A New Class of Autopoietic and Cognitive Machines

The open ontology and information society

Information, as the most elusive subject, is central to all forms of thought, governance, economic structure, science, and society. Regulation of information, especially within the healthcare field, is proving to be a difficult task globally, given the lack of a qualitative framework and understanding of the concept and properties of information (or data) itself. The presentation of the overall qualitative framework, comprising a qualitative analysis of information, data, and knowledge, will be valuable and of great assistance in delineating regulatory, ethical, and strategic trajectories. In addition, this framework provides insights (and answers) regarding (1) data privacy and protection; (2) delineations between information, data, and knowledge based on the important notion of trust; (3) a structured approach to establishing the necessary conditions for an open society and system, and the maintenance of said openness, based on the work of Karl Popper and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel; (4) an active agent approach that promotes autonomy and freedom and protects the open society; and (5) a data governance mechanism based on the work of Friedrich Hayek, which structures the current legal-ethical-financial and social society. This is insightful for questions relating to the extent of rights and duties, the extent of biological bodies and freedom, and the structure of relations in distributed networked systems. There is great value offered in this framework; furthermore, it provides critical insights and thoughts about (and uncovers the interplay between) academic culture, politics, science, society, and societal decay. Note that, in line with the ideas expressed in this manuscript, such as incorporation of personal experience (thereby mending the Kantian and Cartesian gap), a first-person perspective will be used, where relevant.

Is Information Physical and Does It Have Mass?

Some researchers suggest that information is a form of matter, calling it the fifth state of matter or the fifth element. Recent results from the general theory of information (GTI) contradict this. This paper aims to explain and prove that the claims of adherents of the physical nature of information are inaccurate due to the confusion between the definitions of information, the matter that represents information, and the matter that is a carrier of information. Our explanations and proofs are based on the GTI because it gives the most comprehensive definition of information, encompassing and clarifying many of the writings in the literature about information. GTI relates information, knowledge, matter, and energy, and unifies the theories of material and mental worlds using the world of structures. According to GTI, information is not physical by itself, although it can have physical and/or mental representations. Consequently, a bit of information does not have mass, but the physical structure that represents the bit indeed has mass. Moreover, the same bit can have multiple representations in the form of a physical substance (e.g., a symbol on a paper or a state of a flip-flop circuit, or an electrical voltage or current pulse.) Naturally, these different physical representations can have different masses, although the information is the same. Thus, our arguments are not against Landauer’s principle or the empirical results of Vopson and other adherents of the physical nature of the information. These arguments are aimed at the clarification of the theoretical and empirical interpretations of these results. As the references in this paper show, recently many publications in which it is claimed that information is a physical essence appeared. That is why it is so important to elucidate the true nature of information and its relation to the physical world eliminating the existing misconceptions in information studies.

Competency in Navigating Arbitrary Spaces as an Invariant for Analyzing Cognition in Diverse Embodiments

One of the most salient features of life is its capacity to handle novelty and namely to thrive and adapt to new circumstances and changes in both the environment and internal components. An understanding of this capacity is central to several fields: the evolution of form and function, the design of effective strategies for biomedicine, and the creation of novel life forms via chimeric and bioengineering technologies. Here, we review instructive examples of living organisms solving diverse problems and propose competent navigation in arbitrary spaces as an invariant for thinking about the scaling of cognition during evolution. We argue that our innate capacity to recognize agency and intelligence in unfamiliar guises lags far behind our ability to detect it in familiar behavioral contexts. The multi-scale competency of life is essential to adaptive function, potentiating evolution and providing strategies for top-down control (not micromanagement) to address complex disease and injury. We propose an observer-focused viewpoint that is agnostic about scale and implementation, illustrating how evolution pivoted similar strategies to explore and exploit metabolic, transcriptional, morphological, and finally 3D motion spaces. By generalizing the concept of behavior, we gain novel perspectives on evolution, strategies for system-level biomedical interventions, and the construction of bioengineered intelligences. This framework is a first step toward relating to intelligence in highly unfamiliar embodiments, which will be essential for progress in artificial intelligence and regenerative medicine and for thriving in a world increasingly populated by synthetic, bio-robotic, and hybrid beings.