From: John K Clark (johnkc@well.com)
Date: Wed Jun 24 1998 - 20:51:32 MDT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
VirgilT7@aol.com On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 Wrote:
>>Me:
>>Without information there would be no such definition
>>[of fundamental], nobody around to appreciate it, and nobody to
>>debate what has the most of it.
>Agreed. After all, a definition is information, and so no
>information necessarily means no definitions. But so what?
So even in the unlikely possibility that there is something more fundamental
than information we need not worry about it because we'll never understand it.
Information on the other hand we understand, in fact it's the only thing we
can understand.
>I think the question of the status of information (a set of facts
>about a thing or just any set of concepts?)
How about a set of facts about facts?
>is one which must be resolved via methods other than empirical
>experiments.
Only in pure mathematics is experiment unnecessary, and that is most
certainly the study of information about information. When the recursion of
the information about information idea gets very high such as in physics or
even higher in biology or sociology things are far too complicated to figure
out from first principles and experiment is essential.
John K Clark johnkc@well.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQCzAgUBNZGnZ303wfSpid95AQHQqATtG9KzVFFRo1UXGVjJmNz/7orDImXjhB+P
JYzvcx204jO8RAcUR1/luhC0fUdvNDyl83olVwR10sn4nVCxWCxyva19fq6vPF1t
zXFUWdjTPoCxaJphHTRWwkQceFWHCO6Ka0sU9AGp4jBI1nQncwCoqQZyuMb06LhO
R+HjNpd6PcpcNfjsekFQn9bzRWeodhQ6lUt8yHVa46dclXvKu5Y=
=EgfK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:13 MST