Re: Some thoughts on the Modelling Relation

[Tim Gwinn <***>]

Hi Dan,

> > TG: In my view, ALL communication is via some physical
> interaction - there
> > are no "formal channels" of communication between beings. Otherwise,
> > communcation becomes an acausal process. An internal interpretation of a
> > given physical interaction induced on us generates an internal
> > representation we recognize as a formal entity.
>
> One idea that your comments stimulated is that perhaps
> imagination and/or empathy are akin to formal channels,
> routes for knowing that do not require or utilize any
> material transfer between knower and known. The Rosen
> idea to ask questions of a model and learn about the system
> it models may be another route. All these do pre-suppose
> material structures and real models, but for the process of
> "communicating" after these structure are in place, it may
> not require a transfer of material. This could link in an
> informal way to Einstein's quote about imagination being
> more important, perhaps more universal, than knowledge.


TG: Hmm, maybe we are using the words differently,  but aren't 'imagination'
and 'empathy' and asking questions of ourselves all internal processes of a
being rather than communication between beings?


> Quantum spooky action at a distance may be another
> example of communication without material/physical
> transfer or contact...

TG: As I understand it, quantum "spooky action" is - assuming it is a real
phenomena - an entirely physical phenomena. Using this as a medium for
communication would mean inducing a physical interaction with one of a pair
of these 'linked' quanta and then receiving the information via a
corresponding physical interaction of the other quanta in the pair with a
measuring device. The exact nature of the apparent interaction between the
pair elements is not understood, but it seems to operate quite causally.

Regards,
Tim