Matt, The EM fields are not noise. They are chaotic, complex and deeply entwined in function. Indeed central to function. I have theory. I have a hypothesis. I am doing the experiments. I have a concept design for the chip. The central device device is on the floor next to me and testing is in play, funded by the university. I am now off to campus to discuss progress with my colleague at the university. Currently I am battling EM noise from the massive TV towers a few km from here.
Kindly stop misrepresenting things.You have no clue what I am doing and are not qualified to comment. colin On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 5:47 AM Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe electromagnetic noise from neurons is significant. So what? If noise > causes nearby neurons to fire, we can still model the effect using synaptic > weights. Normal training will compensate for the effect. > > I don't know what Colin expects to find from his Xchip when he doesn't > even know what it will look like. He is all about science but he has no > theory, no hypothesis, and no planned experiment to test whatever it is. > > On Mon, May 10, 2021, 10:49 PM Mike Archbold <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 5/10/21, Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Mon, May 10, 2021, 4:16 PM Mike Archbold <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I can't speak for Colin but I do know that he isn't implementing >> >> algorithms.... >> >> >> > >> > Exactly. He is proposing an "Xchip" that reproduces the electrical noise >> > produced by real neurons. What he isn't proposing is any sort of >> > experiment, or any chip design, or any rational argument why this noise >> is >> > important other than that the last 70 years of trying to solve AI have >> > failed. He conveniently ignores all the progress we have made in AI with >> > neural networks that model the spiking rate as a continuous signal >> > representing a clamped, weighted sum of inputs and that learn by >> adjusting >> > anything that reduces the output error. It's like he is trying to >> > understand social networks by studying the noise from the CPU circuit >> > board. >> > >> > When Colin can answer my and WOM's questions I will take him seriously. >> But >> > I don't expect that to ever happen. >> >> Well, your argument is a classic "begging the question" where you have >> already presumed the strong electromagnetic field is just noise. Maybe >> it is. Maybe not. Maybe partly. >> >> Plainly a lot happens at the cell level with electric field action. >> Ions are moving around, eg into cells, subject to electric fields. >> What happens at a macro brain level or the middle stages with EMF? Why >> is there a presumption that such activity is noise? >> > *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/T7c7052974ce450f1-Ma46f601fe9e9f844b349b73f> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T7c7052974ce450f1-Mb799bdc8847c6cb3d4ad8e84 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
