RE: virus: Nature of Information
Robin Faichney (r.j.faichney@stir.ac.uk)
Wed, 15 Oct 1997 09:56:56 +0100
> From: Dave K-P[SMTP:k.p@snet.net]
>
> You earlier defined pattern as compression, but later reminded me that
> we do not generally define things by their uses. How is your's not a
> definition by use?
>
I don't think either patterns or compressions are uses.
On the other hand, the relationship between them, at
least when expressed this way, is a functional one.
What I said was, we don't define things by listing their
uses, but we do define them in relationship to each
other, and sometimes that relationship may be
expressed in functional terms. But that's only one
way of putting it. Possibly more fundamental yet is
this: both patterns and compression depend on the
numerical identity of information: that one item of it
remains one item no matter how many instances of
it exist. One pattern is one pattern, no matter how
many T-shirts it's on. All compression of info
depends on reducing the number of instances of a
given item of info (pattern). There are uses in this
explanation, but they only serve to illustrate the
basic relationships.
Robin