Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] We are information experiencing information.

Expand Messages
  • eduardathome
    Hermit, I think that this use of the term “information” is very specialized. You could have an electron spin at the other side of the universe and say
    Message 1 of 4 , Jun 15, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      I think that this use of the term “information” is very specialized. You could have an electron spin at the other side of the universe and say that it is some kind of information. But it isn’t information such as ... “It is going to rain tomorrow” or “You have a flat tire”.

      Using the specialized application I can agree with your statement, although much of the Wheeler theory I don’t understand and it has been more than 40 years since I did entropy in university. I can appreciate that behind everything is an explanation of its origin.

      However, I would suggest that your statement is wrong in the context of this forum. Well ... sort of. If you and I ARE information, then it would be reasonable to assume this is the kind of information with which we are familiar. My information [I suppose] is the role I play. That is, what do I say to others by my presence.

      Wheeler’s “information” is fascinating but few of us have the time or capability to go there.


      -----Original Message-----
      From: hermit crab
      Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 8:05 PM
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [existlist] We are information experiencing information.

      On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 6:35 PM, eduardathome <yeoman@...> wrote:

      > I don’t understand what you mean by “you and I are information”. To me
      > “information” is some value or description. For example, that the sky is
      > blue is information. Or John stole money from the cookie jar. I don’t see
      > how a person can be information.

      ===Well, it's still fuzzy for me so I will just share some quotes with you
      so you may understand why I said that:


      Wheeler's "it from bit"Following Jaynes and Weizsäcker, the physicist John
      Archibald Wheeler <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler> wrote
      the following:

      [...] it is not unreasonable to imagine that information sits at the core
      of physics, just as it sits at the core of a computer. (John Archibald
      Wheeler <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler> 1998: 340)

      It from bit. Otherwise put, every 'it'—every particle, every field of
      force, even the space-time continuum itself—derives its function, its
      meaning, its very existence entirely—even if in some contexts
      indirectly—from the apparatus-elicited answers to yes-or-no questions,
      binary choices, bits. 'It from bit' symbolizes the idea that every item of
      the physical world has at bottom—a very deep bottom, in most instances—an
      immaterial source and explanation; that which we call reality arises in the
      last analysis from the posing of yes–no questions and the registering of
      equipment-evoked responses; in short, that all things physical are
      information-theoretic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information-theoretic> in
      origin and that this is a participatory
      (John Archibald
      Wheeler<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler> 1990:

      David Chalmers <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Chalmers> of the
      Australian National University summarised Wheeler's views as follows:

      Wheeler (1990) has suggested that information is fundamental to the physics
      of the universe. According to this 'it from bit' doctrine, the laws of
      physics can be cast in terms of information, postulating different states
      that give rise to different effects without actually saying what those
      states are. It is only their position in an information space that counts.
      If so, then information is a natural candidate to also play a role in a
      fundamental theory of consciousness. We are led to a conception of the
      world on which information is truly fundamental, and on which it has two
      basic aspects, corresponding to the physical and the phenomenal features of
      the world.[19] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_physics#cite_note-19>

      Chris Langan <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Langan> also builds upon
      Wheeler's views in his
      metatheory <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metatheory>:

      The Future of Reality Theory According to John Wheeler: In 1979, the
      celebrated physicist John Wheeler, having coined the phrase “black hole”,
      put it to good philosophical use in the title of an exploratory paper,
      Beyond the Black Hole, in which he describes the universe as a self-excited
      circuit. The paper includes an illustration in which one side of an
      uppercase U, ostensibly standing for Universe, is endowed with a large and
      rather intelligent-looking eye intently regarding the other side, which it
      ostensibly acquires through observation as sensory information. By dint of
      placement, the eye stands for the sensory or cognitive aspect of reality,
      perhaps even a human spectator within the universe, while the eye’s
      perceptual target represents the informational aspect of reality. By virtue
      of these complementary aspects, it seems that the universe can in some
      sense, but not necessarily that of common usage, be described as
      “conscious” and “introspective”…perhaps even

      The first formal presentation of the idea that information might be the
      fundamental quantity at the core of physics seems to be due to Frederick W.
      (a physicist from
      Columbia University <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_University>).
      Kantor's book *Information Mechanics*
      1977) developed this idea in detail, but without mathematical rigor.


      *‘We are information experiencing information. Human are anti-entropic

      Kevin Kelly <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Kelly_(editor)>, founding
      editor of Wired Magazine, referring to *technological evolution* as
      following the momentum begun at the big bang - he has stated: *

      “The story and game begin at the beginning. As the undifferentiated energy
      at the big bang is cooled by the expanding space of the universe, it
      coalesces into measurable entities, and, over time, the particles condense
      into atoms. Further expansion and cooling allows complex molecules to form,
      which self-assemble into self-reproducing entities. With each tick of the
      clock, increasing complexity is added to these embryonic organisms,
      increasing the speed at which they change. As evolution evolves, it keeps
      piling on different ways to adapt and learn until eventually the minds of
      animals are caught in self-awareness. This *self-awareness thinks up more
      minds, and together a universe of minds transcends all previous limits. The
      destiny of this collective mind is to expand imagination in all directions
      until it is no longer solitary but reflects the infinite*.”
      — Kevin Kelly <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Kelly_(editor)>, the
      founding executive editor of Wired magazine, and a former editor/publisher
      of the Whole Earth Catalog, cited in Jason
      , We are information experiencing information: an experimental essay in
      “Intertwingularity” <http://bigthink.com/ideas/38733>, Big Think, June 4,

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


      Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

      Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/existYahoo! Groups Links

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.