On 1 April 2018 at 07:56, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey Mindey, > > On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 11:12 PM, Mindey I. <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why not to just define yourself, and then try to re-run yourself? If you > > have a mathematical definition of your own self, you are already close to > > living forever as a running process based on that definition. > > Easier said than done might be the understatement of the millennium here :) > Hey, Telmo. Definitely not easy. However, abstractly, curiosity may boil down to randomness generators, as a means to explore (computational and other) universes (or find solutions), and if we have somehow equivalent generators, it may be that some of us are equivalent in that sense. > Personally, when I try to define myself, I bump into memories of strong > > sense of curiosity, making me nearly cry of desire to know Everything. > > > > Maybe most of us here on the "Everything-List" are like that. Maybe we're > > equivalent? > > I don't know if my curiosity is as strong as yours, I think it's > impossible to know. I think you are being reductive about yourself, no > matter how amazing curiosity is. > Yes, but how could someone with limited thinking resources understand everything by not being somewhat reductionist? > > Telmo. > > > On 31 March 2018 at 20:32, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> 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. > >> > >> > LC > >> > > >> > > >> > On Saturday, March 31, 2018 at 10:31:56 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:24 PM, Lawrence Crowell > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> > Yes, and if you replace the entire brain with technology the peg > leg > >> >>> > is > >> >>> > expanded into an entire Pinocchio. Would the really be conscious? > It > >> >>> > is the > >> >>> > case as well that so much of our mental processing does involve > >> >>> > hormone > >> >>> > reception and a range of other data inputs from other receptors > and > >> >>> > ligands. > >> >> > >> >> I see nothing sacred in hormones, I don't see the slightest reason > why > >> >> they or any neurotransmitter would be especially difficult to > simulate > >> >> through computation, because chemical messengers are not a sign of > >> >> sophisticated design on nature's part, rather it's an example of > >> >> Evolution's > >> >> bungling. If you need to inhibit a nearby neuron there are better > ways > >> >> of > >> >> sending that signal then launching a GABA molecule like a message in > a > >> >> bottle thrown into the sea and waiting ages for it to diffuse to its > >> >> random > >> >> target. > >> >> > >> >> I'm not interested in chemicals only the information they contain, I > >> >> want > >> >> the information to get transmitted from cell to cell by the best > method > >> >> and > >> >> so I would not send smoke signals if I had a fiber optic cable. The > >> >> information content in each molecular message must be tiny, just a > few > >> >> bits > >> >> because only about 60 neurotransmitters such as acetylcholine, > >> >> norepinephrine and GABA are known, even if the true number is 100 > times > >> >> greater (or a million times for that matter) the information content > >> >> ofeach > >> >> signal must be tiny. Also, for the long range stuff, exactly which > >> >> neuron > >> >> receives the signal can not be specified because it relies on a > random > >> >> process, diffusion. The fact that it's slow as molasses in February > >> >> does not > >> >> add to its charm. > >> >> > >> >> If your job is delivering packages and all the packages are very > small > >> >> and > >> >> your boss doesn't care who you give them to as long as it's on the > >> >> correct > >> >> continent and you have until the next ice age to get the work done, > >> >> then you > >> >> don't have a very difficult profession. I see no reason why > simulating > >> >> that > >> >> anachronism would present the slightest difficulty. Artificial > neurons > >> >> could be made to release neurotransmitters as inefficiently as > natural > >> >> ones > >> >> if anybody really wanted to, but it would be pointless when there are > >> >> much > >> >> faster ways. > >> >> > >> >> Electronics is inherently fast because its electrical signals are > sent > >> >> by > >> >> fast light electrons. The brain also uses some electrical signals, > but > >> >> it > >> >> doesn't use electrons, it uses ions to send signals, the most > important > >> >> are > >> >> chlorine and potassium. A chlorine ion is 65 thousand times as heavy > as > >> >> an > >> >> electron, a potassium ion is even heavier, if you want to talk about > >> >> gap > >> >> junctions, the ions they use are millions of times more massive than > >> >> electrons. There is no way to get around it, according to the > >> >> fundamental > >> >> laws of physics, something that has a large mass will be slow, very, > >> >> very, > >> >> slow. > >> >> > >> >> The great strength biology has over present day electronics is in the > >> >> ability of one neuron to make thousands of connections of various > >> >> strengths > >> >> with other neurons. However, I see absolutely nothing in the > >> >> fundamental > >> >> laws of physics that prevents nano machines from doing the same > thing, > >> >> or > >> >> better and MUCH faster. > >> >> > >> >> John K Clark > >> >> > >> >>> > >> > -- > >> > 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 a topic in the > >> Google Groups "Everything List" group. > >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/everything-list/q_DLnngSbP > k/unsubscribe. > >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Mindey I. > > 0x5F5CC7AD > > https://mindey.com > > Scientific Computing > > & Web Applications > > Phone: tel.mindey.com > > > > -- > > 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 a topic in the > Google Groups "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/to > pic/everything-list/q_DLnngSbPk/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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. > -- *Mindey I.*0x5F5CC7AD https://mindey.com Scientific Computing & Web Applications -- 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.
