This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Werner Gitt article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
See
The reversion to the supposed “neutral” version:
“. . .written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics, and control engineering. .”
We should, instead, write articles with the tone that all positions presented are at least plausible, bearing in mind the important qualification about extreme minority views. Present all significant, competing views sympathetically. We can write with the attitude that such-and-such is a reasonable idea, except that, in the view of some detractors, the supporters of said view overlooked such-and-such details.
Reversions and deletions by persons apparently unfamiliar with the sphere of the National Standard’s Institutes (or Laboratories) of Gitt’s professional work does not appar neutral and fails to provide a description of Gitt’s professional work. The scientific process is furthered by criticisms, challenges and opposing hypotheses, not by hiding reference to them. Following are the major changes that were deleted: DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Proposed:
Dr. Gitt received his doctorate Summa Cum Laude, and was awarded the Borchers Medal, Technical University Aachen.
These are objective facts from the cited links. I can add references from below for each. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Proposed:
In 1971 Werner Gitt started his career at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology [ (Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt "PTB"), in Brunswick. From 1971 to 2002 he was Head of PTB Division Q4 Information Technology. Gitt stated he had:
written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics, and control engineering. . . [1]
In 1978 he was promoted to the academic position [2] of Director and Professor at the PTB honoring his scientific publications and achievements as head of the PTB Q4 Division. [3]
This summarizes his professional carreer, with references to PTB and cites detailing each item. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Posted the following with detailed references supporting each statement:
In 1971 Werner Gitt started his career as Head of Department Q4 InformationsTechnologie [4] at the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt "PTB" [5] (the Federal Institute of Physics and Technology, Germany's national metrology institute) [6], in Brunswick. Gitt stated he had:
written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics, and control engineering. . . [7], [8]
In 1978 he was promoted to the academic position [9] of Professor and Director, honoring his scientific publications and achievements as Head of the PTB Q4 Division. [10] Prof. u. Dir. Dr. Gitt managed PTB Dept. Q4 until 2002 [11], [12].
DLH 01:32, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Dr. Gitt is best known for his writings as a Creation Scientist and his opposition to evolution. In his book In the Beginning was Information, he argues that information theory refutes evolution. Critics claim this has been rejected by the scientific community as pseudoscience, specifically pseudomathematics.
This uses Dr. Gitt instead of He, and breaks the long sentence into two. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
- ^ In the Beginning was Information, 2000, Preface
- ^ Biography
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/en/publikationen/jahresberichte/jb2001/oeq/taetigkeitsbereiche_q.htm#fbq4 PTB Department Q4 InformationsTechnologie
- ^ http://www.werner-gitt.de/down_eng/ENG_CV4.pdf Who is Werner Gitt
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/index_en.html
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/en/zieleaufgaben/dieptb.html About PTB
- ^ In the Beginning was Information, 2000, Preface
- ^ http://www.werner-gitt.de/down_eng/ENG_CV4.pdf Who is Werner Gitt
- ^ Biography
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/en/publikationen/jahresberichte/jb2001/oeq/taetigkeitsbereiche_q.htm#fbq4 PTB Deptartment Q4 InformationsTechnologie
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/en/publikationen/jahresberichte/jb2001/oeq/taetigkeitsbereiche_q.htm#fbq4
- ^ http://www.werner-gitt.de/down_eng/ENG_CV4.pdf
This references section is needed to list references. Why vandalise this? DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Restored the References section so we can add formal references per Wiki reference policy. DLH 18:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Selected Information technical publications [1]:
- G4 Gitt, W.; Information und Entropie als Bindeglieder diverser Wissenschaftszweige. PTB-Mitt. 91 (1981), pp 1-17
- G8 Gitt, W.; "Kunstliche Intelligenz" - Moglichkeiten undGrenzen - PTB-Bericht TWD-34, 1989, 43 p.
- G9 Gitt, W.; Information: The Third Fundamental Quantity, Siemens Review, Vol. 56, No. 6 Nov./Dec. 1989, pp. 2-7
- G18 Gitt, W.; Information-A Fundamental Quantity in Natural and Technological Systems Second Conference on the Foundations of Information - The Quest for a Unified Theory of Information. Vienna University of Technology, 11-15 June 1996.
- Gitt, W.; Information, science and biology Technical Journal 10(2):181-187, 1996
Popular publications:
These publications give a sampling of Gitt's professional work to complement his popular publications listed. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Propose deleting day and month of birthdate to reduce risk to Gitt of identify theft. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC) There being no objections, the day and month were deleted. DLH 01:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Introductory summary title ‘’‘Prof. & Dr. Werner Gitt’‘’ provided in the introduction as his professional credentials, since it is difficult to reference “Prof” after the name. Gitt’s professional title was ‘’‘Professor and Director, Doctor’‘’ when head of the Q4 division of PTB. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Can anyone provide the formal suffix for "Professor and Doctor-Ingenieur"? e.g. see Google Search Doctor Ingenieur DLH 14:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
In some Continental European countries all academic degrees were traditionally pre-nominal. Examples of pre-nominal academic degrees, for instance in the German speaking countries include: Dipl.-Ing. (Engineer's Degree), Dipl.-Kfm. (Master's degree in management), Dipl.-Phys. (Master's degree in physics), Dr.-Ing. (German doctorate in engineering)
If that is the formal Continental practice, why do we need to change from Prof. & Dr.-Ing. DLH 14:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
"Besides his scientific publications he is best known for..." No.
[1] lists 611.000 pages.
[2], which excludes the German words for God, evolution, creationist, and Bible, the count is reduced to 999.
This man just does not happen in the public except in his property as creationist. -- Hob Gadling 13:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Google Scholar does not have an entry for Dr. Gitt, so we can't see his full publication list that way. It does mention citations for some specific items though:
All of these are creationist except for possibly the 1982 and 1989 German information ones (which I haven't read). He appears to have had essentially NO other non-creationist technical publications of any impact, at least as far as Google Scholar knows and within the limits of my patience to search them out. As a creationist, he would appear to get an H-Index of 7, which would be respectable for a non-academic (mine is 7) but kind of low for a real researcher. As a real scientist, his H-Index would appear to be no higher than 2 since there are only 2 items that might qualify. That's pretty pathetic for someone at the end of their career.
If any Gitt supporter could provide direct evidence to support the claim that "He has written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics, and control engineering", it would be very helpful. I can't seem to find any myself. Even Gitt's own website ( http://wernergitt.de) doesn't list any. Howard Landman ( talk) 08:26, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
A Summa Cum Lauda Dr. Ing. who was Head of the PTB Information Technology division PTB (the German Standards Institute equivalent to NIST), and was honored by PTB as Professor and Director should properperly be referred to as an "Information Scientist" or an "Information Engineer." Few people have those credentials or honors. DLH See Who is Werner Gitt
e.g. See "In the Beginning was Information" (2000) pp 249-250 References
Because someone writes for a popular audience does not in itself invalidate the underlying principles or technical material. DLH
PTB is the German equivalent of the US NIST - one of the most fastidious publication on accuracy of data. These represent some of the highest technology publications. See: Google Scholar on PTB Only experts at the top of their speciality publish in such publications. Professor, and division Head at PTB with promotion to Director are very high honors. DLH
Directing the Information Technology division for 24 years in itself implies numerous information publications. DLH 00:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Duncharis: The objections are whether Gitt has any publications on Information - then why do you delete his list of publications showing information expertise claiming it is POV? This appearst to be a strongly biased edit in itself. DLH 00:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Or more to the point, Newton did science, and then he did pseudoscience Isaac Newton's occult studies. Which one was more succesful?
Anyway, DLH ( talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) has failed to answer the question, where has Gitt's work been accepted and built on? — Dunc| ☺ 17:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Gitt was responsible for the following Q4 department from '71 to 2002:
Department Q.4 Information Technology:
* Data Networks * Server Systems * Databases * PC Hardware and Operating Systems * PC User Software / IT Training * Data Network-assisted Metrology
* Scientific Computing
71.120.35.49 12:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
The question is not whether Gitt thinks he is doing information theory but whether it can be stated without qualification that he is an information theorist. Gitt can think whatever he likes, but where are the papers, where is the work which builds upon his? — Dunc| ☺ 15:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
So - there are 12 articles and one letter. Two deal with "information theory" in some sense - one 17 years ago, one 25 years ago. Between them they were cited a grand total of once. His entire body of wask was cited 6 times, it would appear. Impact on science? Trivial. Impact on information theory - approximately none. Guettarda 06:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Some of the confusion may stem from the fact that what Americans call "Computer Science" is often referred to as "Informatics" in Europe.
I tend to agree with JoshuaZ that Gitt's "theorems" (and pretty much everything else in In The Beginning Was Information) are scientific garbage. Consider the sentence fragment "every event must have a cause, and that under the same circumstances a certain cause always has the same effects" (ITBWI section 2.3). He is categorically stating that, for example, random spontaneous nuclear decay must have a cause. That could be true, but science doesn't know it to be true. As far as we know at the moment, it happens by itself in an unpredictable manner. And same causes always having the same effects denies the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics. So in less than one sentence, Gitt has claimed that most working physicists have reality completely wrong but he has it right, AND that he knows something WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that is beyond the ability of present day science to test.
Then consider "Theorem" N10b: "The present laws of nature became operational when creation was completed. The laws of nature are a fundamental component of the world as we know it, and they indicate that the Creator sustains all things (Colossians 1:17, Hebrews 1:3). These laws were installed during the six creation days, and thus cannot be regarded as prerequisites for creation, since they themselves were also created." Does anyone want to seriously claim that this is science? How about "Jesus is the Source of all energy, Jesus is the Source of all matter, and Jesus is the Source of all biological information."?
As someone with a math degree, I also believe that when someone calls something a theorem, they are obligated to accompany it with a proof. ITBWI has over a hundred "theorems" and exactly zero proofs. This is not information theory. Real information theory looks more like, say, Leung's textbook on Information Theory or Shannon's 1948 paper. They define their terms. They prove their results.
The best thing that I can say about Gitt is that he seems to be groping his way toward some kind of Theory Of Meaning. Meaning is a very hard problem, and if Gitt had actually defined his version of "information" and made any kind of real progress towards it, his book would have had some value. But he never defines his information. He say what it is NOT (it is NOT physical, it is NOT Shannon Information, etc.) but he never says what it IS. Without a definition of "Gitt information", there is no math and no theory.
For comparison, look up Shannon Information, Fisher Information, or Kolmogorov Complexity, three of the more commonly-used information measures. Each of them is precisely defined. Each of them has dozens or hundreds of useful mathematical results proved, and hundreds or thousands of useful applications to technological problems. Gitt has, as far as I can tell, zero results and zero applications. Howard Landman ( talk) 09:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
This is a specific German academic title: See Biography [blockquote]Three prerequisites must be fulfilled in order for the German Ministerium to award the title ‘Director and Professor’ at a German research institute, on the recommendation of the Praesidium. The person concerned must be:
1. A scientist. I.e. it is most definitely an academic title. 2. One who has published a significant number of original research papers in the technical literature. 3. Must head a department in his area of expertise, in which several working scientists are employed.[/blockquote]
Thus by definition, Gitt is also an Information Scientist. Note that Gitt is not Director of the PTB, but has the academic title Director and Professor, Doctor See: Dir. u. Prof. Dr. DLH 00:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
JS Thanks for restoring the vandelism. DLH 02:07, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Duncharis Each of the changes made are supported by the references and links provided. Wiki Policy Verifiability WP:V If you do not see close reference for a particular fact, please ask and I will add additional closer links. Gitt has a Dr. Ingr. and 31 years working on information technology at one of the premier national standards laboratories which have the highest standards for scientific accuracy. That is expertise worth acknowledging. Unfamiliarity with the national standards insitutes does not constitute justification to delete material. If you have alternative perspectives you wish to add, please do so with supporting references or start discussions on them. However, please do not vandalize serious effort to improve a page just because you vehemently oppose the person being written about and his writings. DLH 00:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC) Further ref see: Gitt's summary biography (translated by Google) DLH 00:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Image:Foto Gitt.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 20:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Content additions require Reliable sources especially for a BLP. Per WP:MOS titles are not used. - - MrBill3 ( talk) 06:05, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Werner Gitt article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
See
The reversion to the supposed “neutral” version:
“. . .written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics, and control engineering. .”
We should, instead, write articles with the tone that all positions presented are at least plausible, bearing in mind the important qualification about extreme minority views. Present all significant, competing views sympathetically. We can write with the attitude that such-and-such is a reasonable idea, except that, in the view of some detractors, the supporters of said view overlooked such-and-such details.
Reversions and deletions by persons apparently unfamiliar with the sphere of the National Standard’s Institutes (or Laboratories) of Gitt’s professional work does not appar neutral and fails to provide a description of Gitt’s professional work. The scientific process is furthered by criticisms, challenges and opposing hypotheses, not by hiding reference to them. Following are the major changes that were deleted: DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Proposed:
Dr. Gitt received his doctorate Summa Cum Laude, and was awarded the Borchers Medal, Technical University Aachen.
These are objective facts from the cited links. I can add references from below for each. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Proposed:
In 1971 Werner Gitt started his career at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology [ (Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt "PTB"), in Brunswick. From 1971 to 2002 he was Head of PTB Division Q4 Information Technology. Gitt stated he had:
written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics, and control engineering. . . [1]
In 1978 he was promoted to the academic position [2] of Director and Professor at the PTB honoring his scientific publications and achievements as head of the PTB Q4 Division. [3]
This summarizes his professional carreer, with references to PTB and cites detailing each item. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Posted the following with detailed references supporting each statement:
In 1971 Werner Gitt started his career as Head of Department Q4 InformationsTechnologie [4] at the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt "PTB" [5] (the Federal Institute of Physics and Technology, Germany's national metrology institute) [6], in Brunswick. Gitt stated he had:
written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics, and control engineering. . . [7], [8]
In 1978 he was promoted to the academic position [9] of Professor and Director, honoring his scientific publications and achievements as Head of the PTB Q4 Division. [10] Prof. u. Dir. Dr. Gitt managed PTB Dept. Q4 until 2002 [11], [12].
DLH 01:32, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Dr. Gitt is best known for his writings as a Creation Scientist and his opposition to evolution. In his book In the Beginning was Information, he argues that information theory refutes evolution. Critics claim this has been rejected by the scientific community as pseudoscience, specifically pseudomathematics.
This uses Dr. Gitt instead of He, and breaks the long sentence into two. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
- ^ In the Beginning was Information, 2000, Preface
- ^ Biography
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/en/publikationen/jahresberichte/jb2001/oeq/taetigkeitsbereiche_q.htm#fbq4 PTB Department Q4 InformationsTechnologie
- ^ http://www.werner-gitt.de/down_eng/ENG_CV4.pdf Who is Werner Gitt
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/index_en.html
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/en/zieleaufgaben/dieptb.html About PTB
- ^ In the Beginning was Information, 2000, Preface
- ^ http://www.werner-gitt.de/down_eng/ENG_CV4.pdf Who is Werner Gitt
- ^ Biography
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/en/publikationen/jahresberichte/jb2001/oeq/taetigkeitsbereiche_q.htm#fbq4 PTB Deptartment Q4 InformationsTechnologie
- ^ http://www.ptb.de/en/publikationen/jahresberichte/jb2001/oeq/taetigkeitsbereiche_q.htm#fbq4
- ^ http://www.werner-gitt.de/down_eng/ENG_CV4.pdf
This references section is needed to list references. Why vandalise this? DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Restored the References section so we can add formal references per Wiki reference policy. DLH 18:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Selected Information technical publications [1]:
- G4 Gitt, W.; Information und Entropie als Bindeglieder diverser Wissenschaftszweige. PTB-Mitt. 91 (1981), pp 1-17
- G8 Gitt, W.; "Kunstliche Intelligenz" - Moglichkeiten undGrenzen - PTB-Bericht TWD-34, 1989, 43 p.
- G9 Gitt, W.; Information: The Third Fundamental Quantity, Siemens Review, Vol. 56, No. 6 Nov./Dec. 1989, pp. 2-7
- G18 Gitt, W.; Information-A Fundamental Quantity in Natural and Technological Systems Second Conference on the Foundations of Information - The Quest for a Unified Theory of Information. Vienna University of Technology, 11-15 June 1996.
- Gitt, W.; Information, science and biology Technical Journal 10(2):181-187, 1996
Popular publications:
These publications give a sampling of Gitt's professional work to complement his popular publications listed. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Propose deleting day and month of birthdate to reduce risk to Gitt of identify theft. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC) There being no objections, the day and month were deleted. DLH 01:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Introductory summary title ‘’‘Prof. & Dr. Werner Gitt’‘’ provided in the introduction as his professional credentials, since it is difficult to reference “Prof” after the name. Gitt’s professional title was ‘’‘Professor and Director, Doctor’‘’ when head of the Q4 division of PTB. DLH 03:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Can anyone provide the formal suffix for "Professor and Doctor-Ingenieur"? e.g. see Google Search Doctor Ingenieur DLH 14:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
In some Continental European countries all academic degrees were traditionally pre-nominal. Examples of pre-nominal academic degrees, for instance in the German speaking countries include: Dipl.-Ing. (Engineer's Degree), Dipl.-Kfm. (Master's degree in management), Dipl.-Phys. (Master's degree in physics), Dr.-Ing. (German doctorate in engineering)
If that is the formal Continental practice, why do we need to change from Prof. & Dr.-Ing. DLH 14:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
"Besides his scientific publications he is best known for..." No.
[1] lists 611.000 pages.
[2], which excludes the German words for God, evolution, creationist, and Bible, the count is reduced to 999.
This man just does not happen in the public except in his property as creationist. -- Hob Gadling 13:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Google Scholar does not have an entry for Dr. Gitt, so we can't see his full publication list that way. It does mention citations for some specific items though:
All of these are creationist except for possibly the 1982 and 1989 German information ones (which I haven't read). He appears to have had essentially NO other non-creationist technical publications of any impact, at least as far as Google Scholar knows and within the limits of my patience to search them out. As a creationist, he would appear to get an H-Index of 7, which would be respectable for a non-academic (mine is 7) but kind of low for a real researcher. As a real scientist, his H-Index would appear to be no higher than 2 since there are only 2 items that might qualify. That's pretty pathetic for someone at the end of their career.
If any Gitt supporter could provide direct evidence to support the claim that "He has written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics, and control engineering", it would be very helpful. I can't seem to find any myself. Even Gitt's own website ( http://wernergitt.de) doesn't list any. Howard Landman ( talk) 08:26, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
A Summa Cum Lauda Dr. Ing. who was Head of the PTB Information Technology division PTB (the German Standards Institute equivalent to NIST), and was honored by PTB as Professor and Director should properperly be referred to as an "Information Scientist" or an "Information Engineer." Few people have those credentials or honors. DLH See Who is Werner Gitt
e.g. See "In the Beginning was Information" (2000) pp 249-250 References
Because someone writes for a popular audience does not in itself invalidate the underlying principles or technical material. DLH
PTB is the German equivalent of the US NIST - one of the most fastidious publication on accuracy of data. These represent some of the highest technology publications. See: Google Scholar on PTB Only experts at the top of their speciality publish in such publications. Professor, and division Head at PTB with promotion to Director are very high honors. DLH
Directing the Information Technology division for 24 years in itself implies numerous information publications. DLH 00:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Duncharis: The objections are whether Gitt has any publications on Information - then why do you delete his list of publications showing information expertise claiming it is POV? This appearst to be a strongly biased edit in itself. DLH 00:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Or more to the point, Newton did science, and then he did pseudoscience Isaac Newton's occult studies. Which one was more succesful?
Anyway, DLH ( talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) has failed to answer the question, where has Gitt's work been accepted and built on? — Dunc| ☺ 17:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Gitt was responsible for the following Q4 department from '71 to 2002:
Department Q.4 Information Technology:
* Data Networks * Server Systems * Databases * PC Hardware and Operating Systems * PC User Software / IT Training * Data Network-assisted Metrology
* Scientific Computing
71.120.35.49 12:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
The question is not whether Gitt thinks he is doing information theory but whether it can be stated without qualification that he is an information theorist. Gitt can think whatever he likes, but where are the papers, where is the work which builds upon his? — Dunc| ☺ 15:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
So - there are 12 articles and one letter. Two deal with "information theory" in some sense - one 17 years ago, one 25 years ago. Between them they were cited a grand total of once. His entire body of wask was cited 6 times, it would appear. Impact on science? Trivial. Impact on information theory - approximately none. Guettarda 06:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Some of the confusion may stem from the fact that what Americans call "Computer Science" is often referred to as "Informatics" in Europe.
I tend to agree with JoshuaZ that Gitt's "theorems" (and pretty much everything else in In The Beginning Was Information) are scientific garbage. Consider the sentence fragment "every event must have a cause, and that under the same circumstances a certain cause always has the same effects" (ITBWI section 2.3). He is categorically stating that, for example, random spontaneous nuclear decay must have a cause. That could be true, but science doesn't know it to be true. As far as we know at the moment, it happens by itself in an unpredictable manner. And same causes always having the same effects denies the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics. So in less than one sentence, Gitt has claimed that most working physicists have reality completely wrong but he has it right, AND that he knows something WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that is beyond the ability of present day science to test.
Then consider "Theorem" N10b: "The present laws of nature became operational when creation was completed. The laws of nature are a fundamental component of the world as we know it, and they indicate that the Creator sustains all things (Colossians 1:17, Hebrews 1:3). These laws were installed during the six creation days, and thus cannot be regarded as prerequisites for creation, since they themselves were also created." Does anyone want to seriously claim that this is science? How about "Jesus is the Source of all energy, Jesus is the Source of all matter, and Jesus is the Source of all biological information."?
As someone with a math degree, I also believe that when someone calls something a theorem, they are obligated to accompany it with a proof. ITBWI has over a hundred "theorems" and exactly zero proofs. This is not information theory. Real information theory looks more like, say, Leung's textbook on Information Theory or Shannon's 1948 paper. They define their terms. They prove their results.
The best thing that I can say about Gitt is that he seems to be groping his way toward some kind of Theory Of Meaning. Meaning is a very hard problem, and if Gitt had actually defined his version of "information" and made any kind of real progress towards it, his book would have had some value. But he never defines his information. He say what it is NOT (it is NOT physical, it is NOT Shannon Information, etc.) but he never says what it IS. Without a definition of "Gitt information", there is no math and no theory.
For comparison, look up Shannon Information, Fisher Information, or Kolmogorov Complexity, three of the more commonly-used information measures. Each of them is precisely defined. Each of them has dozens or hundreds of useful mathematical results proved, and hundreds or thousands of useful applications to technological problems. Gitt has, as far as I can tell, zero results and zero applications. Howard Landman ( talk) 09:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
This is a specific German academic title: See Biography [blockquote]Three prerequisites must be fulfilled in order for the German Ministerium to award the title ‘Director and Professor’ at a German research institute, on the recommendation of the Praesidium. The person concerned must be:
1. A scientist. I.e. it is most definitely an academic title. 2. One who has published a significant number of original research papers in the technical literature. 3. Must head a department in his area of expertise, in which several working scientists are employed.[/blockquote]
Thus by definition, Gitt is also an Information Scientist. Note that Gitt is not Director of the PTB, but has the academic title Director and Professor, Doctor See: Dir. u. Prof. Dr. DLH 00:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
JS Thanks for restoring the vandelism. DLH 02:07, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Duncharis Each of the changes made are supported by the references and links provided. Wiki Policy Verifiability WP:V If you do not see close reference for a particular fact, please ask and I will add additional closer links. Gitt has a Dr. Ingr. and 31 years working on information technology at one of the premier national standards laboratories which have the highest standards for scientific accuracy. That is expertise worth acknowledging. Unfamiliarity with the national standards insitutes does not constitute justification to delete material. If you have alternative perspectives you wish to add, please do so with supporting references or start discussions on them. However, please do not vandalize serious effort to improve a page just because you vehemently oppose the person being written about and his writings. DLH 00:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC) Further ref see: Gitt's summary biography (translated by Google) DLH 00:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Image:Foto Gitt.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 20:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Content additions require Reliable sources especially for a BLP. Per WP:MOS titles are not used. - - MrBill3 ( talk) 06:05, 17 February 2015 (UTC)