How information 'catch' a reality? | About the Information
In his book culture, information, communication, first published in 1968 a famous writer and a scientist - primarily the semiotician - Umberto Eco on your own is the (representative) way of trying to explain what meant by information. He pictured the next 'communicative situation': people who live in the valley below the reservoir is needed timely information when its water level reaches the critical point / point (before the spill). In practical terms, to record critical water level in the lake in the first place they need an appropriate sensor; Eco conceived float. When the water reaches a critical level, a sensor in the form of the float activates a portable device that people in the valley to send an electrical signal. The role of the receiver electrical decostar signal taken over the bulb that people set up so that lights up when the water level in the lake is critical, and is not lit when it is below that level. In this way, they are informed that the water level in the lake has reached a critical point or not. The same signal that lit the lamp could run and another decostar device decostar that would lead to the automatic ejection of water from the lakes and so on. However, what to do in case of power failure? Then the light bulb light up for a while and then go off. Is this a sign that the water in the lake dropped below the critical level? No; "Blackout", in this case, is a typical representative of this phenomenon in the communication model which Claude Shannon labeled trees. To reduce the impact of noise to a minimum, Eco proposes to 'double the price of communication', decostar ie to make more complex our code that we send information on whether decostar (or not) of water in the lake has reached decostar a critical level. Instead of one, for our TV signals we will take two bulbs, A and B. When the bulb is lit only This means that everything is fine, the water had not yet reached a critical level; When turned off the light bulb and a lamp lights B this means that the water has reached a critical level.
If we want to increase the security of the information channels, in addition to the use of increasingly complex code, and we need to increase the redundancy. We can use the four symbols instead of two (no more sense to talk about light bulbs); for example, A, B, C and D, which, of course, provide a richer repertoire of possibilities in the creation of code messages. Some combinations of these symbols we can use, some do not (A, B, CD, ABC, etc.). some combination, according to Eco:
which apparently does not yet recognize as phenomena and important to communicate. (All this information theory elevates the position of one general theory whose validity area reaches even the area of our understanding of nature and the world as a whole.)
This relatively simple example sends us an important message. People are the ones who by nature require them to deliver information; and not any, but the one of a specific set of possibilities that they previously have specified. That is the meaning of information decostar (that is transmitted) paradoxically contained in information which is 'taken' from nature, but also in the knowledge of people that information (through information) decostar received, while irrelevant - to Shannon said - and get lost in its transmission. Devices that transmit and receive the message does not have to know the meaning of 'transmitted' and 'received' information. This fact, which came to light with the Shannon theory, it seems to me, is something deep about the nature of human cognition.
Eco's example with an artificial lake, we can now replace the example of setting traps. How can we monitor the gait of an animal in the forest? The answer is: by placing sensors at appropriate places in and around the forest. We can set the sensor being reported to us that the animal is in the forest or she left. Likewise, we can very easily imagine that our next signal decostar that we immediately communicated the position of the animals in the forest decostar (for example, a signal that her foot / paw stepped on one of the sensors), a camera attached to the sensor also sends a picture of the animals in the form of additional signals. In other words, nothing that does not interfere with our general way of perception of reality to present this picture. In a way, the information we receive from the 'outside world' can be represented as traps that catch the reality that surrounds us. We are 'hunters reality'. It never comes to us alone, it is necessary to enforce it. All of our devices, designed experiments, our spacetime, have a single objective: "to catch" REALITY! What Shannon theory makes a revolutionary discovery is just this simple fact. Whether the world is real or just imagination of our mind, the conceptualization of reading data from nature through the sensor to generate a (dis) continuous signal is very good at his job.
Never, ever, do not perceive reality directly. Maybe we would not have thought so a hundred years ago, before the articulation of a
In his book culture, information, communication, first published in 1968 a famous writer and a scientist - primarily the semiotician - Umberto Eco on your own is the (representative) way of trying to explain what meant by information. He pictured the next 'communicative situation': people who live in the valley below the reservoir is needed timely information when its water level reaches the critical point / point (before the spill). In practical terms, to record critical water level in the lake in the first place they need an appropriate sensor; Eco conceived float. When the water reaches a critical level, a sensor in the form of the float activates a portable device that people in the valley to send an electrical signal. The role of the receiver electrical decostar signal taken over the bulb that people set up so that lights up when the water level in the lake is critical, and is not lit when it is below that level. In this way, they are informed that the water level in the lake has reached a critical point or not. The same signal that lit the lamp could run and another decostar device decostar that would lead to the automatic ejection of water from the lakes and so on. However, what to do in case of power failure? Then the light bulb light up for a while and then go off. Is this a sign that the water in the lake dropped below the critical level? No; "Blackout", in this case, is a typical representative of this phenomenon in the communication model which Claude Shannon labeled trees. To reduce the impact of noise to a minimum, Eco proposes to 'double the price of communication', decostar ie to make more complex our code that we send information on whether decostar (or not) of water in the lake has reached decostar a critical level. Instead of one, for our TV signals we will take two bulbs, A and B. When the bulb is lit only This means that everything is fine, the water had not yet reached a critical level; When turned off the light bulb and a lamp lights B this means that the water has reached a critical level.
If we want to increase the security of the information channels, in addition to the use of increasingly complex code, and we need to increase the redundancy. We can use the four symbols instead of two (no more sense to talk about light bulbs); for example, A, B, C and D, which, of course, provide a richer repertoire of possibilities in the creation of code messages. Some combinations of these symbols we can use, some do not (A, B, CD, ABC, etc.). some combination, according to Eco:
which apparently does not yet recognize as phenomena and important to communicate. (All this information theory elevates the position of one general theory whose validity area reaches even the area of our understanding of nature and the world as a whole.)
This relatively simple example sends us an important message. People are the ones who by nature require them to deliver information; and not any, but the one of a specific set of possibilities that they previously have specified. That is the meaning of information decostar (that is transmitted) paradoxically contained in information which is 'taken' from nature, but also in the knowledge of people that information (through information) decostar received, while irrelevant - to Shannon said - and get lost in its transmission. Devices that transmit and receive the message does not have to know the meaning of 'transmitted' and 'received' information. This fact, which came to light with the Shannon theory, it seems to me, is something deep about the nature of human cognition.
Eco's example with an artificial lake, we can now replace the example of setting traps. How can we monitor the gait of an animal in the forest? The answer is: by placing sensors at appropriate places in and around the forest. We can set the sensor being reported to us that the animal is in the forest or she left. Likewise, we can very easily imagine that our next signal decostar that we immediately communicated the position of the animals in the forest decostar (for example, a signal that her foot / paw stepped on one of the sensors), a camera attached to the sensor also sends a picture of the animals in the form of additional signals. In other words, nothing that does not interfere with our general way of perception of reality to present this picture. In a way, the information we receive from the 'outside world' can be represented as traps that catch the reality that surrounds us. We are 'hunters reality'. It never comes to us alone, it is necessary to enforce it. All of our devices, designed experiments, our spacetime, have a single objective: "to catch" REALITY! What Shannon theory makes a revolutionary discovery is just this simple fact. Whether the world is real or just imagination of our mind, the conceptualization of reading data from nature through the sensor to generate a (dis) continuous signal is very good at his job.
Never, ever, do not perceive reality directly. Maybe we would not have thought so a hundred years ago, before the articulation of a
No comments:
Post a Comment