<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear List,</div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Interesting reference made by Terry to
      "it from bit". Although quite relevant works have been done in
      this direction (Wheeler, Deutsch, Lerner, Dean...), it is not what
      I mean regarding the different realms that emerge from life. So to
      speak, I leave the "it" for physicists, and the "bit" for
      "computerists". The information flows that  make coherent wholes
      out from the multiplicity of cycles involved in the living, are
      not "Shannonian" either. Some parties (also in this list) have
      proposed interesting quantum field hypothesis on how to integrate
      that meta-trans-multi cyclicity. It is something that deserves
      some attention by mathematicians--I dare say.</div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">The new informational vision that could
      be connected with the "adjacent possible" has not been built yet.
      Presently, there might be sort of a bias in the adjacency temporal
      scales considered--evolution, ecology, economics, technology...
      But exploring the adjacent possible could also be a concern for
      far shorter time spans, for physiology ("cellular signaling
      systems"), for neuroscience and ethology (instant behavioral
      choices), for psychology and sociology (emotions, social moods,
      social discord and collapse, etc.etc.)</div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">When during two generations people have
      been talking about the gap between natural science and humanities
      (Lord Snow), it could also mean the divide between physicalism and
      the lack of a coherent sense for the informationally grounded
      realms (social domains, arts, culture...).<br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">By the way, Stuart, if 40.000 pixels
      are enough to capture Picasso's content, would you pay 100 million
      bucks for one of those bit packages? You cannot capture in bits
      the whole socio-cultural-biographic frames embedded in the
      masterpiece. <br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Best--Pedro<br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
    </div>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">El 07/01/2024 a las 23:42, Gordana
      Dodig Crnkovic escribió:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:6DEDB65D-8602-4627-95EE-5A9C174CA8F5@chalmers.se">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
        medium)">
      <style>@font-face
        {font-family:"Cambria Math";
        panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face
        {font-family:Calibri;
        panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}@font-face
        {font-family:"Avenir Book";
        panose-1:2 0 5 3 2 0 0 2 0 3;}@font-face
        {font-family:"Avenir Light";
        panose-1:2 11 4 2 2 2 3 2 2 4;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {margin:0cm;
        font-size:11.0pt;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:blue;
        text-decoration:underline;}span.EmailStyle18
        {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
        color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
        {mso-style-type:export-only;
        font-size:10.0pt;
        mso-ligatures:none;}div.WordSection1
        {page:WordSection1;}ol
        {margin-bottom:0cm;}ul
        {margin-bottom:0cm;}</style>
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">Dear colleagues,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">Allow me to propose one
            more facet of life that adds to the central theme of Kantian
            Wholes:
            <b>autonomous agency</b>. Living organisms are "agential"
            materials, as Michael Levin puts it. They possess cognition,
            have agendas, and act purposefully.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">This is how agency is
            explained by Stu in [1], and similarly in [2]:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">"It is a stunning fact
            that the universe has given rise to entities that daily
            modify the universe to suit their own ends. We call this
            capacity 'agency' — the ability to act on one's own behalf."<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">But then one may ask:
            what must a physical system be such that it can act on its
            own behalf?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">We propose a tentative
            five-part definition of a minimal molecular autonomous
            agent: such a system<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <ol style="margin-top:0cm" type="1" start="1">
          <li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif"
              lang="EN-US">should be capable of reproduction with
              heritable variation,<o:p></o:p></span></li>
          <li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif"
              lang="EN-US">should perform at least one work cycle and
              have boundaries such that it<o:p></o:p></span></li>
          <li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif"
              lang="EN-US">can be naturally individuated,<o:p></o:p></span></li>
          <li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif"
              lang="EN-US">should engage in self-propagating work and
              constraint construction, and<o:p></o:p></span></li>
          <li class="MsoNormal" style="mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><span
              style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif"
              lang="EN-US">should be able to choose between at least two
              alternatives.<o:p></o:p></span></li>
        </ol>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">(I reformatted the
            sentence into the numbered list).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">References:
            <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">[1] Kauffman, S.,
            Clayton, P. On emergence, agency, and organization. Biol
            Philos 21, 501–521 (2006).
            <a
href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-005-9003-9__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWIS2V8aSgvKYkrQRr725ec79RyfScFLmMNE8IsOuQH_2QEXOgrmSFAoTpy10_NrZIogCIJL_U0gt3mM7rtKVyxvUWJfKGhM$"
              target="_new" moz-do-not-send="true">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-005-9003-9</a>
            <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">[2] Kauffman, S.A. The
            origins of order: Self-organization and selection in
            evolution. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">To the above definition
            of agency of a minimal molecular autonomous agent, I would
            propose to add
            <b>information processing</b> which enables <b>learning</b>
            and adaptation.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">It appears to me that
            points 1, 3, 4, and 5 above derive from the information
            processing capacity of these systems.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">Goal-directedness, or
            agency, can be seen as based on information processing,
            which is enabled by memory and the mechanism of anticipation
            that is contingent on memory.
            <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">Evolutionarily, all
            cognitive (agential) mechanisms derive from material
            characteristics.
          </span><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif" lang="EN-US">As an illustration, see
            a very short account in the video
            <a
href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ImKFUHJdcLE__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWIS2V8aSgvKYkrQRr725ec79RyfScFLmMNE8IsOuQH_2QEXOgrmSFAoTpy10_NrZIogCIJL_U0gt3mM7rtKVyxvUQM960NL$"
              target="_new" moz-do-not-send="true">The Biophysics of a
              Brainless Animal</a>.<br>
            More extended explanation can be found at:</span><span
            style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif"><br>
            <a
href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1VAIwcn7z8__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!WWIS2V8aSgvKYkrQRr725ec79RyfScFLmMNE8IsOuQH_2QEXOgrmSFAoTpy10_NrZIogCIJL_U0gt3mM7rtKVyxvUS9S__8A$"
              moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1VAIwcn7z8</a></span><span
            style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif">
          </span><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Light",sans-serif">Manu Prakash: The physics of biology</span><span
            style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif"
            lang="EN-US">, which addresses several of Stu’s questions.</span><span
            style="font-family:"Avenir Light",sans-serif"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Book";mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Book";mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US">Gordana<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Avenir
            Book";mso-fareast-language:EN-US" lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
          1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
          <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
                style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From: </span></b><span
              style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Fis
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es"><fis-bounces@listas.unizar.es></a> on behalf of Stuart
              Kauffman <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:stukauffman@gmail.com"><stukauffman@gmail.com></a><br>
              <b>Date: </b>Sunday, 7 January 2024 at 16:28<br>
              <b>To: </b>Louis Kauffman <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:loukau@gmail.com"><loukau@gmail.com></a>, 0
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:stukauffman@gmail.com"><stukauffman@gmail.com></a><br>
              <b>Cc: </b><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es">"fis@listas.unizar.es"</a>
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es"><fis@listas.unizar.es></a>, Andrea Roli
              <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:andrea.roli@unibo.it"><andrea.roli@unibo.it></a><br>
              <b>Subject: </b>Re: [Fis] Fis Digest, Vol 108, Issue 5<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        </div>
        <div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Thank you
                Lou. I agree. Creativity is not deduction. Given what
                you write, Andrea and I claim to have shown that no laws
                at all entail the evolution of the biosphere which is a
                non-deducible, propagating, construction. Assume this is
                correct. But physics DOES HAVE LAWS THAT ENTAIL. So if
                Andrea and Stu are right and physics with laws is right,
                why can physics have entailing laws but not the evolving
                biosphere</span><span style="color:black" lang="EN-US">?</span><span
                style="color:black"> One answer is that living organisms
                really are Kantian Wholes with Catalytic and Constraint
                closure, that can evolve new boundary conditions
                creating novel phase spaces, that can evolve and create
                ever-new phase spaces by
                <i>selection on the whole, which is downward causation</i>
                for those feature that survive and propagate best in the
                current context - and there is no prior description of
                what the current context will become.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">But even if
                Andrea and I are right about evolving life, why can
                PHYSICS have entailing laws?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">All very odd.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Stu<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
            <blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
              <div>
                <p class="MsoNormal">On Jan 7, 2024, at 2:00 AM, Louis
                  Kauffman <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:loukau@gmail.com"><loukau@gmail.com></a> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
              </div>
              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
              <div>
                <div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Dear Stu,<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">Think about physical laws. <o:p></o:p></p>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Good principles like F = ma,
                      Newton’s Law of Gravity,  and all that. Laws of
                      E&M, Schrodinger equation, Dirac equation,
                      Einstein’s modern geometric understanding of
                      Gravity.<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Some questions and thoughts.<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">1. Newton did not deduce the
                      law of gravity. He guessed it and discovered that
                      it explained Kepler’s Laws that were derived from
                      observation. This made Newton’s guess very firm.
                      There is no way to predict Newton’s Law of
                      Gravity. In fact it is not even correct when one
                      takes Einstein’s wider point of view. Einstein
                      guessed that there should be a differential
                      geometric law of gravity. He was lucky, the tensor
                      expression in curvature that he sought was nearly
                      unique and so in this case the mathematical
                      constraints helped him find a physical law. <o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">2. Once laws are given (or
                      guessed) then some predictions are possible. <o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Clerk Maxwell guessed the laws
                      of EM via Faraday’s experiments and Faraday’s
                      field concepts. But then <o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Maxwell saw that in his theory
                      the EM field could propagate like a wave and its
                      velocity was the velocity of light! Who would have
                      thought it? And this allowed Maxwell to further <o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">guess (yes guess but some say
                      ‘predict’) that light is an EM wave. Huge
                      consequence for the physics and technology after
                      that up through the present day. But this is being
                      done by inventive discovery not by logical
                      deduction. <o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">3. No one could predict the
                      structure of atoms or the later understood nuclear
                      structure in terms of quarks. This is discovered
                      and  verified and there are theories but there is
                      no theory that predicts atoms. Once we know
                      something about atoms we can understand how
                      certain molecules could behave, but no one can
                      predict the emergence and stability of <o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">big molecules like DNA or their
                      reproductive properties.<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">4. Physics is a big guesswork
                      patchwork that uses mathematics and has some
                      predictive abilities. But the main lines of its
                      structure are guessed, discovered, invented,
                      verified.<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">The logic comes last.<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Mathematics is the same. It is
                      a structural enterprise and we cannot predict
                      where it will go and what will be proved. We knock
                      around and invent or discover structures and
                      sometimes get them into deductive frameworks.
                       Lots of ‘obvious’ things are not (yet) proved.<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Best,<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Lou<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <div>
                      <blockquote
                        style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
                        <div>
                          <p class="MsoNormal">On Jan 6, 2024, at 3:49
                            PM, Stuart Kauffman <<a
                              href="mailto:stukauffman@gmail.com"
                              moz-do-not-send="true">stukauffman@gmail.com</a>>
                            wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
                        </div>
                        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                        <div>
                          <div>
                            <p class="MsoNormal">HI Pedro and All, <o:p></o:p></p>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal">Thank you Pedro,
                                perhaps we <i>are </i>at THE GREAT
                                TRANSFORMATION. We begin to confront the
                                vast, unprestatable, non-deducible
                                becoming of the evolving biosphere.
                                YET…yet, physics works also. We really
                                can compute planetary orbits. If the
                                biosphere is “governed by no laws” why
                                do laws work so well in Physics?<o:p></o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal">And there is
                                something very odd about, “Information”.
                                Consider the information content of a
                                Picasso painting. Cast it into 10,000
                                pixels, each reflecting  a wavelength
                                specified by 4 bits. So 40,000 bits
                                suffice and that 40,000 bits  can be
                                sent by email all over the world to be
                                printed out on physically different
                                systems using different procedures and
                                perhaps pigments to create a good copy
                                of the Picasso. It seems information is
                                not embodied but becomes physical to
                                print, or to erase a bit in the 40,000
                                record.<o:p></o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal">Now think of a living
                                cell, a Kantian Whole with Catalytic and
                                Constraint Closure. There IS NO SEPARATE
                                “description” of this reproducing
                                system. It cannot be copied.  The living
                                cell
                                <i>constructed</i> itself, it did not
                                create a description of itself sent to a
                                distance assembly point.<o:p></o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal">Also in Boltzmann
                                entropy can stay constant or increase.
                                In Shannon, in parallel, information can
                                be transmitted without or with loss.
                                BUT..there is no creation of new
                                information. That is due to the
                                Newtonian Paradigm where the phase space
                                of all the possibilities are stated
                                beforehand. (In Shannon, the entropy of
                                the source.) But in the evolution of the
                                biosphere, co-evolving organisms are
                                creating ever-new ways to get to
                                co-exist for a while. This is the
                                unprestable and non-deducible creation
                                of new information. The emerging
                                evolving increasing complexity of the
                                biosphere is not via a channel
                                transmitting information from some
                                exogenous source. Andrea Roli and I are
                                working on this. And this becoming is
                                NOT AI, which is algorithmic.  <o:p></o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal">Hm…. <o:p></o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal">Stu<o:p></o:p></p>
                              <div>
                                <p class="MsoNormal"
                                  style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                                <blockquote
                                  style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
                                  <div>
                                    <p class="MsoNormal">On Jan 5, 2024,
                                      at 2:20 PM, <a
                                        href="mailto:fis-request@listas.unizar.es"
                                        moz-do-not-send="true">
                                        fis-request@listas.unizar.es</a>
                                      wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
                                  </div>
                                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
                                  <div>
                                    <div>
                                      <p class="MsoNormal"
                                        style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Send
                                        Fis mailing list submissions to<br>
                                        <a
                                          href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es"
                                          moz-do-not-send="true">fis@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
                                        <br>
                                        To subscribe or unsubscribe via
                                        the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<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><br>
                                        or, via email, send a message
                                        with subject or body 'help' to<br>
                                        <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fis-request@listas.unizar.es">fis-request@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
                                        <br>
                                        You can reach the person
                                        managing the list at<br>
                                        <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fis-owner@listas.unizar.es">fis-owner@listas.unizar.es</a><br>
                                        <br>
                                        When replying, please edit your
                                        Subject line so it is more
                                        specific<br>
                                        than "Re: Contents of Fis
                                        digest..."<br>
                                        <br>
                                        <br>
                                        Today's Topics:<br>
                                        <br>
                                          1. Re: New Year Lecture -
                                        Stuart Kauffman (Terrence W
                                        Deacon)<br>
                                          2. Re: Fis Digest, Vol 108,
                                        Issue 4 (Krassimir Markov)<br>
                                        <br>
                                        <br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
                                        <br>
                                        Message: 1<br>
                                        Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 08:47:37
                                        -0800<br>
                                        From: Terrence W Deacon
                                        <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:deacon@berkeley.edu"><deacon@berkeley.edu></a><br>
                                        To: Pedro C. Mariju?n
                                        <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com"><pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com></a><br>
                                        Cc: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es">fis@listas.unizar.es</a>,
                                        Skauffman
                                        <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:stukaufman@gmail.com"><stukaufman@gmail.com></a><br>
                                        Subject: Re: [Fis] New Year
                                        Lecture - Stuart Kauffman<br>
                                        Message-ID:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:CAOJbPRLC40bnKjupETxqd_tDLXziDZdwVTvXHVauFwcdwytxuA@mail.gmail.com"><CAOJbPRLC40bnKjupETxqd_tDLXziDZdwVTvXHVauFwcdwytxuA@mail.gmail.com></a><br>
                                        Content-Type: text/plain;
                                        charset="utf-8"<br>
                                        <br>
                                        Beware of the cryptic
                                        Cartesianism of opposing
                                        informationalism to<br>
                                        physicalism (as in "it from
                                        bit").<br>
                                        By accepting this framing, we
                                        risk falling for the old
                                        idealism vs<br>
                                        materialism trap, just in a new
                                        form.<br>
                                        <br>
                                        <br>
                                        On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 3:59?AM
                                        Pedro C. Mariju?n
                                        <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com"><pedroc.marijuan@gmail.com></a><br>
                                        wrote:<br>
                                        <br>
                                        <o:p></o:p></p>
                                      <blockquote
                                        style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
                                        <p class="MsoNormal"
                                          style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Dear
                                          Stuart and FIS colleagues,<br>
                                          <br>
                                          We are honored that you impart
                                          the FIS New Year Lecture this
                                          time. In this<br>
                                          list, quite a few members
                                          share the impression that we
                                          are involved in a<br>
                                          historical transition in
                                          science. Maybe, as you and
                                          Andrea Roli state, it<br>
                                          could be the Third Great
                                          Transition. That it revolves
                                          around putting  into<br>
                                          question the predominance of
                                          physicalist views was
                                          coincidentally discussed<br>
                                          in a previous discussion
                                          session, when two pioneers of
                                          AI research (Yixin<br>
                                          Zhong from China and Eric
                                          Werner from Oxford) were
                                          arguing for a paradigm<br>
                                          change away for physicalism.
                                          Now you are providing strong
                                          arguments from<br>
                                          the biological
                                          self-construction and
                                          evolutionary points of view.
                                          An<br>
                                          important point is the
                                          argument on Kantian wholes,
                                          from the closure of<br>
                                          auto-catalitic sets. It could
                                          also be considered as the
                                          organizational<br>
                                          reliance on "cycles". In
                                          biological systems there is a
                                          towering presence of<br>
                                          cycles: from elementary
                                          reaction cycles, to enzyme
                                          work-cycles, to regional<br>
                                          reaction cycles, gene
                                          expression cycles (your
                                          Boolean networks!!), to<br>
                                          genetic macro-cycles... to the
                                          cell's entire life cycle. And
                                          an even larger<br>
                                          story could be told about
                                          cycles in complex organisms...<br>
                                          <br>
                                          To put the argument in a
                                          nutshell: bye to physicalism
                                          (as a fundamental<br>
                                          meta-scientific vision). Yes,
                                          but what would substitute for
                                          it?<br>
                                          I dare say "informationalism".
                                          You mention the biosphere and
                                          the  global<br>
                                          economy, and even our
                                          cultures. Aren't all them
                                          based on the circulation of<br>
                                          "information flows"  (in
                                          vastly different forms, of
                                          course)??<br>
                                          Let us think, for instance, on
                                          the enormous disarray created
                                          by the new<br>
                                          social networks in our
                                          societies... we do not much
                                          understand the<br>
                                          psychological changes derived
                                          for the intertwining of
                                          natural vs artifical<br>
                                          info flows in our societies.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          I am just reading Joseph's
                                          just arrived comments,
                                          philosophically and<br>
                                          formally oriented. Fine.  I
                                          would ad that we are lacking a
                                          vast<br>
                                          informational view that can
                                          help us to understand that
                                          strange world put<br>
                                          into action 3,000 million
                                          years ago, full of emergent
                                          realms. So, filling<br>
                                          in the gap that physicalim is
                                          unable to fill in
                                          consistently.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          Best regards to all,<br>
                                          --Pedro<br>
                                          <br>
                                          *PS. If anyone has doubts
                                          about the messages effectively
                                           distributed in<br>
                                          the list, go please to the
                                          instantaneous archive:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/">http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/</a><br>
<<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/%3E*">http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/%3E*</a><br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
                                          El 04/01/2024 a las 23:54,
                                          Stuart Kauffman escribi?:<br>
                                          <br>
                                          Hello to All,<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          I am truly grateful to have
                                          this opportunity to discuss
                                          with you the<br>
                                          recent Stuart Kauffman and
                                          Andrea Roli paper, ?A Third
                                          Transition In<br>
                                          Science?? J. Roy. Soc.
                                          Interface, 4/ 14 2023.  I
                                          attach a link below. It?s<br>
                                          eventual publication in a fine
                                          journal after almost two years
                                          has its own<br>
                                          wry history.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          Andrea and I think we are
                                          correct, but we may be wrong.
                                          More, I only<br>
                                          slightly begin to understand
                                          what our results, if correct,
                                          mean.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          I had thought that the First
                                          Transition in science was
                                          Newton?s invention<br>
                                          of Classical Physics in 1689
                                          A.D. And I thought the Second
                                          Transition was<br>
                                          the reluctant discovery of
                                          quantum mechanics between 1900
                                          and 1927 A.D.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          I begin to suspect I was
                                          wrong.  The First Transition
                                          in science was in<br>
                                          1299A.D. when the first
                                          mechanical clock was invented
                                          and installed at the<br>
                                          Wallingford Abby. It was
                                          installed because the monks
                                          were often late for<br>
                                          prayers. Within less than a
                                          century, Europe was dotted by
                                          chuch towers with<br>
                                          ever - more impressive
                                          mechanical clocks. Modern
                                          people in 1379 A.D. must<br>
                                          have begun to wonder if the
                                          World itself was some amazing
                                          clockwork<br>
                                          machine. Then Copernicus, 1543
                                          A.D., then Kepler, Galileo and
                                          Newton.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          This, then, was the Second
                                          Transition in Science. Yes,
                                          yes, yes!  The<br>
                                          World is a vast clockwork
                                          machine. No room for God?s
                                          miracles ? the Deistic<br>
                                          God of the Enlightenment. No
                                          room for mind ? Descartes lost
                                          his Res<br>
                                          cogitans to Newton?s Res
                                          extensa. No Free Will.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          With Planck, Heisenberg, and
                                          Schrodinger cam a loss of
                                          determinism, but<br>
                                          still within the Newtonian
                                          Paradigm. And no mind and no
                                          responsible Free<br>
                                          Will.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          If Andrea and I are correct,
                                          this Third Transition
                                          demonstrates for the<br>
                                          first time since 1299AD, 725
                                          years later, that the evolving
                                          biosphere is<br>
                                          not a clockwork machines.
                                          Evolving life is not a machine
                                          at all.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          Are the two of us correct? If
                                          so, what does this Third
                                          Transition<br>
                                          portend?  These  issues now
                                          lies before us.<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          Merci a tous,<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          Stu Kauffman<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                          A Third Transition in Science?
                                          Link<br>
                                          <br>
                                          <br>
                                        </p>
                                      </blockquote>
                                    </div>
                                  </div>
                                </blockquote>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </blockquote>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <pre class="moz-quote-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>
----------
INFORMACIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN DE DATOS DE CARÁCTER PERSONAL

Ud. recibe este correo por pertenecer a una lista de correo gestionada por la Universidad de Zaragoza.
Puede encontrar toda la información sobre como tratamos sus datos en el siguiente enlace: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas">https://sicuz.unizar.es/informacion-sobre-proteccion-de-datos-de-caracter-personal-en-listas</a>
Recuerde que si está suscrito a una lista voluntaria Ud. puede darse de baja desde la propia aplicación en el momento en que lo desee.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listas.unizar.es">http://listas.unizar.es</a>
----------
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p><br>
    </p>
  <div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br /><table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;"><tr><td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 13px;"><a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TX498wljC4O-aWzYOp8J8Zkhdgss3X1jfwHwc54puXOigDfaAz-UqiOraasOx24vWzwDlSOJLGU2cvzCyD1miXAg64ni$" target="_blank"><img src="https://s-install.avcdn.net/ipm/preview/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" alt="" width="46" height="29" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"/></a></td><td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 12px; color: #41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">Libre de virus.<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TX498wljC4O-aWzYOp8J8Zkhdgss3X1jfwHwc54puXOigDfaAz-UqiOraasOx24vWzwDlSOJLGU2cvzCyD1miXAg64ni$" 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>