J.,
Your arguments seem to support my intuitive beliefs, so my instinctual response is to be thankful for them. But I have to sheepishly admit I don't totally understand them. Could you please give me a simple explanation for why it is an "obvious argument against infinite values ... that the laws of thermodynamics would no longer apply if that were the case." I am not disagreeing, just not understanding. For example, I am not knowledgeable enough about the subject to understand why the laws of thermodynamics could not apply in a classical model of the world in which atoms and molecules have positions and velocities defined with infinite precision, which I think many people who believed in them for years thought before the rise of quantum mechanics. I addition --- although I do understand how noise provides a limit to what can be encoded and decoded as intended communication between an encoding and decoding entity even on a hypothetical infinite bandwidth medium --- it is not clear to me that, at least, that at some physical level, the noise itself might be considered information, and might play a role in the computations of reality. That is not an argument that proves infinite variability, but it might be viewed as an arguments that limits the range of applicability of your noise-floor argument. As anybody who has listened to noisy radio, or watched noisy TV reception can, hear or see, noise can be perceived as signal, even if not an intended one. To the extent that I am wrong in this devil's advocacy, please enlighten me. (Despite his obvious deficiencies, the devil is a most interesting client, and I am sure I have offended many people --- but, I hope, not you --- by arguing his cause too strenuously out of intellectual curiosity.) Ed Porter -----Original Message----- From: J. Andrew Rogers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 4:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: >> RE: FW: [agi] A paper that actually does solve the problem of consciousness On Dec 2, 2008, at 8:31 AM, Ed Porter wrote: > From my quick read it appears the only meaningful way it suggests a > brain might be infinite was that since the brain used analogue > values --- such as synaptic weights, or variable time intervals > between spikes (and presumably since those analogue values would be > determined by so many factors, each of which might modify their > values slightly) --- the brain would be capable of computing many > values each of which could arguably have infinite gradation in > value. So arguably its computations would be infinitely complex, in > terms of the number of bits that would be required to describe them > exactly. > > If course, it is not clear the universe itself supports infinitely > fine gradation in values, which your paper admits is a questions. The universe has a noise floor (see: Boltzmann, Planck, et al), from which it follows that all "analog" values are equivalent to some trivial number of bits. Since "digital" deals with the case of analog at the low end of signal to noise ratios, "digital" usually denotes a proper subset of "analog", making the equivalence unsurprising. The obvious argument against infinite values is that the laws of thermodynamics would no longer apply if that were the case. Given the weight of the evidence for thermodynamics being valid, it is probably prudent to stick with models that work when restricted to a finite dynamic range for values. The fundamental non-equivalence of digital and analog is one of those hard-to-kill memes that needs to die, along with the fundamental non- equivalence of parallel and serial computation. Persistent buggers, even among people who should know better. Cheers, J. Andrew Rogers ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
