This is indeed a difficult defintion to construct as it seems to depend ASSUMING no difference of infinte and finite ratios for any sign of the word signifers IN THE DEF., how NORMAL FORMS would normalize the data that traditionally is discussed under the word(s), "Mendel Ratio" (3:1) etc. and this seems to me differently ACCOUNTED for by Gould and Dawkins comparatively if sufficiently definable/defined. If one DID NOT THINK OF INFORMATION in this sense but only the relation to ENTROPY, I think accomplishing the writing of such defintions would be propositionally easier. I have not begun to figure out HOW EXACTLY predication IN KANT would be changed by such objectivication so thought. GOOD POINT WK! I myself get stuck because of the evolutionary thought experiment Ameisen gave as to cell death and mitochondria.
for reference see
IIS 8.5 Detailed Error - 404.0 - Not Foundcontent etc
http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/...{Shortened display form of URL, to restore page width to normal - Adminnemooseus}
This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 11-01-2004 10:47 PM
™ Version 4.2
