Re: The meaning of "representation"

noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
> Xiaoshu Wang wrote
>   
>> Second, information is embedded in a message, i..e, it is the 
>> content of the message, yes?
>>
>>     
>>> [Noah Mendelsohn wrote]:
>>>
>>> No.  Assuming binary coding is used, the message is a 
>>>       
>> sequence of bits. It 
>>     
>>> is presumed that the sender and receiver agree in advance on 
>>>       
>> the range of 
>>     
>>> possible information values (my term, not Shannon's), that a 
>>>       
>> given message 
>>     
>>> might convey;  each distinct message essentially selects one of those 
>>> values.    From Shannon's 1948 paper [1]:
>>>
>>>       
>> I take the 'no' means that the message is not embedded?
>>     
>
> Your original quote was that "information is embedded in a message."  I 
> was saying "no" to that;  I don't believe it is best to think of 
> information being "embedded" in a message.  Presuming that the sending and 
> receiving parties share the necessary assumptions about encoding, messages 
>   
I am not sure if I have misunderstand. Do you want to say that 
"information *is* bit-stream"?  Then modeling information becomes the 
task of modeling bits?  I am not sure how that will work.  But, other 
the other hand, all other description, embed, convey , transmit, etc. 
are just different wording: because they all make information a property 
of the message (bit-stream), do you agree?

Xiaoshu
>> convey< or >transmit< information, I would think. 
>>     
>
> Noah
>
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn 
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2007 21:11:44 UTC