Part of the reason I'm predisposed to pay attention to Ingber is the fact that circa 1996 Roger Gregory and I used his ASA "C" code to do total orbital launch system optimization <https://web.archive.org/web/20180819055718/http://halfwaytoanywhere.com/newerasa/> while coming up with a business model for our ultracentrifugal rocket engine. Then, unaware that Ingber had developed ASA to model meso-scale neocortical interactions involving magnetic vector potential of calcium ions and EEG data, I was tasked with modeling experimental results from reproducing a patented communications system based on curl free magnetic vector potential and ran across Ingber's more recent papers.
On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 10:50 AM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > From a 2016 paper by Ingber: > > "Using this theory as a guide, discoveries were made that indeed modeled > various aspects of neocortical interactions, e.g., properties of STM −− > e.g., capacity (auditory 7 ± 2 and visual 4 ± 2), duration, stability , > primacy versus recency rule, Hick’s law, nearest-neighbor minicolumnar > interactions within macrocolumns calculating rotation of images, etc > (Ingber, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985a, 1994). SMNI was also scaled to include > mesocolumns across neocortical regions to fit EEG data, as it used here as > well (Ingber, 1997a, 2012). The resulting mathematics is used here for SMNI > modeling of EEG data, further generalized to include possible interactions > with Ca2+ molecular processes." > > Statistical mechanics of neocortical interactions: Large-scale EEG > influences on molecular processes <https://arxiv.org/pdf/1206.6286.pdf> > > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 10:27 AM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> To summarize, the secret to solving AGI is to reproduce the >> electromagnetic noise produced by neurons. No experimental evidence is >> provided. >> >> Really? >> >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020, 11:28 PM Colin Hales <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> For a very long time I have been trying to articulate a fundamental >>> issue in the conduct science of AI (AGI). The issue is the proper conduct >>> of the science such that we can know, with empirical certainty, whether and >>> under what circumstances, a general-purpose computed abstract model of >>> nature (the brain) has functional equivalence with the nature (the brain). >>> >>> It's taken 10 years of brutal grind, but I think I have found the >>> mature/accurate shape of the argument, the proper nature of the problem, >>> and the way forward. >>> >>> I have completed the paper to preprint stage before I go to a journal >>> for the final peer review meat-grinder. >>> >>> So for a bit of a quiet read while the world self-immolates over the >>> next couple of weeks: >>> >>> Hales, C.G. (2020). The Model-less Neuromimetic Chip and its >>> Normalization of Neuroscience and Artificial Intelligence. >>> https://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.13298750.v2 >>> >>> 1 main article. >>> 2 supplementary supporting articles. >>> 4 videos from a computational EM study. >>> >>> Many of you will find previous discussions here remain part of it. It's >>> been quite a job to get to the bottom of the matter. >>> >>> I hope it makes sense of a difficult issue. >>> >>> Take care out there, >>> >>> cheers, >>> Colin >>> >> *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/Tf319c0e4c79c9397-Mbb01b39dee87b8d26104b315> >> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tf319c0e4c79c9397-M807b413b07ef99d4dfcbc3db Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
