A Ha, as I said before, I do not agree with Dr. Gitt’s theological outlook. But as a linguist and scientist, I do relate to his theory on UI (Universal Information). In his book Gitt discusses his different propositions for UI in detail. In a general discussion he touches on the Egyptian hieroglyphics and their deciphering by means of the Rosetta stone. Human language and computer language are included in this discussion. Next he explains the lowest level of information as being statistics. Shannon’s theory of information is suitable for describing statistical information.
1) Any random sequence of symbols is regarded as information, without regard to its origin or whether it is meaningful or not,
2) The statistical information content of a sequence of symbols is a quantitative concept, measured in bits (binary digits).
Gitt then goes on to discuss most, if not all, existing codes and coding systems. He arrives at the following conclusion:
a) A code is a necessary prerequisite for establishing and storing information.
b) Every choice of code must be well thought out beforehand in the conceptual stage.
c) If information is to be understood, the particular code must be known to both sender and recipient.
d) Devising a code is a creative mental process.
e) Matter can be a carrier of codes, but cannot generate any codes.
Furthermore, he summarizes
the prerequisites of Universal Information (UI) as follows:
Cosyntics (code + syntax): Code employed and code understood.
Symantics: Communicated ideas and understood meaning.
Pragmatics: Expected action and implemented action.
Apobetics: Intended purpose and achieved result.
There can be no UI without a code.
Any code is the result of free and deliberate convention.
There can be no UI without a sender.
Any given chain of UI points to a mental source.
There can be no UI without volition (will).
There can be no UI unless all five hierarchical levels are involved: Statistics, cosyntics, semantics, pragmatics, and apobetics.
UI cannot originate in solely statistical processes or from inanimate objects.
He uses protein synthesis in the cell as the application and translation of code. A such it qualifies as UI. Proteins are the chief components and building blocks for the structural composition of living cells. Our genetic code has four base pairs (adenine, thymine, cytosine, guanine) which code for 20 amino acids required for protein synthesis. Here one needs at least 20 combinations, which could be calculated according to Shannon’s theory. Proteins function structurally/mechanically as well as functionally/enzymatically. Proteins are formed by three processes: Transcription, translation and replication. The flow of UI is a two way “conversation” with regulation on/off switches.
Code + Syntax: DNA/RNA Protein Synthesizing System (DRPSS) have an abstract code and a set of syntactical rules.
Semantics: The DNA/RNA codons substitute for/represent commands or specific amino acids and specify their proper sequence.
Pragmatics: When the ribosome ‘reads’ the RNA ‘executes command,’ and starts forming covalent peptide bonds between amino acids as specified by mRNA.
Apobetics: The purpose would be to sustain and maintain a living, functioning organism.
Universal Information can only be created by an intelligent sender.
The ‘information’ conveyed by the DPRSS qualifies as UI.
Therefore, UI in the DRPSS must have been created by an intelligent sender.
I see now that not all are convinced that DNA/RNA of the cell nucleus, as well as its DRPSS, is a Universal Information System. But for me the evidence is overwhelming and it fits in perfectly with my world view. Time will tell whether I am right or wrong.