RE: virus: Translation

Brett Lane Robertson (
Wed, 15 Oct 1997 12:53:04 -0500

At 11:25 AM 10/15/97 +0100, you wrote:
>> From: Brett Lane Robertson[]
>> But ultimately, I think that there has to be a single point (or
>> information
>> stream)within which the two streams of information which are being
>> compared
>> might meet...
>It's really very simple: two streams which are translatable
>one into the other are "about" the same thing, or more
>strictly, share patterns. Compression doesn't come into
>the picture here -- it played a part in my definition of
>patterns, but is not necessarily used wherever patterns


Elsewhere you say that a pattern reduces to a singularity. Two streams of
information which are simultaneously translated into a third symbolic stream
of information would require this translation stream to have certain
properties. The symbolic stream of information must *not* be compressed
into a singularity; for in it's expanded form, it shows a *relationship*
between two streams of information, in addition to a pattern--or rather, the
relationship IS the pattern but it is not a singularity (the way I see it),
being a stream which, itself, could--in turn--be compressed into a pattern.

If the noncompressed form of the symbolic stream is a "pattern" for the two
streams of information being translated, and a "pattern" is formed by the
compression of the symbolic stream--What does this say for the definition of
pattern, that sometimes it is a singularity...that sometimes it can be
compressed and uncompressed without loss of information..that other times
the pattern is the stream itself and to compress this stream is to lose
information about the relationship between two streams?

I'm not really faulting the definition of "pattern"...I'm just saying that
if pattern is as you have defined it--that which can be compressed and
uncompressed without loss of information--then the symbolic stream of
information which forms the universal translation between two information
states would not be a pattern under your definition.


Rabble Sonnet Retort
Every man has a right to be wrong in his opinions.
But no man has a right to be wrong in his facts.

Bernard Baruch