mso-ansi-language: #000a; mso-highlight: white"><SPAN
lang=EN-GB style="mso-ansi-language: en-gb"><A
href="http://www.conformon.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/PDE_Vigier9.pdf"><FONT
size=4>http://www.conformon.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/PDE_Vigier9.pdf</FONT></A><FONT
size=4> </FONT></SPAN><FONT size=4> </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>is pointed that:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>“</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>The Planckian information, I<SUB>P</SUB>, which (i) may be <STRONG><EM>a
new measure of order</EM></STRONG> that can be applied widely to both natural
and human sciences and (ii) can serve as the opposite of the Boltzmann-Gibbs
entropy, S, which is a measure of disorder.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>More generally "information" can be defined as the correlation
between the source (or the 'object' in the language of Peircean semiotics) and
the receiver ('interpreter') of a communication system. The message carried by
the messenger ('sign' or 'representation') in the communication system can be
identified with "information". The net result of such a mediated process can be
described as the 'information flow' from the source to the
receiver.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Just as the Peircean sign is an irreducible triad (i.e., it
cannot be defined without all of the 3 nodes, i.e., object, representation, and
interpreter [2, see Row 6 in Table V] , connected by the three edges
representing 'natural process', 'mental process', and 'information flow', so I
maintain that 'information' is another "irreducible triad" (of source,
messenger, and receiver).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>“</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>This means that again <EM>we cannot take in account</EM>
<STRONG><EM>differed 'interpreters'</EM></STRONG> – what is an information for
one may be not information for the another.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Because of this, in General information Theory, the
information is defined as quadruple:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>I = (source, messenger, evidence, receiver).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>In all cases, the <STRONG><EM>interpreter is an intelligent
agent</EM></STRONG> who may evaluate incoming messages and corresponded
evidences! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>I like idea of the </FONT>Unified Theory of the Amount of
Information (UTAI) but, as it is pointed in the paper above, we need more:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="size: 4">“</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Many investigators have suggested that information has three distinct
aspects –(i) quantity, (ii) meaning, and (iii) value. It is important to keep in
mind that UTAI can only deal with the AMOUNT of information, not its meaning nor
its value.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>The UTAI may be considered as the 'quantitative functor' connecting the
mathematical aspects of communication, and I predict that there is the
'qualitative functor' (in agreement with the assumed principle of
quantity-quality complementarity [30]) that connects the qualitative aspects of
communication and semiotics. This predicted qualitative functor may be
identified with natural and formal languages, both of which belonging to the
class of the irreducible triad (see Fig. 27).</DIV>
<DIV><FONT style="size: 4">“</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>The “evidence” or, in other words, “information expectation”,
maybe corresponds to the <FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 14pt">qualitative functor but I
have no idea how we can extend UTAI in such direction. </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Friendly regards</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Krassimir</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es
href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es">Pedro C. Marijuan</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, March 28, 2017 3:26 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=fis@listas.unizar.es
href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es">'fis'</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> [Fis] planckian information</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<P>Dear FISers,</P>
<P>quite many things have been said these days about our "family ghosts".
Everyone has a different opinion on the under-information matter, and maybe
that's healthy. Personally I have not changed very much the vision with which
FIS was started many years ago. See in the descriptive text (<A
class=moz-txt-link-freetext
href="http://fis.sciforum.net/about-fis/">http://fis.sciforum.net/about-fis/</A>):
<SPAN style="COLOR: #808080">"...At FIS, rather than the discussion of a single
particularized concept, information becomes the intellectual adventure of
developing a ‘vertical’ or ‘transdisciplinary’ science connecting the different
threads and scales of informational processes, which demands both a
<EM>unifying</EM> and a <EM>multi-perspective</EM> approach..."</SPAN></P>
<P>With time my impression, already expressed in this list, is that there is a
fundamental hiatus in our conceptions around biological information so that a
meaningful connection with the several infos of the physical realm, and the
miscellany of humanities can not be worked out. In a couple of recent
discussions I was close to see with more clarity the problem, but again I feel
blurred. It does not mean at all that I have an abandonment attitude. Conversely
I think we are getting closer and closer. The fundamental fact of our generation
is the stupendous new panorama that computers and the new technologies have
opened on life, from the bioinformatics to the neurodynamics and the
"topodynamics". To say something more concrete the big problem I see is how to
enter the LIFE CYCLE as the generalized source and sink of the information
flows.</P>
<P>And then the Planckian Information theme presented by our new colleague Sung
looks quite intriguing. Why most of these information flows and energy flows
exchanges are caught under that covering law? Anecdotally we (my research
minigroup) are working in the sociotype, understood as the social communication
structures surrounding the person. What is the average number of friends and
acquaintances that we can maintain meaninfully? Probably you have heard about
Dunbar's number (in between 150-200), but what sort of statistical distribution
would you obtain? Very easy, seemingly they follow a Planckian distribution. We
have limited mental resources and have to keep an "economy" on our memory
investment on other people... <BR></P>
<P>Anyhow, the present discussion session may be important to make an indent on
this curious commonality between the physical and the biotic arrangement of
exchanges.</P>
<P>All the best--Pedro<FONT size=+2><BR></FONT></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 0
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
<A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/">http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/</A>
------------------------------------------------- </PRE>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>Fis mailing
list<BR>Fis@listas.unizar.es<BR>http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>