Vidqun: Yes, TD I believe you’ve hit the nail on the head. Gitt
and associates base their findings on their study of language and computer code.
I agree with Gitt, one could and should classify information as information and
Universal Information.
I believe Gitt is in error when he classifies the DNA
information system as a mere language. It’s much more than a language. It’s a
coded operating system with an error correcting system and a two way
communication system all thrown in. We can only surmise how energy is distributed and the role of enzymes to speed things up. Remember, the DNA gives instructions and
receives instructions: Structural protein is needed. Structural protein is manufactured.
The process is stopped when a saturation point has been reached. Yes, the cell
is a little microcosm with far reaching consequences. It originates life, sustains
life and reproduces life.
That brings me to one of Gitt’s questions:
Biological systems are more
complex than technological systems. Should there not be a specific definition
of information from biological systems?
Gitt: It is true that biological systems are far more
complex than our technological inventions. It is also possible that there may
be other-than-UI forms of information encoded within the DNA molecules. If and
when other-than-UI forms of information are discovered, these must be
unambigiously defined. In the mean time, the definition of UI, derived from
human natural and machine languages, perfectly characterizes the ‘information’
that is present in the DNA of all organisms-specifically within the DNA/RNA
Protein Synthesizing System (DPRSS). Therefore, at least for the DRPSS, the
definition of UI is appropriate and scientific laws that govern its domain can
be applied. “Without Excuse,” p. 247.
Vidqun: Deduction (take note, this he deducts or infers from what
was previously stated).
Universal Information can only be created by an intelligent
sender.
The ‘information’ conveyed by the DPRSS qualifies as UI.
Therefore, UI in the DNA RNA Protein Synthesis System must
have been created by an intelligent sender.
This brings me to two relevant questions, especially for you
A Ha. I was in error. An intelligent sender is not a prerequisite for his
definition as UI. I assumed it was. I was wrong:
Does the sender also belong to your definition of Universal
Information? If that were true then the conclusion would be, of course, that
the sender exists.
Gitt: The sender is not part of nor a prerequisite for the
definition of Universal Information. In either case it would be a circular
argument. All scientific laws are established by observation and
experimentation and not prejudiced by assumptions or prerequisites. When we
investigate an unknown system we have to determine whether all four
distinguishing attributes of Universal Information are present. If so, then we
can apply the Scientific Laws of Universal Information to reach the conclusion
that the UI in the unknown system must have been created by an intelligent author.
“Without Excuse,” pp. 248, 249.
Vidqun: Remember the Enigma Machine of the Germans. It was designed and built by German scientists in WW II. The English could only break its code if they had one in their possession. Now, the Enigma Machine is crude in comparison to the code of the DNA information system.
The criteria for information seem to be mostly subjective.
Gitt: Yes, the criteria for information may seem subjective
because there are several ‘definitions’ for ‘information.’ However our criteria
for Universal Information are based on careful observation of human natural and
machine languages. We began by observing and establishing a hierarchy of five
levels, the lowest being statistical with progressively higher levels, i.e.,
cosyntic, semantic, pragmatic and apobetic. Further study revealed that the
upper four levels are distinguishing
attributes that together unambigiously define Universal Information. Therefore
the definition of Universal Information (UI) is: A symbolically encoded, abstractly represented message conveying the
expected action(s) and the intended purpose(s). “Without Excuse,” p. 242. [Cursive script his.]