Brad, considering that 3 people on this list who know some fair amount
about info theory say you are wrong, Yockey the author of a text says you
are wrong, and Greg quoted your own professor saying that you are wrong,
maybe you should have the insight to reconsider your position. Let me help
with the following comment about what you wrote above.
English, which has lots of information in the sense you are using it
(meaning 'meaning' 'inteligability, 'knowledge' etc) Does NOT have a
equiprobable distribution of symbols. If I recall, e is the most common
letter, and either q or x is the rarest. There is NOTHING equiprobable
about the symbols in the English language. Thus if we use the reasoning
above, we would find that a random source which DOES have equiprobable
symbols, creates more informtion than English. This deduction from what
you are saying shows the contradictory nature of your assertion. A random
sequence DOES have equiprobable distribution and generates the most info
according to your statement, but according to other statements you have
claimed that a meaningful sequence (like the English language has more
information(meaning) than a random sequence(which according to you over the
past few days has no information). Your position refutes itself and is
circular.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm