At least we are getting closer. :smile:

At the most fundamental level. Your most fundamental thought, is a mirror image of fundamental reality. Nothing exists before this, as far as we are concerned. This is where mind arises, as the distinction of one thing to another. Before that, everything was **timeless and indistinct. No mind – but a grey nothingness.

:up:

Holding non-physicals is a capability of our brains and unique to our brains. — Mark Nyquist

So your non-physicals are either energy or information, or both? All held together in matter?

it is mental content of things that are physically non-existent. — Mark Nyquist

You are abstracting information from it's physical ground. If energy = matter = information, and we have had no serious rebuttal of this. You are free to do that. The world can be seen as all matter, or all energy, or all information.........instead of saying immaterial, why not say informational?

This is what I thought was significant - data is ones and zeros but mental content is fully formed ideas that are interconnected with the environment and dynamic. — Mark Nyquist

:up: I see now. Yes, Information is the catalyst of evolution. But if we are to arrive at a definition of information, we need to capture all information, in every circumstance. Whilst there are some differences, I think what is significant is that one system causes the other to change - this is information.
We tend to miss the catalysing effect of the process of information, and instead just focus on the result, that data has been transferred. But if we change the focus to how information causes change, then we are closer to getting a fix on it, imo.

Ultimately, we are exchanging information, and being changed in the process incrementally. This is an important consideration in this information age, imo.

Everything that manifests itself does so in relation to something
— Possibility

:up: In the distinction of one thing and another arises two distinct forms. Hence energy and information.
— Pop

?? That’s nothing like what I wrote. Can you explain how you think this is saying the same thing? — Possibility

I was agreeing that thigs are relational, and I was trying to point out how this is related to the limits of thinking. Logic at its most fundamental is the relation of one thing to another. Like a field and its excitation, or the substance energy and its information.

You’re presuming that someone exists with knowledge and a capacity for understanding - ie. thinking. I’m not. I’m talking about what logic is before anything exists. What is this ‘structure’ without knowledge? — Possibility

Everything exists as an evolving body of information, such that subsequent informing fits onto existing informing, necessarily, in order to create an evolving body. All systems are enmeshed in this way, and interrelationally evolve together. Information, as the interaction of form, enables this.

Evolving bodies of information exist internal to us and external to us. Evolving bodies of information are all that exists. As stated earlier, it starts with two wavicles integrating, and then evolves from there.

Systems theory is essential knowledge for any philosopher. You don't need to understand it all. Just enough to grasp the butterfly effect, which would take an intelligent person like you, about half an hour I would guess.

:up: I have no idea of your methods, but it sounds interesting. I wonder if you can convert it to MB?
Human DNA has about 875mb of data, or 100 odd volumes of Encyclopedia Brittanicas worth. It would be interesting to compare.

We covered earlier how moments of consciousness can be 1- 400ms long, according to a couple of studies, and this equates to 25 - 35 moments of consciousness per second. This sounds about right, as in the old days movie movie reels used to run at about 25 frames per second, and we couldn't tell the difference between that and normal perception.

So in fact all men are equal but differently formed inormation structures? To put it in a highly abstract way. — Prishon

I think so.

Im not sure what you mean by the force we :rofl: at our center. Is it sexual? Then yes. — Prishon

:up: :rofl: :rofl: I was referring to emotions / feelings. I would understand evolution as the evolution of self organization.

Everything that manifests itself does so in relation to something — Possibility

:up: In the distinction of one thing and another arises two distinct forms. Hence energy and information.

Logic is commonly defined as a proper or reasonable way of thinking about something. But what is logic — Possibility

Logic is the only way to understand something, via a structure of knowledge. The thing understood, is understood in terms of the already established understanding.

QM determines that energy is fundamental, — Possibility

How does it do this? would it be via information.


This is an intro to a free course:

The hand of God(s)? — Prishon

The hand of God. The Anthropic principle. The basis of self organization. Natural Law. The forces we feel at our center all seem to be linked? Different words for the same stuff maybe?

Please remember this is the internet. For all you know, I'm just frantically Googling my way through my own bullshit. And Prishon certainly is, don't elevate the guy to an authority. — Kenosha Kid

I can tell you that I am constantly Googling, checking, and rechecking, and referring to a wide range of opinion from reputable sources. We are all cyborgs these days. We absolutely need to be because of the pace of change. My background is art and IT, but decorative art makes me puke, whereas art that is symbolic of understanding I can really get into. I have a broad range of understanding, but in my fields of special interest, my understanding, I believe, is equal to anyone's. I'm sure you and Prishon feel something similar. Interpretation is a fact, and differences of interpretation exist in any field due to the nature of consciousness - it creates uniqueness- so your interpretation is slightly different to Prishon's, it is to be expected, and it arises at all levels of life.

so classical information theory does treat information stored in a system well, it's just within a context of transmission. — Kenosha Kid

Yes, I agree. It quantifies the information such that you can get a value out of it. A number.

Ultimately, information storage is physical configuration of state, therefore the physical configuration of a system has information irrespective of whether it was intended or transmitted. That physical state is (theoretically) completely encoded in the wavefunction (all of the information about that system), hence one can have a purely informational basis for physics. — Kenosha Kid

:up: Thanks for that. To simplify: The word I am currently typing is a form of the larger form of my thinking. So my form interacts with the form of the keyboard, which interacts with the form of the computer, which interacts with the form of the internet ( this way the information is stored and transmitted, but can be stored indefinitely ) which interacts with the form of your device which interacts with you to change your brain state ( form ) such that you have understanding of my thoughts.
In this view, Information is the interaction of form, Although we say the information is stored, it doesn't become information until it is interacted with - this is true for the device that stores it, as well as the end user.

To put it another way: Information has to have form - that is what we derive from the distinction of the blank sheet of paper and the scribble on it. The scribble makes its way to the end user mind through intermediary interactions - it is those interactions that determine what information is ultimately stored, not the storage of them?? ( Chinese whisper )

This way of understanding information explains the double slit experiment. The interaction of the measurement device collapses the wave, so the information stored is a point particle?

I think you are getting close! Energy, at least forms of it, needs interaction to have a form. A circle form will "evaporate" if no interactions are considered. Its a pitty you havent studied quantum fields. A free field (without a gauge field to INTERACT with,is a weird thing... To say the least... :smile: — Prishon

I used wave theory for illustrative simplicity. The interesting thing to me is that there is an underlying structure that is consistent to all these conceptions.: A wave and its frequency, a field and it's excitation, a string and its vibration, a piece of paper and its scribble, a thing against a nothingness, are all different forms of fundamental conception, that create relational distinction, such that we can understand. These are the limits of relational understanding.

:up: It needs to interact to have a form, and we need to relate it to create a distinction. So a form against a greater form that is our understanding, is a conception of consciousness at its most basic.

The physics stuff is beyond me (and most of us because of the math) — Mark Nyquist

Yeah, me too. So it is great to have @Kenosha Kid, and @Prishon to fill in the blanks.

The mass - energy - information equivalence principle, suggests these are all the same thing. We know since E=mc2 that matter = energy. So really we have energy and information left to consider. Do we see energy, or do we see information about energy? Energy must exist, but can not without information, so it is a tricky question. Largely physics has been blind to this, and only lately has it become a consideration.

I think it is largely an issue of paradigm politics. A definition of information, in this day and age, should be out there, but the one we found, which is explanatory, changes its normal meaning, and understanding as a result. Information is almost the same as interaction, in fact. But interaction already has that spot.

I will make another thread soon to explore this, as I think it is important to understand that information changes us. And how this works today is an important consideration.

That would be you. — Possibility

Or, at heart, you and me are the same, just different in formation :smile:

At fundamental energy, two wavicles modulate their information ( frequency, amplitude, etc ) to a resultant wavicle that "integrates that information".

This is all that ever happens, can happen.

This continues to amass until it gets to a density of elementary particles, then atoms, then molecules, etc

These are all symbolized forms. Forms are the things that represent order, in pockets of the universe experiencing a phase state of self organization. forms are the thing evolving.

Is there some bosonic force creating this order?

This would be the thing doing the thinking? - Integrating the information to various forms.

I dont make an observation of the state. I imagine it. It can exist without me interacting with it. — Prishon

I guess we would have to say your imagination is a physical interaction neurally?

Thanks, your input is invaluable as I don't have a physics background, so could not verify the definition in reference to that knowledge.

It is true you don't make an observation , but imagine one, and the same situation arises, and this still needs to be understood.

Form seems to be the thing the universe is evolving. This impression converges from several angles, and you are suggesting something of the sort.

Form is endlessly variable and open ended. But it enables a substance to mesh into the larger system, such that it can interact.** form is something the universe needs itself. :smile:

I think it is a paradigm thing.

** Realists / materialists assume a mind independent world.

But don't quiz me much further. I'm still trying to understand it myself. :smile:

A state of matter at zero Kelvin contains zero information. There is only one state. Since S=lnN the information is zero. — Prishon

That observation is an interaction.

Also when you interact. — Prishon

Yes.

Why is that? Ten equal pieces of paper with different numbers on them (1 digit) contain the same information (when expressed as a number). — Prishon

Not until you interact with them.

"The wavefunction is the total information about a system,"

Almost correct. The wavefunction contains only information about the chances where to find a particle. Or the chances of finding a momentum in a certain range. The total information about a system is dependent on the configuration of the particles wrt to each other. But if there is no interaction with the systems surroundings, this wavefunction wavers out in phasespace (well, the position part wavers out while the momentum part collapses). After a while all useful information will be lost. The chances are conserved though (unitarity). Information about these chances, or better, the particles with their chances are conserved whenn falling into a black hole. — Prishon

Hey guys, something cool.

In trying to validate this definition of information. I thought about the double slit experiment and wave function collapse, and much to my delight the definition is consistent. Bear in mind I used no physics at all to arrive at it . I used information theory ( personal understanding ) reductionism, and systems theory, @Daniel was a great help.

Information enables the interaction of form, But it doesn't enable the interaction of something that has no form. You cannot provide me something that has no information - ever! Since in order for information to occur, interaction has to cause a change to a system. So this would explain why the wave function collapses, but get this - it also predicts entanglement cannot contain information, can only contain information at the point of collapse. It also explains Wigner's friend scenario.

The interaction element of information is missing in most understanding of information. What do you think?

** interaction creates information.

I'm not sure what your reference is to. So wavefunction is total information about a system. Is information then a mathematical construct or a physical reality? — Mark Nyquist

Information is interaction. Ideally it is evolutionary interaction. But within that interaction, something external has to be translated to an internal structure of knowledge ( constructivism style ). At minimum, that knowledge structure gets changed............Bear in mind, I am conceptualizing this to something that makes sense to me. I haven't heard it explained quite like this before. And frankly Information seems to be one of those concepts like consciousness, that we have been largely blind to.

I think the definitions presented earlier are reliable, and I can not find alternative better ones. Have you had any luck?

I happen to prefer the notion of a Cosmic Program, with built-in directions, but no pre-determined Final Answer — Gnomon

But how does an abstract Principle think and act, unless it is also a free agency with goals and intentions? Does Reason overrule Chance? — Gnomon

Evolution is a brilliant mind, imo. It takes everything into account, and then has all the time in the universe to see what survives and what doesn't. In the end the best possible solution, under the circumstances, is presented every time. I normally think perfection is impossible, but evolution has got to be pretty close! Similarly AP, ensures that in Gnomon's pockets of the universe, a phase state of order occurs, due to the underlying self organization in such states. That ordering occurs is determined, but with a slight element of randomness such that we cannot foresee exactly what the ordering result will be, but obviously, the right elements found themselves in the right circumstances at the right time, is how I see it. So I tend to think life is determined, but exactly where and what time, is random. But we have spoken at length about this before. :smile:

The book sounds fascinating, but there is always so much to learn on my list. If you find anything of import, please let me know.

What do you think about the definition? https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/583523

I am strictly amateur when it comes to physics. I need to go now, but If you get a chance to acquaint yourself with the link above I would love to hear your thoughts sometime. :up:

There is a quite a lot of interest in the idea that information is equal to energy and matter. We covered this somewhat earlier in the thread. Seems to work in theory, but has not actually been achieved as yet.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844021004382

mass = energy = information.

Information is the equalisation of different forms by assigning a number to them. — Prishon

Would you equalize them necessarily?

What do you think of the mass - energy - information equivalence principle?

Hey, thanks so much for your comment. it just made something click! :smile:
I've been searching for a definition of information, expecting to see somebody has beaten me to it, but I can not find anything better. I saw a lecture last night by some information professor, but he had no definition. So still searching hoping not to find it. :razz:

information contained in a physical system = the number of yes/no questions you need to get answered to fully specify the system. — Mark Nyquist

This quantifies the information in the system, but does not tell us what information is.

Maximum information is useless. Nothing interesting going on. The chaos is maximal. The same holds for total order. Both can be described in one single line. Interesting things happen in-between. You can write books full about that "state" of intermediate order. — Prishon

That is a great point! The distinction between order and entropy is the information in the system. That is very much the same as the distinction of the blank page and the scribble on it is information, or the grey nothingness and an object within it is information. The object has form, as distinct to the nothingness.

At the same time as I describe this I am aware what I describe is identical to my neural patterning creating it. So I am interacting with this idea, which is entirely internal, and when you interact with it, it is internal to you. This creates the process of information, where the form of an idea interacts with a larger form that is our consciousness, thus creating it’s moments, and distinctions of moments and thus sense of time, and this way we evolve..

Without these distinctions of order against entropy, there would be total order, or total entropy, and this way the system would be a nothing, so could not interact and evolve.

So, information enables the interaction and evolution of a system.

The definition of information in this sense is: information enables the interaction of form. or Information = evolutionary interaction

On a more human scale this definition reduces to: Information changes us, in a continuous evolutionary process.


This is well illustrated in fictional "form":

I was bewildered by all the information given to me all at once.

Information of her brothers death caused her to sink to the floor in tears.

Information about the party ruined the surprise.

The information in the rock changed the paleontologist's mind about its origins.


As I understand it anyhow. :smile:

Information (brain states) is encoded to paper and ink (because it's cheap and relatively stable) and decoded by yourself or others (by convention) - an attempt to transfer brain states. — Mark Nyquist

:up: Yes, and it causes a change in the sender and recipients brain state, thus changing them. And through an ongoing process of such informing, we evolve.

It is the belief of phenomenology, and the philosophical zombie argument.
— Pop
Thanks, but I would prefer your opinion, what do you think/believe and why. — Alkis Piskas

I have a short theory of consciousness. It is badly in need of renovation, but it might give you some clues. Ultimately you have to do something like this on your own, unless you are to take somebody else's word for it .

↪Pop Might have missed a lot. Like in school I missed subtraction using the Venn diagram method. — Mark Nyquist

How information shapes and changes us might be another thread. Am a bit pooped at the moment. :smile:

Oh well. — Possibility

This was explained to you previously, but in an edit, so you may have missed it.

**In the end our philosophy is only as good as the reality it creates. I have given my views on this previously - why I argue what I do, and where it leads. — Pop

I have been processing some of the references offered here, and the article ‘What is information?’ from Christophe Adami caught my attention - in particular a Venn diagram showing information as ‘what you don’t know (entropy) minus what remains to be known given what you know’.
— Possibility

What you don't know- that's a strange way to define a set. Ok, it's an unknown set.
What remains to be known given what you know- that's even worse! How did this get published? It's junk. — Mark Nyquist

Information can be simply defined as the opposite of a blank sheet of paper minus the writing on it[/b]

So: ( paper - writing )opposite = information. or Paper + writing = information

But I am interested in a deeper understanding. I want to understand why information changes us.

What you need to understand is that your interaction model does not include you, but is relative to you: — Possibility

No, I take a** third person perspective and first person perspective into account and I can see the abyss at its end. Hence my guess with the anthropic principle doing the thinking.

This is a forum. I try to simplify and reduce things to a minimum of wordage. I cannot do what Joshs and Apo do, it would take me all day. Misunderstanding results from this, but I cannot see a way around it.

Matter inside a volume (not having the configuration of a black hole state yet, can be nicely ordered and whirl around in formation. Not too much information and not too little being there. — Prishon

:up: ....Very nice. thank you for your comment. Are there limits on the minimum amount of information?.... According to my model that would be impossible, since in the end, everything reduces to information, if we are to have knowledge of it.

What is the material "thing" cats have in common? — Gnomon

DNA.

What kind of information is it made of? :cool: — Gnomon

Code. 100 odd volumes of Encyclopedia Britannica worth . :smile: