Oleg Tchernyshyov - Intellectual Coward and Crackpot

-
In the thread Measuring Information/ specified complexity, olegt said:

On the basis of what you have said and by using what little I know about information and statistics I am forced to conclude that the information content of a cake is zero. Others in this thread and at AtBC have hinted at this outcome, but here is my simple proof.

Here are my assumptions. First, I assume along with you that the amount of CSI X in a cake is determined by the number of letters in the recipe. I further assume that CSI, like Shannon information and entropy, is an additive quantity. The third and final assumption is that CSI, like entropy, is a function of state: if two cakes are the same in size and taste, they contain the same amount of CSI. It does not matter how they were prepared.

It follows from these assumptions that the amount of CSI in a cake X=0. To see why this is so, note that the amount of CSI in 2 cakes of the same size is X+X because CSI is additive. On the other hand, a recipe for preparing two cakes can be obtained from a recipe for one by appending the single-word sentence Repeat. It follows that the amount of CSI in the second cake X is based on the number of letters in the sentence Repeat.

While that already is a pretty minimal amount of information, we can shrink it a bit further. 4 cakes can be made by appending another single-word sentence Repeat. The amount of CSI contained in the two new cakes, 2X, is again based on the number of letters in the sentence Repeat. Thus 2X = X, which means X = 0. Q.E.D.

So even after I told him that his assumptions are faulty, what does olegt do? Presses on regardless!

Oleg, it is the actions not the words. The word "repeat" does nothing but tell you to repeat the actions.

And the actions of the second cake are in addition to the actions of the first cake.

Therefor the information of a cake is additive, despite oleg's spewage.

It is the actions, not the words, which are important:

It is obvious by reading my post on Measuring Information/ specified complexity, that I am talking about reproducing the ACTIONS of the designer(s) in order to get a representation of the information the designer(s) imparted onto/ into their design.

So why am I bringing this up now?

Well olegt is over on Telic Thoughts running his mouth as if he did something to my premise.

olegt is an intellectual coward and crackpot.