[[As I said, reality can’t be defined out of reality. Also, “being acted upon” is irrelevant. An underlying physical reality is required in order for any and every instance of information to exist. If any information exists, it exists as an instance of configuraiton in an underlying physics.]]
You’re talking points irrelevent to the idea that BB was talking about info being able to exist indepenedent of outside physical actions acting upon it.
[[THe underlying physics is not simply a box that contains info; the info is properties of the physical configuration.]]
Well yeah in a sense it is simply because the container isn’t responsible for the action of the information when triggered by outside forces- The coexistence of the container and the info has no bearing on the fact that info can and does exist indepenedent of outside forces acting upon it in hte direct manner specific to that information as it was intended to react as per the instructions contained withion hte info
[[Information is the configuration of some underlying physics.]]
That is is-
[[Reality has no need for anything contained in the concept of meta-info. The concept of meta -info is purely a creation of mind which is an instance of circular logic.]]
Talk about circular reasoning- Reality absolutely does rely on higher instructions- Metainfo is NOT a ‘mind concept- but a biological reality as evidenced by the fact that systems of metainfo are intelligently constructed and display higher function by controlling the reactions that occure when lower instructions are affected for whatever reason- this isn’t a ‘concept’- htis is biological fact- reality- it’s not opinion, it’s not an assumption, it’s a verifiable reality.
The rest of your post is an excersize in confusion I’m afraid- Knowing somethign about parts and assemblies of physical structures is a much different issue than is the interconnected woprkings, controllings and directions of the actual information systems. You are assignign hte value of metainfo to the scientists by claiming htey don’t ‘need more physics’ in order to understand any asembly- Of course they don’t- they are mimicking hte end product of metainfo when they understand the mechanics and assemblies. your arguemt does nothign to rebuttal the need for metainfo- it only goes to strenthen it I’m afraid.
Defining it so doesn't make it so.
Re: Reality has no need for anything contained in the concept of meta-info. The concept of meta -info is purely a creation of mind which is an instance of circular logic.
"Talk about circular reasoning- Reality absolutely does rely on higher instructions- Metainfo is NOT a ‘mind concept- but a biological reality as evidenced by the fact that systems of metainfo are intelligently constructed and display higher function by controlling the reactions that occure when lower instructions are affected for whatever reason- this isn’t a ‘concept’- htis is biological fact- reality- it’s not opinion, it’s not an assumption, it’s a verifiable reality.
Sayong so, doesn't make it so. The time development of complexity in biological organisms and systems is observed to always procede from simple to complex, in accordance with the laws of physics and in a fashion modeled by evolutionary algorithms. The end point complexity has never been found to be required in any of that. IOWs, info doesn't "flow" down, it's collected as a collection of successful physical possibilities, according to the mathematics of an evolutionary model.