Re: Predictive physiological anticipation preceding seemingly unpredictable stimuli: a meta-analysis

On 24.10.2012 20:31 meekerdb said the following: On 10/24/2012 5:31 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: http://www.frontiersin.org/Perception_Science/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00390/abstract Comments? Woo-woo. Small effect sizes which are *statistically* significant are indicative of bias errors. I'd wa

Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: > On 10/27/2012 12:07 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >> Stephen, >> >> I agree that " All of this discussion is below the level of conscious >> self-awareness", but prefer to think of raw perception as >> distinguishing what can be from what c

Re: Re: Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 8:08 AM, John Mikes wrote: > Stathis: > > IMO you left out one difference in equating computer and human: the > programmed comp. cannot exceed its hardwre - given content while > (SOMEHOW???) a human mind receives additional information from parts > 'unknown' (see the steps

Putnam on computationalism (a-f)

Putnam on computationalism (a-f) . This starts at https://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=izqKc1SIFJQ&feature=endscreen If the next video in the lecture does not appear on the screen, you can search for it in the search box. For example, if part f does not appear, put Putnam on computationalism (f)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

Hi Richard Ruquist Yes, the strings themselves are extended, but theoretical strings (string theory itself) are not. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 10/27/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Richard Ru

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

On 26 Oct 2012, at 01:45, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, October 25, 2012 5:16:47 PM UTC-4, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Craig Weinberg : > > > On Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:58:33 PM UTC-4, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: >> >> You can identify a particular qualia with certain computa

Re: Can comp simulate an experience ? What does that require ?

On 26 Oct 2012, at 01:50, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, October 25, 2012 6:08:43 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: In order for a computer or comp to simulate an experience it must be able to generate qualia. That is the plural of qua锟�e/'kw锟�e/ Noun: A quality or property as perceived or e

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

On 26 Oct 2012, at 13:01, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Alberto G. Corona Instead of trying to understand these phenomena under the materialist function of mind (what they are) it is IMHO more useful to understand them by what they do-- create the subjective or mental correlates to the physical sourc

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

On Saturday, October 27, 2012 8:08:01 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 26 Oct 2012, at 01:45, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 25, 2012 5:16:47 PM UTC-4, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: >> >> Citeren Craig Weinberg : >> >> > >> > >> > On Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:58:33 PM U

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

On 26 Oct 2012, at 13:51, Roger Clough wrote: Hi meekerdb Quanta do exist, and can be measured, but by definition they can only be experienced as qualia, (another word for experience) which can't be measured. Quanta are within spacetime, qualia are beyond spacetime. Not with comp (in the p

Re: Even more compact dimensions Re: Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:00, Roger Clough wrote: Hi Brent, What happens -- or is it even possible -- to collapse the dimensions down to one (which I conjecture might be time), or zero (Platonia or mind). Yes it is more zero, or zero^zero (one). In my favorite working theory. Bruno Roger

Re: Re: Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Saturday, October 27, 2012 6:28:14 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 8:08 AM, John Mikes > > wrote: > > Stathis: > > > > IMO you left out one difference in equating computer and human: the > > programmed comp. cannot exceed its hardwre - given content while > > (SOMEH

Re: Solipsism = 1p

On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:24, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Friday, October 26, 2012 1:01:34 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > We are atoms, molecules, cells, tissues, and organisms. Whatever we do is > what the laws of physics *actually are*. Y

Re: A mirror of the universe.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:44, Roger Clough wrote: Dear Bruno and Alberto, I agree some what with both of you. As to the idea of a "genetic algorithm can isolate anticipative programs", I think that anticipation is the analogue of inertia for computations, as Mach saw inertia. It is a rel

Re: wave function collapse

On 26 Oct 2012, at 15:52, Richard Ruquist wrote: Well Bruno, If the "measure problem" (which I take to be the assignment of probabilities) is intrinsic to Everett's MWI, does that not amount to negating it? Why? I think that it is beautifully solved by Gleason theorem, for the Hilbert spac

Re: Topological order: from long-range entangled quantum matter to an unification of light and electrons

On 26 Oct 2012, at 15:58, Richard Ruquist wrote: For Hans, Topological order: from long-range entangled quantum matter to an unification of light and electrons Xiao-Gang Wen (Submitted on 4 Oct 2012) In primary school, we were told that there are four states of matter: solid, liquid, gas, and

Re: A mirror of the universe.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 20:30, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/26/2012 8:44 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Dear Bruno and Alberto, I agree some what with both of you. As to the idea of a "genetic algorithm can isolate anticipative programs", I think that anticipation is the analogue of inertia for c

Re: What If A Zombie Is What You Need?

On 26 Oct 2012, at 21:14, meekerdb wrote: On 10/26/2012 5:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 25 Oct 2012, at 07:10, meekerdb wrote: On 10/24/2012 9:23 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Or what if we don't care? We don't care about slaughtering cattle, which are pretty smart as computers go. We m

Re: Code length = probability distribution

On 26 Oct 2012, at 21:30, meekerdb wrote: On 10/26/2012 6:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Oh yes, I remember that you did agree once with the 323 principle, but I forget what is your problem with the movie-graph/ step-8, then. If you find the time, I am please if you can elaborate. I think R

Re: A mirror of the universe.

On 10/27/2012 10:06 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 Oct 2012, at 20:30, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/26/2012 8:44 AM, Roger Clough wrote: Dear Bruno and Alberto, I agree some what with both of you. As to the idea of a "genetic algorithm can isolate anticipative programs", I think that a

Re: Interactions between mind and brain

On 26 Oct 2012, at 21:48, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/25/2012 10:31 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Oct 2012, at 20:29, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/24/2012 10:15 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Oct 2012, at 06:03, Stephen P. King wrote: What difference does what they refer to matter?

Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

On Friday, October 26, 2012 11:46:23 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > On 10/26/2012 11:36 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > All of it ultimately has to be grounded in ordinary conscious > > experience. Otherwise we have an infinite regress of invisible > > homunculi translating crystalline m

Re: Solipsism = 1p

John, A fixed universal machine (some hardwired one, like a brain or a laptop) can emulate a self-modifying universal machine, even one which modifies itself "completely". Bruno On 26 Oct 2012, at 23:08, John Mikes wrote: Stathis: IMO you left out one difference in equating computer an

Re: Re: Re: Solipsism = 1p

Stathis, do you think "Lucy" had the same (thinking?) hardware as you have? are you negating (human and other) development (I evade 'evolution') as e.g. the famous cases of mutation? Is all that R&D a reshuffling of what WAS already knowable? Maybe my agnosticism dictates different potentials at w

Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Saturday, October 27, 2012 9:18:33 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:24, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Friday, October 26, 2012 1:01:34 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Craig Weinberg >> wrote: >> >> > We are atoms, molecules, cel

Re: Re: Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> How can a human exceed his hardware? Everything he does must be due to >> the hardware plus input from the environment, same as the computer, >> same as everything else in the universe. > > > What input from the environment might cause an

Re: Re: Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 2:38 AM, John Mikes wrote: > Stathis, > do you think "Lucy" had the same (thinking?) hardware as you have? are you > negating (human and other) development (I evade 'evolution') as e.g. the > famous cases of mutation? Is all that R&D a reshuffling of what WAS already > kno

Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:24, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Friday, October 26, 2012 1:01:34 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Craig Weinberg >> wrote: >> >> > We are atoms, molecules, cells, tissues, and o

Re: Against Mechanism

On 27 Oct 2012, at 06:12, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 Bruno Marchal wrote: > we know that nobody can answer the question "why do I feel to be the one in Washington and not in Moscow". Because your eyes are sending signals to your brain of the White House and not of the Krem

Re: Compact dimensions and orthogonality

On 27 Oct 2012, at 07:56, Stephen P. King wrote: On 10/27/2012 12:07 AM, Richard Ruquist wrote: Stephen, I agree that " All of this discussion is below the level of conscious self-awareness", but prefer to think of raw perception as distinguishing what can be from what cannot be, as for examp

Re: Against Mechanism

On Saturday, October 27, 2012 12:04:48 AM UTC-4, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 Craig Weinberg >wrote: > > >> I'm with John Clark on that - if a machine functions intelligently it's >>> intelligent and it's probably conscious. Nothing magical about it. >>> >> >> > It's completely m

Re: Dennett and others on qualia

On 27 Oct 2012, at 14:59, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Saturday, October 27, 2012 8:08:01 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 Oct 2012, at 01:45, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, October 25, 2012 5:16:47 PM UTC-4, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Citeren Craig Weinberg : > > > On Thursday, Oct

Solipsism = 1p

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Craig Weinberg > wrote: > No. What we as humans do is determined by human experiences and human > character, which is not completely ruled externally. We participate > directly. It could only be a small set of rules if those rules include 'do > whatever you like,

Re: Against Mechanism

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 Craig Weinberg wrote: > People don't have to prove that they aren't machines. > So says you, but a computer might have a very different opinion on the subject, and I don't think you even have a clear understanding what a machine is. >> it explains why Evolution bothered t

Re: Re: Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Saturday, October 27, 2012 11:47:14 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > > >> How can a human exceed his hardware? Everything he does must be due to > >> the hardware plus input from the environment, same as the computer, > >> same

Re: Against Mechanism

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> >> your eyes are sending signals to your brain of the White House and not >> of the Kremlin, and there is nothing more profound about it. >> >> > But the eyes of the copy get also the signal

Re: Against Mechanism

On Saturday, October 27, 2012 1:41:08 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 Craig Weinberg >wrote: > > > People don't have to prove that they aren't machines. >> > > So says you, but a computer might have a very different opinion on the > subject, and I don't think you even have

Re: Solipsism = 1p

On Saturday, October 27, 2012 1:03:52 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Craig Weinberg > wrote: > > > No. What we as humans do is determined by human experiences and human > > character, which is not completely ruled externally. We participate > > directly. It

Re: Code length = probability distribution

On 10/27/2012 7:56 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 26 Oct 2012, at 21:30, meekerdb wrote: On 10/26/2012 6:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Oh yes, I remember that you did agree once with the 323 principle, but I forget what is your problem with the movie-graph/step-8, then. If you find the time, I am

Re: Against Mechanism

On 10/27/2012 11:00 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM, John Clark > wrote: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 Bruno Marchal mailto:marc...@ulb.ac.be>> wrote: >> your eyes are sending signals to your brain of the White House and not of

mega-consciousness,created by bio-electrical circuitry?

UH OH! We may have to consider the ethics of our treatment of bacteria next. Brent The seafloor is home to a vast electrical network created by bacteria Annalee Newitz It sounds a little bit like one of the subplots in Avatar, where we discover that the moon Pandora possesses a kind of mega-

Re: Against Mechanism

On Oct 27, 2012, at 2:54 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 10/27/2012 11:00 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM, John Clark wrote: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 Bruno Marchal wrote: >> your eyes are sending signals to your brain of the White House and not of the Kremlin, and the

Re: Code length = probability distribution

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 05:13:50PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Oh yes, I remember that you did agree once with the 323 principle, > but I forget what is your problem with the movie-graph/step-8, then. > If you find the time, I am please if you can elaborate. I think > Russell too is not yet en

Re: Against Mechanism

On 10/27/2012 1:58 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Oct 27, 2012, at 2:54 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 10/27/2012 11:00 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:27 PM, John Clark > wrote: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 Bruno Marchal m