Article View: sci.physics
Article #8621Re: Majpruz and network evolution
From: Tom Schneider
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 18:36
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1992 18:36
52 lines
3018 bytes
3018 bytes
In article <53011@cup.portal.com> Andrew_-_Palfreyman@cup.portal.com writes:
>J. Giles writes (quoting someone else, I think):
>:If I arbitrarily rearrange a DNA molecule, the _biological_ information
>:it contained is completely destroyed - it now contains _ZERO_ information
>:from a biological point of view.
This is wrong. It is still a molecular machine which can select sub states,
see the reference given below.
>:[..]I think you'll find that the change in entropy depends on what is
>:considered a "blank" tape and what is considered "information" on a
>:recorded tape. It is not difficult to conceive of coding conventions
>:in which the lowest entropy condition of the tape corresponds to a
>:blank - completely erased - tape.
If we take information to be a negative decrease in uncertainty,
then this is meaningless, as you have not specified clearly the two
relevant states.
> In short, the change in entropy
>:of a physical system used to record information depends on the
>:_interpretation_ which relates the physical system to the data
>:that it records. What is the thermodynamic definition of an
>:interpretation? [..]
Negative decrease in uncertainty corresponds to selection of states.
Interpretation is not required.
>i'm glad you've brought this point up, Jim. when learning about statistical
>mechanics from Zemansky, i recall the "equation" there stating
> information = -log(entropy)
>perhaps not exactly; the point made was the link between the two in the
>context of thermodynamics.
You were thinking perhaps of the epitaph on Boltzmann's grave:
S = - log W
At risk of repeating myself, see J. Theor. Biol. (1991) 148 83-137, and please
join us over on bionet.info-theory to discuss these issues in detail.
>as regards information, i'm always puzzled by the contrast between this
>posited thermodynamic equivalence and the fact that if something is
>*not surprising in the least*, it's not information.
This happens because most peoples definitions are messed up.
Tom Schneider
National Cancer Institute
Laboratory of Mathematical Biology
Frederick, Maryland 21702-1201
toms@ncifcrf.gov
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2674@fcs280s.ncifcrf.gov>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sample.eng.ohio-state.edu!purdue!haven.umd.edu!ncifcrf!fcs260c2!tomsReferences:
<1992Jan16.023209.24635@ucc.su.OZ.AU> <1992Jan16.185750.967@beta.lanl.gov> <53011@cup.portal.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f803e,9b8acc57c773be93,start X-Google-Attributes: gidf803e,public X-Google-Thread: 10b271,9326ef375f5608d1 X-Google-Attributes: gid10b271,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1992-01-20 11:03:44 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sample.eng.ohio-state.edu!purdue!haven.umd.edu!ncifcrf!fcs260c2!toms From: toms@fcs260c2.ncifcrf.gov (Tom Schneider) Newsgroups: sci.physics,bionet.info-theory Subject: Re: Majpruz and network evolution Message-ID: <2674@fcs280s.ncifcrf.gov> Date: 20 Jan 92 18:36:48 GMT References: <1992Jan16.023209.24635@ucc.su.OZ.AU> <1992Jan16.185750.967@beta.lanl.gov> <53011@cup.portal.com> Sender: news@ncifcrf.gov Followup-To: bionet.info-theory Organization: NCI Supercomputer Facility, Frederick, MD Lines: 52