Information is private sensory input. Energy is public motor output.
Everything is physical, nothing is non-physical, but physical includes
Private physics is experiences which make time. Public physics is all
experience, viewed from a given instant, location, and sensory scope, and
the orthogonal representation of private experience (discrete bodies in
positions relative to each other rather than experienced dispositions
relative to the self).
On Saturday, February 2, 2013 3:18:02 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
> 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 -----
> *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 -----
> *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.
> 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 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier>:
> 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
> Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 08:18:32 -0200
> Subject: [perspectiveofmind] Re: "How to create a mind" by Kurzweil - part
> 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
> 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: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3099270/
> 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 Brief".
> 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 language.
> 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
> in this
> Recent Activity:
> - New
> Visit Your
> [image: Yahoo!
> *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 post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.