What I'd like is a mathematical estimate of why a graphic or image (or any
form of physical map) is a vastly - if not infinitely - more efficient way
to store information than a set of symbols.
Yo troll . . . . a graphic or image is *not* "a vastly - if not infinitely -
more efficient way to store information than a set of symbols".
Take your own example of "an outline map" -- *none* of the current high-end
mapping services (MapQuest, Google Maps, etc) store their maps as images.
They *all* store them symbolicly in a relational database because that is
*the* most efficient way to store them so that they can produce all of the
different scale maps and directions that they provide every day.
Congratulations! You've just disproved your prime pet theory. (or do you
believe that you're smarter than all of those engineers?)
And all this is important, because it will affect estimates of what brains
and computers can do.
What brains can do and what computers can do are very different. The brain
evolved by a linear optimization process with *numerous* non-brain-related
constraints because of all of the spaghetti-code-like intertwining of all
the body's systems. It is quite probable that the brain can be optimized a
lot!
(No computer can yet store and read a map as we do, can it?)
What can you do with a map that Google Maps can't? Google Maps may not
store and read maps like you do, but functionally it is better than you
(faster, more info, etc.).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Tintner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <agi@v2.listbox.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 7:33 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] Human memory and number of synapses
Vlad et al,
Slightly O/T - while you guys are arguing about how much info the brain
stores and processes...
What I'd like is a mathematical estimate of why a graphic or image (or any
form of physical map) is a vastly - if not infinitely - more efficient way
to store information than a set of symbols.
Take an outline map of a country, with points for the towns. That map
contains a practically endless amount of info about the relationships
between all the towns and every point in the country - about how distant
they all are from each other - and therefore about every possible travel
route across the country.
Now try expressing that info as a set of symbolic relationships - London
to York 300 Miles, London to Oxford 60 Miles, London to Cardiff 200
miles - and so on and on.
If you think just about the ink or whatever substrate is used to write the
info, the map is vastly more efficient.
And all this is important, because it will affect estimates of what brains
and computers can do. A great deal of the brain's memory is stored, I
suggest, in the form of maps of one kind or other. (No computer can yet
store and read a map as we do, can it?)
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&;
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=55735545-d56dca
