Re: Bipartisan House group presses for select committee, classified hearings on UFOs

[Alan Grayson]

Let’s have ‘transparency’ on UFOs: Rep. Tim Burchett | Watch (msn.com) 


On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 6:40:42 PM UTC-4 Alan Grayson wrote:

> Lawmakers demand truth about secret UFO programs in letter to inspector 
> general (msn.com) 
> 
>
> On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 11:48:34 AM UTC-4 Alan Grayson wrote:
>
>> ISTM the keepers of the secrets will continue to stonewall regarding 
>> classified, closed-door hearings on the UFO problem. I naively expected 
>> these hearing to have already occurred, but it isn't the case. AG
>>
>> On Friday, August 18, 2023 at 10:13:03 AM UTC-6 Alan Grayson wrote:
>>
>>> Bipartisan House group pushes for select committee, classified hearings 
>>> into UFOs (msn.com) 
>>> 
>>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/9734ba5a-de0d-413d-8065-afd4f37713f6n%40googlegroups.com.

Better quantum woo for me & your from Nature

['spudboy...@aol.com' via Everything List]

 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02646-x

The universe as a quantum computer.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/34649860.363353.1693007843715%40mail.yahoo.com.

Re: A new theory of consciousness: conditionalism

[Stathis Papaioannou]

On Sat, 26 Aug 2023 at 03:47, Jason Resch  wrote:

> I would like to propose a theory of consciousness which I think might have
> some merit, but more importantly I would like to see what criticism others
> might have for it.
>
> I have chosen the name "conditionalism" for this theory, as it is based
> loosely on the notion of conditional statements as they appear in both
> regular language, mathematics, and programming languages.
>
> At a high level, states of consciousness are states of knowledge, and
> knowledge is embodied by the existence of some relation to some truth.
>
> A conditional is a means by which a system can enter/reach a state of
> knowledge (i.e. a state of consciousness) if and only if some fact is true.
> A simple example using a programming language:
>
> if (x >= 5) then {
>// knowledge state of x being greater than or equal to 5
> }
>
> I think this way of considering consciousness, as that existing between
> those two braces: { } can explain a lot.
>
> 1. Consciousness is revealed as an immaterial, ephemeral relation, not any
> particular physical thing we can point at or hold.
>
> 2. It provides for a straight-forward way to bind complex states of
> consciousness, though conjunction, for example:
> If (a and b) {
> // knowledge of the simultaneous truth of both a and b
> }
> This allows states of consciousness to be arbitrarily complex and varied.
>
> 3. It explains the causal efficacy of states of consciousness. All we need
> to do is link some action to a state of knowledge. Consciousness is then
> seen as antecedent to, and a prerequisite for, any intelligent behavior.
> For example:
> If (light == color.red) {
> slowDown();
> }
>
> 4. It shows the close relationship between consciousness and information,
> where information is defined as "a difference that makes a difference", as
> conditionals are all about what differences make which differences.
>
> 5. It shows a close relationship between consciousness and
> computationalism, since computations are all about counterfactual and
> conditional relations.
>
> 6. It is also supportive of functionalism and it's multiple realizability,
> as there are many possibile physical arrangements that lead to conditionals.
>
> 7. It's clear there neural networks firings is all about conditionals and
> combining them in whether or not a neuron will fire and which other neurons
> have fired binds up many conditional relations into one larger one.
>
> 8. It seems no intelligent (reactive, deliberative, contemplative,
> reflective, etc.) process can be made that does not contain at least some
> conditionals. As without them, there can be no responsiveness. This
> explains the biological necessity to evolve conditionals and apply them in
> the guidance of behavior. In other words, consciousness (states of
> knowledge) would be strictly necessary for intelligence to evolve.
>

I agree with all this and as usual it is very well put and explained. What
I have difficulty with is the concept of implementation. This is
straightforward if we consider cases where the machine interacts with its
environment, but puzzling when we consider similar physical processes in a
different situation where such interaction is not possible. A certain
sequence of movement of gears and springs may be implementing completely
different computations or experiences in different machines, just as a
certain string of Latin characters might mean different things in different
languages. The semantics seems dependent on the observer, and there may be
multiple possible observers, no observer, in the case of a conscious
computation a self-generated observer, and in the case of an inputless
conscious computation a self-generated observer not dependent on any
external observer or other environmental input.

> --
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAH%3D2ypXONK3NN9OTYMDu6MQbn8SLT8gHV%3D80mRT7QhRBOFfH9g%40mail.gmail.com.

A new theory of consciousness: conditionalism

[Jason Resch]

I would like to propose a theory of consciousness which I think might have
some merit, but more importantly I would like to see what criticism others
might have for it.

I have chosen the name "conditionalism" for this theory, as it is based
loosely on the notion of conditional statements as they appear in both
regular language, mathematics, and programming languages.

At a high level, states of consciousness are states of knowledge, and
knowledge is embodied by the existence of some relation to some truth.

A conditional is a means by which a system can enter/reach a state of
knowledge (i.e. a state of consciousness) if and only if some fact is true.
A simple example using a programming language:

if (x >= 5) then {
   // knowledge state of x being greater than or equal to 5
}

I think this way of considering consciousness, as that existing between
those two braces: { } can explain a lot.

1. Consciousness is revealed as an immaterial, ephemeral relation, not any
particular physical thing we can point at or hold.

2. It provides for a straight-forward way to bind complex states of
consciousness, though conjunction, for example:
If (a and b) {
// knowledge of the simultaneous truth of both a and b
}
This allows states of consciousness to be arbitrarily complex and varied.

3. It explains the causal efficacy of states of consciousness. All we need
to do is link some action to a state of knowledge. Consciousness is then
seen as antecedent to, and a prerequisite for, any intelligent behavior.
For example:
If (light == color.red) {
slowDown();
}

4. It shows the close relationship between consciousness and information,
where information is defined as "a difference that makes a difference", as
conditionals are all about what differences make which differences.

5. It shows a close relationship between consciousness and
computationalism, since computations are all about counterfactual and
conditional relations.

6. It is also supportive of functionalism and it's multiple realizability,
as there are many possibile physical arrangements that lead to conditionals.

7. It's clear there neural networks firings is all about conditionals and
combining them in whether or not a neuron will fire and which other neurons
have fired binds up many conditional relations into one larger one.

8. It seems no intelligent (reactive, deliberative, contemplative,
reflective, etc.) process can be made that does not contain at least some
conditionals. As without them, there can be no responsiveness. This
explains the biological necessity to evolve conditionals and apply them in
the guidance of behavior. In other words, consciousness (states of
knowledge) would be strictly necessary for intelligence to evolve.


Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUhtNO0jWDAAE167oM%2BGAODWxoh%2Bx2AsHAqz-_iBenxS7w%40mail.gmail.com.