korrelan

In a generic system of regenerative competency, my theory holds how a 'Toolkit' 
component contributes significantly to the notion of 'Reality'. Perhaps then, 
your 'GTP' correlates to my component named 'Relativity', where such a 
component provides the existential argument for the existence of 'Reality' in 
any, particular context.

Could it be that dementia was nothing more than the train of reality going so 
fast it ended up looking at it's own rear-end reality without recognizing it as 
such? Would any person be able to cognitively declare the back of his/her own 
head as belonging to self? Is this where the spacetime continuum possible bends 
and reality as we know it ends?

Perhaps if dementia were considered purely systemically instead of purely in 
the light of existing knowledge (with reference to your sound 
literature-reviewed approach) about its complex symptomatic constraints?

I'm of the one conviction that one cannot find answers in answers that did not 
contain the knowledge to begin with. What knowledge about dementia was reverse 
engineered from the BOK?

You've obviously built a corresponding 'Toolkit', and many more components of 
such a system of systems. I think your points on experimentation are insightful 
and most valid. Thanks for sharing.

Robert Benjamin

________________________________
From: korrelan <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, 04 July 2019 11:21
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] ARGH!!!


Unless you have the spare cash, time and resources then the whole argument is 
moot, and you must find another way of achieving the goals within your means.  
You can negate most of the above by taking a leaf out the Wright brothers 
methodology… take a leap of faith (in yourself) and just build the damn thing, 
make it work… prove it works.

Every now and again I like to take a break from teaching/ designing my AGI’s 
and consider human frailties, and check if my design can simulate the symptoms, 
and/ or give any insights into the prognosis/ diagnosis or cure.

I have a list, roughly ordered by complexity and today it’s the turn of 
terminal or paradoxical lucidity (PL).  Paradoxical Lucidity is one of natures 
cruellest tricks, approx 75% of patients with long term dementia will fully/ 
partially become conscious/ lucid shortly before they die.  It’s a very complex 
diagnosis that ties into many other conditions and I’m greatly over simplifying 
the topic for the purpose of explanation.



https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1552526019300950

Considering the phenomena in its simplest terms obviously begs the question of 
how this can happen/ function. It seems intuitive that for normal (ish) 
function to return the symptoms of dementia cannot be caused by permanent 
damage/ change, or that something like a build up of amyloid plaque is 
ultimately responsible, but something is impeding consciousness, so what could 
it be.

Keep in mind I have already done this for a myriad of conditions and phenomena, 
so I have insight into how my model behaves/ functions.  I’ve replicated 
optical/ audio illusions, pareidolia, schizophrenia, hallucinations, hypnotism, 
meditation (states of mind), epilepsy, anaesthesia, NDE, and many more, all 
with in the same model.

Firstly I read as much empirical information about the subject as possible. 
Then formulate a theory of how those symptoms could arise and manifest within 
my model. I then alter the models balances and test, repeat until I get the 
desired results, making notes all the way.

Within my model memory consolidation and consciousness are extremely sensitive 
to the base frequencies of the Global Thought Pattern (GTP). The high 
dimensional facets of memories are encoded/ indexed by the state of the GTP 
performing the task at hand, consciousness manifests from the harmonics within 
the GTP.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJmdWfDTgLQ

This shows a small section (1.2mm², 0.01%, 10K neurons, 200K synapse) of 
cerebral cortex from my model, I use it for testing hypotheses and it 
encompasses all the functionality of the full model. It’s learned 40K memory 
engram's segmented into 80 pattern concepts along with a regular base GTP 
rhythm. The graph (lower left) function is equivalent to real-time colour coded 
Golgi staining, and shows the confidence the model has in recognising the 
current pattern, shown by the scrolling bar. Notice the actual pattern stream/ 
matrix on the upper right along with the injected regular GTP rhythm just 
below. On the first pass it shows a very high confidence in recognising the all 
patterns, both the episodic sequence memories and the memories regarding the 
pattern structure are being recalled/ accessed.  On the second pass I change 
the base frequency of just the GTP, notice how the memory retrieval/ 
recognition becomes sporadic. On the third pass I cut the GTP and the 
confidence totally drops even though the 80 patterns are still being injected. 
I then re-establish the GTP and normal operation resumes. This shows how 
reliant/ sensitive the system is to the state of the underlying base GTP 
frequencies.

The slow onset of dementia hints at the second pass, it’s not like the global 
GTP disruption caused by anaesthetic, so I don’t think it’s an imbalance in the 
neurotransmitter levels/ medium.  It must also be affecting the well 
established networks with diminished plasticity; otherwise the brain would just 
adapt to the disruptions and wouldn’t then be able to exhibit the PL phenomena.

So one cause of dementia could be an alteration of the base frequencies within 
the GTP, and the PL phenomena could mean that whatever is causing the phase 
change is related to a condition that rises or reduces/ diminishes just before 
death. Allowing the GTP to phase back through its normal frequency domain and 
thus allowing consciousness to temporarily return.  My current main candidate 
is intracranial pressure, as altering the shape of the connectome can also have 
adverse effects on the phase of the GTP, further pondering is required.

My point being that… although there is no empirical data on how the human brain 
functions it is still possible to gain insights and build a working model 
through experimentation and cross reference, and although this is a low 
resolution insight into the functioning of the brain it hints that so far my 
schema is correct.

Indeed, IMO this is the only way to do it, you have to work the problems. 
Applying/ finding empirical scientific proof of every required step/ concept 
would make the project impossible, especially to a lone researcher with limited 
resources.


:)
Artificial General Intelligence List<https://agi.topicbox.com/latest> / AGI / 
see discussions<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + 
participants<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery 
options<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> 
Permalink<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T87761d322a3126b1-M69e955d6c9d973f1a3850431>

------------------------------------------
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T87761d322a3126b1-Mc7f73c8dd6fe8f857951d662
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription

Reply via email to