> On 4 Apr 2018, at 22:57, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 4/2/2018 10:53 AM, smitra wrote: >> On 02-04-2018 17:27, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>>> On 1 Apr 2018, at 00:29, Lawrence Crowell >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 2:32:06 PM UTC-6, telmo_menezes >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 10:17 PM, Lawrence Crowell >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> You would have to replicate then not only the dynamics of >>>>> neurons, but every >>>>>> biomolecule in the neurons, and don't forget about the >>>>> oligoastrocytes and >>>>>> other glial cells. Many enzymes for instance to multi-state >>>>> systems, say in >>>>>> a simple case where a single amino acid residue of >>>>> phosphorylated or >>>>>> unphosphorylated, and in effect are binary switching units. To >>>>> then make >>>>>> this work you now need to have the brain states mapped out down >>>>> to the >>>>>> molecular level, and further to have their combinatorial >>>>> relationships >>>>>> mapped. Biomolecules also behave in water, so you have to model >>>>> all the >>>>>> water molecules. Given the brain has around 10^{25} or a few >>>>> moles of >>>>>> molecules the number of possible combinations might be on the >>>>> order of >>>>>> 10^{10^{25}} this is a daunting task. Also your computer has to >>>>> accurately >>>>>> encode the dynamics of molecules -- down to the quantum >>>>> mechanics of their >>>>>> bonds. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is another way of saying that biological systems, even that >>>>> of a basic >>>>>> prokaryote, are beyond our current abilities to simulate. You >>>>> can't just >>>>>> hand wave away the enormous problems with just simulating a >>>>> bacillus, let >>>>>> alone something like the brain. Now of course one can do some >>>>> simulations to >>>>>> learn about the brain in a model system, but this is far from >>>>> mapping a >>>>>> brain and its conscious state into a computer. >>>>> >>>>> Well maybe, but this is just you guessing. >>>>> Nobody knows the necessary level of detail. >>>>> >>>>> Telmo. >>>> >>>> Take LSD or psilocybin mushrooms and what enters the brain are >>>> chemical compounds that interact with neural ligand gates. The >>>> effect is a change in the perception of consciousness. Then if we >>>> load coarse grained brain states into a computer that ignores lots >>>> of fine grained detail, will that result in something different? >>>> Hell yeah! The idea one could set up a computer neural network, >>>> upload some data file from a brain scan and that this would be a >>>> completely conscious person is frankly absurd. >>> >>> This means that you bet on a lower substitution level. I guess others >>> have already answered this. Note that the proof that physics is a >>> branch of arithmetic does not put any bound of the graining of the >>> substitution level. It could even be that your brain is the entire >>> universe described at the level of superstring theory, that will >>> change nothing in the conclusion of the reasoning. Yet it would be a >>> threat for evolution and biology as conceived today. >>> >>> Bruno >>> >>>> LC >>>> >> >> In experiments involving stimulation/inhibition of certain brain parts using >> strong magnetic fields where people look for a few seconds at a screen with >> a large number of dots, it was found that significantly more people can >> correctly guess the number of dots when the field was switched on. The >> conclusion was that under normal circumstances when we are not aware of >> lower level information, such as the exact number of dots ion the screen, >> that information is actually present in the brain but we're not consciously >> aware of it. Certain people who have "savant syndrome" can be constantly >> aware of such lower level information. > > And not just people > > https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2014/04/16/302943533/the-ultimate-animal-experience-losing-a-memory-quiz-to-a-chimp > > which suggests to me that the part of one's brain that instantiates > consciousness competes with other parts and may interfere with their > function. I think everyone experiences this in sports. Who hasn't missed a > shot in tennis by "thinking about it too much?”
A funny illustration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ia9hoEMFOY <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ia9hoEMFOY> But I think that the cat just missed the minus sign in the third equation :) Bruno > > Brent > >> >> This then suggests to me that the substitution level can be taken at a much >> higher level than the level of neurons. In the MWI we would have to be >> imagined being spread out over sectors where information such as the number >> of dots on a screen is different. So, what you're not aware of isn't fixed >> for you, and therefore it cannot possibly define your identity >> >> Saibal >> > > -- > 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 [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
