<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear Karl and FIS Colleagues,<br>
<br>
Your message has made me think a couple of subjects. First, I have
acknowledged several times, both publicly and privately, that your
approach to estimating the multidimensional partitions on limited
sets (the limit of distinctions when multiple qualities are piled
upon elements of finite sets) is highly original and may find
application in different fields. I think particularly in
hippocampus' space/time organization of our spike sequences into
binding percepts; probably in fields of physics too. But on the
other hand, I have always disagreed on your (over)extension to DNA
triplets, which has received a strong emphasis from your part ...
Well, it is my personal opinion, and it may be quite wrong, of
course.<br>
<br>
Anyhow, the above has taken me to the next reflection, somehow
outlandish, that concerns "limits". I have some vague memories of
a reflection in C.Booker (2004; or was it in Bonnet 2006?) on why
we are not conscious of our own limitations and incur in quite
many idiosyncratic biases, which are so well captured in
narratives. I will try to put it in a more conceptual way: our
thinking limitations do not let us establish the limits of our
thought. It has individual consequences in our terrible
inclination to overextend paradigms, but also a more "abstract",
collective lack of final anchors. There is a false closure
attempted that fails, and inevitably reappears later on in strange
but fundamental principles: Godel, Heisenberg, Church-Turing...
They basically consist in limits of thought put to the foundations
of universalistic disciplines. In other more restricted fields,
particularistic ones, those principles do not appear, or better,
they are not needed. In the case of information science, which in
my view is also universalistic, that kind of principled limit is
needed too. Once properly established, or at least intuited, we
could better discuss on the kinds of general theories that may be
comprehended within a really multifarious enterprise such as info
science.<br>
<br>
I will appreciate hearing opinions on these baseless comments.<br>
<br>
Best--Pedro <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
El 19/02/2019 a las 12:08, Karl Javorszky escribió:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+nf4CX7Z=SSpjBiX_SyuhWUWqYkgRikku1YACTKi3=zC7zm-g@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Dear Pedro,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>please allow me to raise a dissenting voice to the content
of following citation:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US"><i>“…On the other
hand, no general theory for large non-equilibrium systems
exists. The legendary Hungarian mathematician John Von
Neuman once referred to the theory of non-equilibrium
systems as the “theory of non-elephants” meaning there
could be no unique theory of such a vast area of science.”
</i>(Per Bak, How Nature Works)</span><br>
<span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US"></span>
</div>
<div>In fact, the theory has been brought to you since some 24
years, as a sequence of suggestions, proposals, models,
initiatives, encouragements, requests and so forth, that
observing the interaction between sequences and mixtures is
opening up a new door to a completely fresh view of the
interrelations among the parts of the world. The principles
deducted from models that employ such elements which are
distinguishable and concurrently both contemporaneously and
sequentially labeled (as opposed to all models known hereto,
which each use elements that are indistinguishable and either
sequential or contemporary), these principles are valid and
actually at work in Nature, on all echelles, from the
subatomar to the galactic .</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I include the abstract I submitted to IS4SI, as part of the
FIS track, and hope that the colleagues will participate in
bringing recgnition to the collaborative work that has gon on
in this FIS chatroom since 1997. The abstract describes, in
the form of a general theory, large non-equilibrium systems.
By including that part of the world, which is not the case,
the theory encompasses elephants and non-elephants
concurrently.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Karl<span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US"></span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
-------------------------------------------------
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
<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>
<div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br /> <table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;">
<tr>
<td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 18px;"><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient" target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;" /></a></td>
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 17px; color: #41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">Libre de virus. <a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient" target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;">www.avast.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</table>
<a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"> </a></div></body>
</html>