When we attempt to define life, we tend to refer to individuals, those that are alive. But these individuals might be cells, organisms, colonies... ecosystems? We can describe living systems at different scales. Which ones might be the best ones to describe different selves? I explore this question using concepts from information theory, ALife, and Buddhist philosophy. After brief introductions, I review the implications of changing the scale of observation, and how this affects our understanding of selves at different structural, temporal, and informational scales. The conclusion is that there is no single ``best'' scale for a self, as this will depend on the scale at which decisions must be made. Different decisions, different scales.

Information theory has been developed for seventy years with technological applications that have transformed our societies. The increasing ability to store, transmit, and process information is having a revolutionary impact in most disciplines. The goal of this work is to compare the formal approach to information with Buddhist philosophy. Considering both approaches as compatible and complementary, I argue that information theory can improve our understanding of Buddhist philosophy and vice versa. The resulting synthesis leads to a worldview based on information that overcomes limitations of the currently dominating physics-based worldview.

The dynamics of many complex systems can be classified as ordered, chaotic, or critical. Order offers stability and robustness, while chaos allows for change and adaptability. Criticality, then, is often seen as a balance required by living systems at different scales. In classical models, however, criticality is only found near phase transitions, restricting the parameter space (and thus the likelihood) of critical dynamics, as most parameters yield ``undesirable'' solutions. Here we show that this limitation is due to the homogeneity built-in these models, i.e., all elements sharing parameter values. By exploring heterogeneous versions of archetypal models in physics and computer science, we observe critical dynamics in a broader range of parameters, and thus could be more common than previously thought.