<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 All,<br>
<br>
Thanks to Jerry, Stan, and Bruno for their responses.<br>
There is a recent publication on "Agent Inaccessibility as a
Fundamental Principle in Quantum Mechanics" by Jan Waleczek
(Entropy, 2019, 21/1), pointed out by courtesy of Malcolm Dean,
that captures very well the deep sense of this discussion. The
subtitle is: "Objective Unpredictability ad Formal
Uncomputability." It is open access. Rather than the triumph of
indeterminism with the quantum revolution, the paper states that
it is only valid to claim the following: <i>the quantum
revolution means the profound discovery of an agent-inaccesible
regime of the physical universe. </i><br>
And if we think about all the problems and paradoxes surrounding
research on consciousness, Do they relate to this very
inaccessibility? Many parties have tried to connect consciousness
"explanation" with the quantum. Rather unsuccessfully, at least at
the time being. But the point I see is, Could the Limit of quantum
inaccessibility to the external world of the agent be germane, or
even the same Limit, than the inaccessibility to its own internal
world? <br>
In my view, this does not imply a negationist stance concerning
the integrity of the whole scientific enterprise or information
science in particular. Precisely, the universalistic, open-ended
nature of our human openness to information derives from
consciousness, language, and the empirical congruence
perception/action in a collaborative social framework. Because of
this universal openness to information we can organize
universalistic sciences (physics, maths, logics/comp., info
science) and many other particularistic ones, depending on the
further limits or principles we establish--as Jerry remarks below.
<br>
Should the universal openness to information, subtended by the
inaccessibility limit(s) of quantum and consciousness, be
considered as a sort of Information Zeroth Principle?<br>
<br>
Best wishes<br>
--Pedro<br>
PS. I have just seen entering the new message from Karl...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
El 25/02/2019 a las 21:14, Jerry LR Chandler escribió:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:8CD03E16-99B8-4CDB-A764-05B17A0FE640@icloud.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div class="">Pedro, Karl, List:</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">While I concur with most of your post, Pedro, I do
not find the situation as dismal as you project. In my view,
our perceptions and interpretations of signs of nature are
critical to setting limits to meaning. I support your general
thesis and add some supportive arguments.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Shannon information theory avoids the issue by
requiring that the representation of meaning must first be
reduced to mathematical symbols by encoding. (At some future
time, the purpose and consequences of encoding in the
foundations of Information theory need to be addressed here.!) </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Closure is intrinsic to the encoding process-the
meaning of mathematical, physical, chemical, biological and
linguistic symbols are all necessarily re-represented as bits
and bytes before transmission.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Yes, the issue of limits is foundational to the
informational sciences. The issue of extension is among the
most critical informational concepts because it bounds the
meaning of terms, not just in mathematics but all other
disciplines as well. The notion of limits is often ignored in
the soft sciences. But not just the softer sciences, the limits
of extension are also ignored in many physical derivations in
order to avoid intractable mathematics and in order to
approximate equations to fit results. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I also concur with closure issues that is
well-stated by: </div>
<div class=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"
class=""><b class="">"There is a false closure attempted that
fails, and inevitably reappears later on in strange but
fundamental principles: Godel, Heisenberg,
Church-Turing.. “ </b></span></div>
<div class=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"
class="">These issues relate to our perception of nature. </span></div>
<div class=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"
class=""><br class="">
</span></div>
<div class=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"
class="">When is symbolic closure meaningful?</span><span
style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class=""> </span>I
also concur that the extension of simple number sequences to
molecules is fraught with difficulties closely related to the
concepts of individuality, identity, extension and physical /
chemical / mathematical logic. Each discipline requires a
different approach to encoding the symbols into Shannon
information. Each discipline has a different approach to
limitations of meanings of logical terms. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">The limits of chemical codes address the issue of
the extensions of sequences of DNA to numerical sequences. </div>
<div class="">The chemical logic of DNA necessary starts with the
atomic numbers and additive relations.</div>
<div class="">Chemical logic is limited to the atomic numbers.</div>
<div class="">Chemical logic is limited by the number of atomic
numbers in the table of elements.</div>
<div class="">Chemical logic is limited by the number of atoms in
a molecule.</div>
<div class="">Chemical logic is limited by the valences of the
atoms in the molecule.</div>
<div class="">Only atomic numbers can be composed into molecules
such as DNA, thus constraining the mathematical forms of DNA to
specific electrical and physical properties. </div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class="">Each DNA base has an <b class="">internal</b>
information (physical and chemical attributes) that is COMPOSED
exclusively from the atomic numbers. The rules for composition
of atomic number are expressed in quantum theory.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Thus, the meaning of the symbols for sequences of
DNA is limited by the limits of meanings of atomic numbers and
collections of atomic numbers (other molecules of the cell
related to DNA.)</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">In this context, the meaning of such chemical terms
as molecular number, molecular formula, molecular weight,
molecular structure and molecular (isomeric) forms are limits of
meaning of "numbers” such that a molecular name (such as “DNA”)
can be composed from our perceptions atomic numbers.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Hopefully, others will contribute to this discussion
on the role of limits and extension on theories of information. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Cheers</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Jerry</div>
<div class=""> </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Feb 25, 2019, at 12:42 PM, Pedro C. Marijuan
<<a href="mailto:pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.es</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size:
18px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal;
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans:
auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform:
none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing:
0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color:
rgb(255, 255, 255); float: none; display: inline
!important;" class="">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.</span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<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>