Re: Free-will

["Tim Gwinn" <***>]

> -----Original Message-----
--snip---
> >>
> >> Rose Reasoning insists that its the 'translations of
> >> information between classes and sets' that's important.
> >> The performance rules of information and communication
> >> engagements and transformations, rather than 'does one
> >> content account for some other content?'.
> >
> >
> >I don't quite follow. In the material world, there are no "sets" and
> >"classes". What are the material occurrences of these to which you are
> >referring? Maybe an example case would help.
>
> I'll give it a go, but apologize ahead of time.  I'm going to need
> you to drop some preconceptions you have and try some of
> mine for a bit.  You don't have to agree, or even hold on to them,
> but just accede to them for a bit if you would.
>
> The first thing we have to do is throw out and rebuild extant notions
> about 'information'.   The model for doing this comes from energy
> mechanics: transduction, the activity of energy moving through
> different forms or incarnations and being retrievable.  Eg, audible voice,
> to vibrating molecules in a receiver, to electrical impulse(s), then
> to vibrating molecules in conductor, back to audible air vibrations
> as sound.  Where the 'message content' is "deshaped" and
> retrievably "reshaped".

Ok.

> Through any such transforms, an 'intrinsic' information remains
> even through all the changes.

Ok.

> With this in our kitbag, we turn to the Calculus .. integration
> and differentiation.  By doing these functions we generate
> different numerical groups - different 'information's as it were.
> For example, a linear slope is not a curve is not the area
> under a curve and so on.  Different information.  But is it?

Assuming we are talking about continuous functions and exact differentials,
differentiating and integrating would seem to neither add nor remove
information.

> In the first instance of 'transform' some kind of information
> stays invariant even through the changes.  So why can't the
> same be reasonably happening in the transforms of the
> Calculus, where you can move through different transformations
> and yet come back and retrieve the original 'extrinsic'
> information form.

Ok. You are talking about certain kinds of mathematical transformations
which are reversible.

>
> What starts taking precedence is not the mappings
> between the considered 'extrinsic' informations, but the
> consistently applicable operators that the different contents,
> forms or extents are subject to.

What are these "operators"?

> That's sort of the Short Course, Tim, for looking toward
> the 'relations' between states and systems rather than
> their comparative completeness.
>

My primary question is twofold:
1) what is the material basis (or, the material counterparts) of this
"information" and "operators"?
2) do we have any measurable phenomena in the material world that is unique
evidence of this view? (that is, can science study it?)

Regards,
Tim