Re: [asa] another physics question-information

From: <>
Date: Tue Oct 30 2007 - 20:02:41 EDT

Dave siid:
> "This holds even though there is no more information in
> a thousand copies of a document than in one."

Which begs the question of what constitutes a copy and
can info be precisely copied? If we artificially assign
a constraint to the info, like only what's printed on a
page, then a photocopy of the info adds nothing. But
when we include all info that may be useful to humans we
find the whole field of forensics is included in the info.

We find lately that even identical genomes have an
epigenetic layer that can and routinely do conditionally
suppress parts of the DNA from one twin to the next as
well as across the entire lifespan of the same genome.

What role does the potentially infinite divisibility
of matter play in information. We think of two electrons
as identical. Something tells me that one day we will
discover that no two things are structurally identical.

-Mike (Friend of ASA)


-----Original Message-----
From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <>
Sent: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 6:36 pm
Subject: Re: [asa] another physics question-information

There is another problem with the conservation of information, or perhaps
a different way to understand a point you make. If a genome is exactly
duplicated, whether in a second cell or second organism, there is no
increase in the amount of information. This holds also when, by
duplication within a cell, a trimer or tetramer results. But the latter
allows a mutation in one part of the genome that increases the amount of
information. There is more information even though the result has no
phenotypic effect. This holds even though there is no more information in
a thousand copies of a document than in one.
t'other Dave (ASA)

On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:27:55 -0400 "Randy Isaac" <>
> Dave,
> As is often the case, this topic gets a little clearer if we
> define some
> terms and concepts. The term "information" is used in many different
> ways.
> We usually think of loss of information as the inability to
> ascertain the
> meaning of an intended communication. If static drowns out a
> telephone
> conversation, we think we lost the information. But the concept of
> conservation of information doesn't work quite that way. Information
> may get
> scrambled and unintelligible but it isn't lost. It's just converted
> into a
> form which we can't decipher. The concern that Hawking had over the
> years
> was the absolute loss of information, not just the scrambling that
> makes it
> hard to decode. That debate isn't over yet and for those of you
> interested
> in this topic, here are a couple of articles with a little more
> clarity.
> Note also that in this context "information" is not the
> communication of
> a sentient being. Rather, entropy is the measurement of the
> information
> content. The two types of information are not necessarily totally
> independent of each other but the concepts are quite different.
> Relating this to DNA, there simply is no way that the
> conservation of
> information principle has anything to do with constraining the
> possible
> changes of DNA code. For one thing, energy is expended in the
> process of
> cell replication so it doesn't violate the second law of
> thermodynamics,
> which is essentially the same thing in this context. The entropy or
> information content of cellular DNA can increase or decrease without
> any
> violation of a conservation law.
> Randy

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.


Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! -

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Oct 30 20:03:47 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Oct 30 2007 - 20:03:47 EDT