Hi Roger Clough 

F = U - TS points out a curious relationship between 
information, which is nonphysical, mental and part of mind, hence S,
and energy U or F , which is physical so part of the brain. 

----- Receiving the following content ----- 
From: Roger Clough 
Receiver: - mindbr...@yahoogroups.com 
Time: 2013-02-02, 03:12:05
Subject: Re: [Mind and Brain] "How to create a mind" ?

Hi Philip Benjamin 

How about the fact that the brain deals with information, 
which can also be a source or sink (as entropy) of energy ? 
Such as:

" This unusable energy is given by the entropy of a system multiplied by the 
The historically earlier Helmholtz free energy is defined as F = U - TS, where 
U i
s the ... energy' for the expression E - TS, in which the change in F (or G) 
determines ... " 

----- Receiving the following content ----- 
From: Philip Benjamin 
Receiver: MindBrain MindBrain 
Time: 2013-02-01, 11:26:47
Subject: [Mind and Brain] "How to create a mind" ?

FW: [perspectiveofmind] Re: "How to create a mind" by Kurzweil - part 3 
[Philip Benjamin] 
How is this (fundamental pattern recognition units) different from the 
philosophical dualism of 
Sir John Eccles & Friedrich Beck (1991-1992)? At least there was no violation 
of the principle of energy conservation there for mind-brain interaction. Their 
40 million  dendrons were fundamental neural units of the cerebral cortex which 
are cylindrical bundles of neurons arranged vertically in the six outer layers 
(laminae) of the cortex. Each cylinder is about 30 micrometres as radius, is 
linked to a mental unit, or "psychon" (nobody knows what it is) and represents 
a unitary conscious experience. Psychons act on dendrons in willed actions and 
thoughts, increasing for a moment the probability of the firing of selected 
neurons through quantum tunneling effect in synaptic exocytosis. In perception 
the reverse process takes place.

The same error is being repeated endlessly, conflating the locus of mind with 
the mind itself and then leaving the mechanism of transduction of physical 
information into mental phenomena. Physical cannot be transduced into or 
interact with non-physical. The transformation into the mental may simply mean 
interaction  with a different form or "image"of physicality through the 
"mysterious" (not mystical) resonance processes. 
Best regards

Friedrich Beck (2008). "My Odyssey with Sir John Eccles". NeuroQuantology 6 
(2): 161?163. http://www.neuroquantology.com/index.php/journal/article/view/170
Friedrich Beck, John C. Eccles (1992). "Quantum aspects of brain activity and 
the role of consciousness". Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 89 (23): 11357?11361. 
doi:10.1073/pnas.89.23.11357. PMID 1333607. 
Friedrich Beck, John C. Eccles (1998). "Quantum processes in the brain: A 
scientific basis of consciousness". Cognitive Studies: Bulletin of the Japanese 
Cognitive Science Society 5 (2): 95?109. 
John C. Eccles, How the Self Controls its Brain, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1994. 
ISBN 3-540-56290-7.
Philip Benjamin
"Spiritual Body or Physical Spirit? Your Invisible Doppelg?ger". Sunbury Press 
Jan 2013
Trade paperback ISBN: 978-1-62006-182-4  Mobipocket format (Kindle) ISBN: 
ePub format (Nook) ISBN: 978-1-62006-184-8  Materialism/Physicalism 
"Bio Dark-Matter Chemistry", International Journal of Current Research and 
Reviews Vol 4 issue 20, 2012


To: perspectiveofm...@yahoogroups.com; mindbr...@yahoogroups.com
From: valter...@engeplus.com.br
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 08:18:32 -0200
Subject: [perspectiveofmind] Re: "How to create a mind" by Kurzweil - part 3


I noticed that, for some reason, the message I sent yesterday , when viewed in 
HTML format, was not being shown completely. The last part was missing. Only 
when viewed as a txt would the ending part appear.

So, I decided to send the message again, reedited, hoping that this time it 
will be shown in its complete form even for those viewing it in HTML format.

I apologize for the inconvenience.



In my message posted to "Perspective of the Mind" and "Mind and Brain", on 
January 24th, 2013, with the title: "How to create a mind" by Kurzweil - part 
2, I wrote about the way I understood Raymond Kurzweil's ideas in regard to his 
"Pattern Recognition Theory of the Mind" (PRTM), as presented in his book "How 
to create a mind".
See:  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/perspectiveofmind/message/680

In that message I cited Kurzweil's reference to fundamental and repetitive 
units he referred to as pattern recognizers, which he estimates to be composed 
of about a hundred neurons each.

In this message I continue the citations and commentaries about the book.

My first understanding of the idea was that the task of each of these 
fundamental units, the pattern recognizers, is to be imprinted with a given 
pattern, during the process of learning and, later on, to have a role in 
recognizing the same pattern every time it is inputted (thus acting both in the 
processing of data and as an element of memory).

The process of learning would occur when a yet non-imprinted pattern recognizer 
was first exposed to a new pattern (a pattern which wasn't recognized by any 
other pattern recognizer) in such a way that certain connections within the 
neurons composing the pattern recognizer would form/strengthen, thus forming 
the imprinting. At the same time that the pattern recognizer was imprinted by 
the new pattern, its output would link to one or more pattern recognizers up in 
the hierarchy.

So, I was surprised when I reached the part where Kurzweil explains that he 
believes these fundamental units, the pattern recognizers, have a relatively 
stable structure, genetically determined, so that the connections between the 
neurons they are composed, within each unit, do not change with learning. What 
changes with learning are the connections between pattern recognizers.

So, he writes:
[Kurzweil]:"The pattern recognition theory of mind that I articulate in this 
book is based on a different fundamental unit: not the neuron itself, but 
rather an assembly of neurons, which I estimate to number around a hundred. The 
wiring and synaptic strengths within each unit are relatively stable and 
determined genetically - that is, the organization within each pattern 
recognition module is determined by genetic design. Learning takes place in the 
creation of connections between these units, not within them, and probably in 
the synaptic strengths of those interunit connections."

In the book Kurzweil tells that the idea about the existence of these 
fundamental units, the pattern recognizers, gained support from an observation 
of Henry Markram, published in 2011.

So, he writes:
[Kurzweil]: "Recent support for the basic module of learning's being a module 
of dozens of neurons comes from Swiss neuroscientist Henry Markram (...). In a 
2011 paper he describes how while scanning and analyzing actual mammalian 
neocortex neurons, he was 'search[ing] for evidence of Hebbian assemblies at 
the most elementary level of the cortex.' What he found instead, he writes, 
were 'elusive assemblies [whose] connectivity and synaptic weights are highly 
predictable and constrained.' He concludes that ' these findings imply that 
experience cannot easily mold the synaptic connections of these assemblies' and 
speculates that ' they serve as innate, Lego-like building blocks of knowledge 
for perception and that the acquisition of memories involves the combination of 
these building blocks into complex constructs.' He (Markram) continues:

'Functional neuronal assemblies have been reported for decades, but direct 
evidence of clusters of synaptically connected neurons... has been missing.... 
Since these assemblies will all be similar in topology and synaptic weights, 
not molded by any specific experience, we consider these to be innate 
assemblies...Our study found evidence [of] innate Lego-like assemblies of a few 
dozen neurons... Connections between assemblies may combine them into 
super-assemblies within a neocortical layer, then in higher-order assemblies in 
a cortical column, even higher-order assemblies in a brain region, and finally 
in the highest possible order assembly represented by the whole brain... 
Acquiring memories is very similar to building with Lego. Each assembly is 
equivalent to a Lego block holding some piece of elementary innate knowledge 
about how to process, perceive and respond to the world... When different 
blocks come together, they therefore form a unique combination of these innate 
percepts that represents an individual's specific knowledge and experience.'"

The article cited by Kurzweil was published on line, on May 16, 2011, in 
Frontiers in Neural Circuits, by Henry Markram and Rodrigo Perin, with the 
title: Innate Neural Assemblies for Lego Memory", and can be found in the link: 

Kurzweil also cites another publication that provides support to the idea of 
the existence of these modules, the pattern recognizers. 

It is a study from the Massachusetts General Hospital, published in a March 
2012 issue of the journal Science, which also shows a regular structure of 
connections across the neocortex. 

He mentions Van J. Wedeen, a Harvard neuroscientist and physicist, as the head 
of the referred study, citing a text from Wedeen that appeared in a Science 
magazine podcast: 

[Van J. Wedden, being cited by Kurzweil]:  "This was an investigation of the 
three-dimensional structure of the pathways of the brain. When scientists have 
thought about the pathways of the brain for the last hundred years or so, the 
typical image or model that comes to mind is that these pathways might resemble 
a bowl of spaghetti-separate pathways that have little particular spatial 
pattern in relation to one another. Using magnetic resonance imaging, we were 
able to investigate this question experimentally. And what we found was that 
rather than being haphazardly arranged or independent pathways, we find that 
all of the pathways of the brain taken together fit together in a single 
exceedingly simple structure. They basically look like a cube. They basically 
run in three perpendicular directions, and in each one of those three 
directions the pathways are highly parallel to each other and arranged in 
arrays. So, instead of independent spaghettis, we see that the connectivity of 
the brain is, in a sense, a single coherent structure."

[Kurzweil]: "In whereas the Markram study shows a module of neurons that 
repeats itself across the neocortex, the Wedeen study demonstrates a remarkably 
orderly pattern of connections between modules. The brain starts out with a 
very large number of  'connections-in-waiting' to which the pattern recognition 
modules can hook up. Thus if a given module wishes to connect to another, it 
does not need to grow an axon from one and a dendrite from the other to span 
the entire physical distance between them. It can simply harness one of these 
axonal connections-in-waiting and just hook up to the ends of the fiber. As 
Wedeen and his colleagues write, ' The pathways of the brain follow a base-plan 
established by.early embryogenesis. Thus, the pathways of the mature brain 
present an image of these three primordial gradients, physically deformed by 
development. ' In other words, as we learn and have experiences, the pattern 
recognition modules of the neocortex are connecting to these preestablished 
connections that were created when we were embryos."

The abstract of the article published on March 30, 2012, in the journal 
Science, with the title: "The Geometric Structure of the Brain Fiber Pathways" 
can be found in the link:

In his book, Kurzweil provides a copy of the illustrations of these highly 
parallel structures mentioned by Wedeen, which are not freely availabe in the 
Science Magazine link above.

If you haven't seen the illustrations yet, and you are curious to see them you 
can find them in color in the link:

(Note: This is a link to a summary of Kurzweil's book provided at "New Books in 

Further, he writes:
[Kurzweil]: "This pattern was found in all of the primate and human brains 
studied and was evident across the neocortex, from regions that dealt with 
early sensory patterns up to higher-level emotions."

He writes that the neocortex is one pattern recognizer thick ("as the neocortex 
is always just one pattern recognizer thick").

Kurzweils argues in favor of the idea that the basic algorithm for learning, 
using these fundamental units, the pattern recognizers, is the same all over 
the neocortex. As argument he cites the discovery that the part of the 
neocortex that in normal people is used to process visual inputs, processing 
patterns representing shapes, in blind people was demonstrate to process 

So, he writes: 
[Kurzweil]: " Consider the implications of this study: It means that 
neocortical regions that are physically relatively far apart, and that have 
also been considered conceptually very different (primitive visual cues versus 
abstract language concepts), use essentially the same algorithm. The regions 
that process these disparate types of patterns can substitute for one another".

The summary:
[Kurzweil]"The pattern of connections and synaptic strenghts within each module 
is relatively stable. It is the connections and synaptic strengths between 
modules that represent learning."

"(...) an actual physical connection must be made, composed of an axon 
connecting to a dendrite. We each start out with a vast stockpile of possible 
neural connections. As the Wedeen study shows, these connections are organized 
in a very repetitive and orderly manner. Terminal connections to these 
axons-in-waiting takes place based on the patterns that each neocortical 
pattern recognizer has recognized. Unused connections are ultimately pruned 
away. These connections are built hierarchically, reflecting the natural 
hierarchical order of reality. That is the key strength of the neocortex."

__._,_.___Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic 
Messages in this topic (1) 

Recent Activity: New Members 1 
Visit Your Group 
 Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us 
Feedback .
DreamMail - Enjoy good email software  www.dreammail.org

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to