On 10 Sep 2009, at 19:38, Brent Meeker wrote:

> ronaldheld wrote:
>> arXiv.org/abs/0909.1508
>> I saw the title and thought of what Bruno would make of it. Any
>> thoughts?
> The authors write, "However, recent studies lead to the conclusion  
> that
> the human mind is not a classical computer, and, in general, not
> completely reducible to any kind of computer (not even classical)
> because of the
> non-algorithmic nature of some mental processes."  But they give to no
> reference to these "recent studies".  The paper seems to be about well
> known problems in training artificial neural networks and other
> artificial learning algorithms.  Sure EEG is inadequate to define
> "intention", there's just not much information there.  I don't see  
> that
> as having any foundational implications.

I think so. Yet the     authors postulate a wave collapse, and conclude

The previous arguments showed that the quantum approach predicts the  
possibility of a direct action
of mind on matter.

Just an old idea, it seems to me.

See Deutsch and Albert for quantum intospection in Everett and Bohm  



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to