On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> You can simulate it as far as being able to model the aspects of it's
> behavior that you can observe, but you can't necessarily predict that
> behavior over time, any more than you can predict what other people
> might say to you today. T
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Colin Geoffrey Hales
wrote:
> 1) simulation of the chemistry or physics underlying the brain is impossible
>
> It’s quite possible, just irrelevant! ‘Chemistry’ and ‘physics’ are terms
> for models of the natural world used to describe how natural processes
> appe
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 2:58 AM, Pilar Morales
wrote:
> Does Comp address "ego" little or not, or super human powers, or theory
> brewing? How about miracles, and temporarily apparent,
> and non-repeatable, break down of laws of physics?
>
> For example, in the early 1900s, there was a man walking
Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 10:43 pm, Jason Resch wrote:
>> I am more worried for the biologically handicapped in the future.
>> Computers
>> will get faster, brains won't. By 2029, it is predicted $1,000 worth of
>> computer will buy a human brain's worth of computational power. 15
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:03 PM, benjayk
wrote:
> Also, we have no reliable way of measuring the computational power of the
> brain, not to speak of the possibly existing subtle energies that go beyond
> the brain, that may be essential to our functioning. The way that
> computational power of t
On Aug 16, 1:49 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> The I/O interface could involve neurotransmitters which are
> synthesised and released when the artificial neuron sees the
> appropriate voltage, and an enzyme which mops up the released
> neurotransmitter.
Right. Not really an emulation of the fu
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 7:03 AM, benjayk wrote:
>
>
> Craig Weinberg wrote:
> >
> > On Aug 15, 10:43 pm, Jason Resch wrote:
> >> I am more worried for the biologically handicapped in the future.
> >> Computers
> >> will get faster, brains won't. By 2029, it is predicted $1,000 worth of
> >> com
On Aug 16, 3:22 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Craig Weinberg
> wrote:
> > You can simulate it as far as being able to model the aspects of it's
> > behavior that you can observe, but you can't necessarily predict that
> > behavior over time, any more than you
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 2:58 AM, Pilar Morales
> wrote:
> > Does Comp address "ego" little or not, or super human powers, or theory
> > brewing? How about miracles, and temporarily apparent,
> > and non-repeatable, break down of laws o
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> On Aug 16, 3:22 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Craig Weinberg
> wrote:
> > > You can simulate it as far as being able to model the aspects of it's
> > > behavior that you can observe, but you can't nec
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> On Aug 16, 1:49 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>> The I/O interface could involve neurotransmitters which are
>> synthesised and released when the artificial neuron sees the
>> appropriate voltage, and an enzyme which mops up the release
On Aug 16, 8:03 am, benjayk wrote:
> Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > On Aug 15, 10:43 pm, Jason Resch wrote:
> >> I am more worried for the biologically handicapped in the future.
> >> Computers
> >> will get faster, brains won't. By 2029, it is predicted $1,000 worth of
> >> computer will buy a hu
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>> If the brain does something not predictable by modelling its
>> biochemistry that means it works by magic.
>
> Then you are saying that whether you accept what I'm what I'm writing
> here or not is purely predictable through biochemistry
On 15 Aug 2011, at 19:53, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 15.08.2011 19:18 Bruno Marchal said the following:
Hi Evgenii,
On 14 Aug 2011, at 21:25, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Bruno,
Let me put it this way. I guess that a Lobian machine could be
implemented, or it has been already implemented. So let us
On 16 Aug 2011, at 08:08, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
On 8/15/2011 7:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
just like you can simulate flight if you simulate the environment
you are flying in.
But do we need to simulate the entire atmosphere in order to
simulate flight, or just the atmosphere in the
On Aug 16, 8:10 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:03 PM, benjayk
>
> wrote:
> > Also, we have no reliable way of measuring the computational power of the
> > brain, not to speak of the possibly existing subtle energies that go beyond
> > the brain, that may be essential
Jason Resch-2 wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 7:03 AM, benjayk
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Craig Weinberg wrote:
>> >
>> > On Aug 15, 10:43 pm, Jason Resch wrote:
>> >> I am more worried for the biologically handicapped in the future.
>> >> Computers
>> >> will get faster, brains won't. By 2029,
Stathis Papaioannou-2 wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:03 PM, benjayk
> wrote:
>
>> Also, we have no reliable way of measuring the computational power of the
>> brain, not to speak of the possibly existing subtle energies that go
>> beyond
>> the brain, that may be essential to our functi
On 15 Aug 2011, at 20:50, benjayk wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
All I can say to the debate whether your TOE is dependent on
consciousness
is that it may not assume consciousness, but this doesn't mean
it's
independent of it, or prior to it.
I would say of cour
Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 15 Aug 2011, at 20:50, benjayk wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>
Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>> All I can say to the debate whether your TOE is dependent on
>> consciousness
>> is that it may not assume consciousness, but this do
Stathis,
do you have a reasonable opinion about whatever you (and physicists?) call:
*"energy"*?
(Not how to measure it, not what it does, not the result of 'it', or
quantitative relations, or kinds you differentiate, but 'is it a thing'?
where it comes from and how? i.e. an i*dentification of th
On Aug 16, 9:59 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Craig Weinberg
> wrote:
> > On Aug 16, 1:49 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
> >> The I/O interface could involve neurotransmitters which are
> >> synthesised and released when the artificial neuron sees the
> >>
On Aug 16, 10:08 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> Our body precisely follows the deterministic biochemical reactions
> that comprise it. The mind is generated as a result of these
> biochemical reactions; a reaction occurs in your brain which causes
> you to have a thought to move your arm and mo
On 8/15/2011 11:08 PM, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote:
On 8/15/2011 7:08 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
just like you can simulate flight if you simulate the environment
you are flying in.
But do we need to simulate the entire atmosphere in order to simulate
flight, or just the atmosphere in the
On 8/16/2011 7:08 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
Our body precisely follows the deterministic biochemical reactions
that comprise it. The mind is generated as a result of these
biochemical reactions; a reaction occurs in your brain which causes
you to have a thought to move your arm and move your
On 8/16/2011 7:50 AM, benjayk wrote:
And the problem with the reductionist view is?
>
It seeks to dissect reality into pieces,
And also to explain how the pieces interact in reality.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List"
On 8/16/2011 10:16 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
It's not only possible, it absolutely is otherwise. I move my arm. I
determine the biochemical reactions that move it. Me. For my personal
reasons which are knowable to me in my own natural language and are
utterly unknowable by biochemical analysis. I
On 16 Aug 2011, at 05:55, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 15, 3:46 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 14 Aug 2011, at 23:42, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Why not? I'm just saying that if I've never been outside of
Nebraska,
I will have an exponentially better chance of being able to
correctly
imagine Ka
On 15.08.2011 23:42 Jason Resch said the following:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi
wrote:
On 15.08.2011 07:56 Jason Resch said the following:
...
Can we accurately simulate physical laws or can't we? Before you
answer, take a few minutes to watch this amazing video, which
On 16.08.2011 02:28 Stathis Papaioannou said the following:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi
wrote:
On 15.08.2011 19:18 Bruno Marchal said the following:
Hi Evgenii,
On 14 Aug 2011, at 21:25, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Bruno,
Let me put it this way. I guess that a Lobian machine
On 16.08.2011 16:08 Stathis Papaioannou said the following:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:23 PM, Craig
Weinberg wrote:
If the brain does something not predictable by modelling its
biochemistry that means it works by magic.
Then you are saying that whether you accept what I'm what I'm
writing he
On 16.08.2011 16:18 Bruno Marchal said the following:
On 15 Aug 2011, at 19:53, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
On 15.08.2011 19:18 Bruno Marchal said the following:
Hi Evgenii,
On 14 Aug 2011, at 21:25, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Bruno,
Let me put it this way. I guess that a Lobian machine could be
imp
On 16 Aug 2011, at 02:23, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Bruno Marchal
wrote:
Suppose a teacher is in front of his classroom answering questions
of the
student.
Then at time t, his brain stops completely to function, but a cosmic
explosion, happening ten year
meekerdb wrote:
>
> On 8/16/2011 7:50 AM, benjayk wrote:
>>> And the problem with the reductionist view is?
>>> >
>>>
>> It seeks to dissect reality into pieces,
>
> And also to explain how the pieces interact in reality.
>
Right, otherwise there is little use in dissecting. But the ve
On 8/16/2011 11:03 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
Yes, this is why in my first post, I said consider God's Turing
machine (free from our limitations). Then it is obvious that with
the appropriate tape, a physical system can be approximated to any
desired level of accuracy so long as it is predictable
On 8/16/2011 11:31 AM, benjayk wrote:
meekerdb wrote:
On 8/16/2011 7:50 AM, benjayk wrote:
And the problem with the reductionist view is?
It seeks to dissect reality into pieces,
And also to explain how the pieces interact in reality.
On Aug 16, 1:44 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/16/2011 10:16 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> > It's not only possible, it absolutely is otherwise. I move my arm. I
> > determine the biochemical reactions that move it. Me. For my personal
> > reasons which are knowable to me in my own natural language an
On 8/16/2011 9:27 AM, John Mikes wrote:
Stathis,
do you have a reasonable opinion about whatever you (and physicists?)
call: */_"energy"_/*?
(Not how to measure it, not what it does, not the result of 'it', or
quantitative relations, or kinds you differentiate, but 'is it a
thing'? where it
On 8/16/2011 9:35 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 16, 9:59 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 16, 1:49 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
The I/O interface could involve neurotransmitters which are
synthesised and released when th
On 8/16/2011 12:37 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 16, 1:44 pm, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/16/2011 10:16 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
It's not only possible, it absolutely is otherwise. I move my arm. I
determine the biochemical reactions that move it. Me. For my personal
reasons which are
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
> On 15.08.2011 23:42 Jason Resch said the following:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Evgenii Rudnyi
>> wrote:
>>
>> On 15.08.2011 07:56 Jason Resch said the following:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> Can we accurately simulate physical laws o
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 9:32 AM, benjayk wrote:
>
>
> Jason Resch-2 wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 7:03 AM, benjayk
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Craig Weinberg wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Aug 15, 10:43 pm, Jason Resch wrote:
> >> >> I am more worried for the biologically handicapped in the f
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:35 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>> A computer needs I/O devices such as keyboards and screens if it is to
>> interact with its environment.
>
> No, it doesn't. We need keyboards and screens if We are to interact
> with a computer. The computer already does interact with it'
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 4:04 AM, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:
>> But the scientists could be studying zombies. There is no way of
>> knowing. What we can know is that IF the original brain is conscious
>> and is modified with a functional analogue THEN the modified brain
>> will also be conscious.
>
> T
On Aug 16, 7:35 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/16/2011 12:37 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 16, 1:44 pm, meekerdb wrote:
>
> >> On 8/16/2011 10:16 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
> >>> It's not only possible, it absolutely is otherwise. I move my arm. I
> >>> determine the biochem
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> On Aug 16, 10:08 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>> Our body precisely follows the deterministic biochemical reactions
>> that comprise it. The mind is generated as a result of these
>> biochemical reactions; a reaction occurs in your brai
On 8/16/2011 6:57 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 16, 7:35 pm, meekerdb wrote:
On 8/16/2011 12:37 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Aug 16, 1:44 pm, meekerdbwrote:
On 8/16/2011 10:16 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
It's not only possible, it absolut
On Aug 16, 1:49 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote:
> On 16 Aug 2011, at 05:55, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> > Can you give me an example that supports this? We're embedded in a
> > reality whether we like it or not. I'm saying that the more similar
> > the target reality is to our reality, the better chance we
On Aug 16, 7:28 pm, meekerdb wrote:
> On 8/16/2011 9:35 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> >> A computer needs I/O devices such as keyboards and screens if it is to
> >> interact with its environment.
>
> > No, it doesn't. We need keyboards and screens if We are to interact
> > with a computer. The comp
On Aug 16, 9:38 pm, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 2:35 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
> >> A computer needs I/O devices such as keyboards and screens if it is to
> >> interact with its environment.
>
> > No, it doesn't. We need keyboards and screens if We are to interact
> > wit
On 8/16/2011 10:51 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
Molecules in a live brain behave differently
than those in a dead brain. What is this force? Cumulative
entanglement. Significance. Negentropy. Sense.
It already has had a name for a long time: elan vital.
Brent
--
You received this message b
51 matches
Mail list logo