I think ultimately the difference between information and numbers is only pragmatic. — hypericin
Both piggyback on the logic of counterfactuality. — apokrisis
There is more to say, and I think there are problems with this idea, but what do you guys think? — hypericin
Mathematical platonism has considerable philosophical significance. If the view is true, it will put great pressure on the physicalist idea that reality is exhausted by the physical. For platonism entails that reality extends far beyond the physical world and includes objects that aren’t part of the causal and spatiotemporal order studied by the physical sciences. Mathematical platonism, if true, will also put great pressure on many naturalistic theories of knowledge. For there is little doubt that we possess mathematical knowledge. The truth of mathematical platonism would therefore establish that we have knowledge of abstract (and thus causally inefficacious) objects. This would be an important discovery, which many naturalistic theories of knowledge would struggle to accommodate. — SEP
Can you unpack that a bit? — Wayfarer
But there's a lot of hype around information as a kind of fundamental ontological ground, kind of like the digital geist of the computer age. — Wayfarer
As for Shannon's information theory, I think it tends to be somewhat over-interpreted. Shannon was an electronic engineer trying to solve a particular problem of reliable transmission of information. Of course one of the fundamental discoveries of cybernetics, we all rely on Shannon's work for data compression and tranmission every time we use these devices. But there's a lot of hype around information as a kind of fundamental ontological ground, kind of like the digital geist of the computer age. — Wayfarer
"Information" is a vexed term, as it is used differently (and often vaguely) in different contexts. A crucial thing about Shannon's theory in particular, which is often lost when it is casually mentioned, as you do here, is that it is a theory of communication, in which bits are only one part of a system that also includes, at a minimum, the encoder, the channel and the decoder. Taken in isolation, numbers or bits cannot be identified with information in any meaningful way. — SophistiCat
then back to sound waves as you finally hear it, led me to start conceiving of information and matter as being independent, and both as fundamental elements of the universe (maybe not unlike Aristotle's hylomorphism). — hypericin
Afaik, it's "the difference" between pattern-strings and mathematical structures, respectively, such that the latter is an instance of the former. They are formal abstractions which are physically possible to instantiate by degrees – within tractable limits – in physical things / facts and usually according to various, specified ("pragmatic") uses. I think 'Platonizing' information and/or numbers (as 'concept realists', 'hylomorphists, and 'logical idealists' do) is, at best, fallaciously reifying.I think ultimately the difference between information and numbers is only pragmatic. — hypericin
There is more to say, and I think there are problems with this idea, but what do you guys think? — hypericin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_scent_technology
Digital scent technology (or olfactory technology) is the engineering discipline dealing with olfactory representation. It is a technology to sense, transmit and receive scent-enabled digital media (such as motion pictures, video games, virtual reality, extended reality, web pages, and music). The sensing part of this technology works by using olfactometers and electronic noses.
Current challenges. Current obstacles of mainstream adoption include the timing and distribution of scents, a fundamental understanding of human olfactory perception, the health dangers of synthetic scents, and other hurdles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustatory_technology
Virtual taste refers to a taste experience generated by a digital taste simulator. Electrodes are used to simulate the taste and feel of real food in the mouth.[1] In 2012, Dr. Nimesha Ranasinghe and a team of researchers at the National University of Singapore developed the digital lollipop, an electronic device capable of transmitting four major taste sensations (salty, sour, sweet and bitter) to the tongue.
https://contextualrobotics.ucsd.edu/seminars/digitizing-touch-sense-unveiling-perceptual-essence-tactile-textures
Imagine you could feel your pet's fur on a Zoom call, the fabric of the clothes you are considering purchasing online, or tissues in medical images. We are all familiar with the impact of digitization of audio and visual information in our daily lives - every time we take videos or pictures on our phones. Yet, there is no such equivalent for our sense of touch. This talk will encompass my scientific efforts in digitizing naturalistic tactile information for the last decade. I will explain the methodologies and interfaces we have been developing with my team and collaborators for capturing, encoding, and recreating the perceptually salient features of tactile textures for active bare-finger interactions. I will also discuss current challenges, future research paths, and potential applications in tactile digitization.
'Platonizing' information and/or numbers (as 'concept realists', 'hylomorphists, and 'logical idealists' do) is, at best, fallaciously reifying. — 180 Proof
Forms are ideas, not in the sense of concepts or abstractions, but in that they are realities apprehended by thought rather than by sense. They are thus ‘separate’ in that they are not additional members of the world of sensible things, but are known by a different mode of awareness. — Perl, Thinking Being
Yet the holographic principle in fundamental physics says it means something that the same formalism works for information and entropy — apokrisis
Wasn't that because Von Neumann, who was an associate of Claude Shannon, suggested to him that he adopt the term 'entropy', noticing that it was isometric with Bolzmann's statistical mechanics interpretation of entropy? — Wayfarer
I don't grok this. — 180 Proof
I'm not sure. Suppose an archaeologist uncovers tablets on which are inscribed a lost language. What did the archaeologist discover? Seemingly, information that can no longer be decoded. Years later, the language was translated. Did the information spring into being? Or was it always there? — hypericin
Exactly, how is it that the same marks on dry clay can carry more or less information in different contexts? — SophistiCat
And note that it's not just any marks that transmit information. Some random indentations and scratches on the same tablet would not do. How could that be if marks themselves were information? — SophistiCat
and in your OP you went back and forth between numbers and computers, which, of course, are not the same thing — SophistiCat
Numbers or bits can serve as an abstract representation of an encoded message. — SophistiCat
information and entropy become two ways of talking about the same fact. — apokrisis
However, I wonder if equating the two risks losing sight of the fact that information derives its significance from its order. — Wayfarer
So I question that equivalence - might it not be a fallacy of equivocation? — Wayfarer
The reason that measures of entropification can be applied to information, is just because information represents a form of order, and entropy naturally applies to order. — Wayfarer
I'm sure this is what leads to the prevalence of information-as-foundation in contemporary discourse. — Wayfarer
Information crucially depends on the sender and the receiver (and noise, if any) - this is what is being neglected here. Divining from patterns of tea leaves or decoding random marks on clay gives you no information, because no information was sent in the first place, despite there being a message. Similarly, numbers in themselves are not information, because they do not encode any message - they are just there. — SophistiCat
The message "The cat is on the mat. The cat is on the mat." gives you no more information than the message "The cat is on the mat." even though the former contains more bits than the latter (I am discounting noise for simplicity). The message "Your name is X" gives you no information if your name really is X and you are not suffering from amnesia. So, information depends on the receiver as well. — SophistiCat
Similarly, numbers in themselves are not information, because they do not encode any message - they are just there. — SophistiCat
If you start with the question, "what is information?" the way to go is to survey existing uses of the word. Another approach would be to do what Shannon and other researchers did, which is to start with a specific problem, something that matters, and then see whether a concept with a family resemblance to "information" fits. But starting with the answer, before you even understand the question, is backwards. — SophistiCat
What if we did not use words, but communicated with math? I know mathematicians can do that, but what if from the beginning we all did? I am sure my IQ would be much higher if I could do that. And I wonderful how thinking in mathematical terms might change our emotional experience of life. — Athena
You have a thought, you make some marks on a piece of paper, you mail the paper to me, I look at it, and by some mysterious communication algorithm, I construct in my own brain a pattern that has the same feel as your original thought. Information! — Athena
What if we did not use words, but communicated with math? — Athena
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.