On Sat, Dec 07 2013, brian carroll wrote: > Jim Bell wrote:
>> "Spooky action" entanglement has been measured to operate at a velocity of >> at least 10,000 'c', where 'c' is the speed of light in a vacuum. (signals >> transmitted on optical fibers about 20 kilometers apart.) Unfortunately, >> there does not appear to be any way to employ this to transmit information. > it also makes me wonder, given the insane speed vs. infinitesimal distance > if *information* could operate as a kind of cognitive pressure on the mind, > (as with predictive Random Event Generator (REG) vs RNG where patterns > organize/emerge out of quantum-noisefield) thus corollary perhaps to the > analogy of water pressure for electrical circuits and flow based on pneuma- > tic dynamics in a potentially bounded or closed system). that may enter > into questions of 'where information actually exists', perhaps stored outside > the brain in noosphere as patterns or forms (invisible > constellation/structure) > that is referenced or linked to rather than contained within a brain, and thus > boundary of brain vs. mind. same: digital computer vs.quantum processor, > perhaps. thus issue of channeling or tuning into versus as origin of truth. > what if a fundamentally different data model, thus security model, etc. > this conceptualization has the individual person modeled as an antenna, > tuning into various structures based on what resonates, aligns correctly, > what circuits or feedback loops or environments exist. versus machine > of clockwork, rote memorization, and processor speed of read/write. This is exactly the model of the mind that I believed in when I was in college. These days I believe that consciousness consists of information but that information, far from being static, is actually the connections among potential events. It's like a complex machine: pull lever A here and gear B over there moves. The complex set of (abstract, not concrete) connections that makes up the "model" of our reactions to various sets of stimuli *is* our consciousness, versus there being some component in there that produces the illusion of consciousness. I'm sure that sounds sort of crazy; condensing such a large set of varyingly intuitive leaps into a single paragraph is probably not such a great idea. Happy to provide more background on the list or privately for anyone who's interested. -- Sean Richard Lynch <[email protected]> http://www.literati.org/~seanl/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
