Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-20 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 20, 1:51 am, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: Hey Craig, Sorry for not answering sooner. I am very busy at the moment and realistically I cannot participate to the degree I'd like to. So this may be my last reply... I will try to keep it short. No problem, I understand.

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-20 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 20, 1:51 am, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: Hey Craig, Sorry for not answering sooner. I am very busy at the moment and realistically I cannot participate to the degree I'd like to. So this may be my last reply... I will try to keep it short. No problem, I understand.

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-19 Thread Terren Suydam
Hey Craig, Sorry for not answering sooner. I am very busy at the moment and realistically I cannot participate to the degree I'd like to. So this may be my last reply... I will try to keep it short. On Oct 16, 2:43 pm, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Emergent properties of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-17 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: We are on the exact same page. This is why I keep barking in Stathis direction - his view is that there are no emergent properties because everything that exists must be reducible to a molecular level or else it's

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-17 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/16 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 16 Oct 2011, at 04:22, Terren Suydam wrote (answering Craig): Exactly. I think that it can be better understood as a phenomenon which is not only an emergent property

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-17 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 16, 10:59 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/16/2011 5:53 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 16, 8:38 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net  wrote: On 10/16/2011 11:43 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Emergent properties of electromagnetism are also electromagnetic, are they not?

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-17 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 17, 6:50 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: Well I'm going to stop guessing about what Stathis thinks and let him chime in if he wants to. There is no downward causation from high level

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-17 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 17, 7:02 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: Suppose I decide to arrange three stones in a triangle. Do the stones create the triangle (upward causation), or does the triangle constrain the stones (downward causation)? The triangle does not exist. If anything, it

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-17 Thread meekerdb
On 10/17/2011 4:27 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 16, 10:59 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/16/2011 5:53 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 16, 8:38 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.netwrote: On 10/16/2011 11:43 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Emergent properties of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-17 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 17, 12:19 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: There is a mapping between the image and thing imaged (which could be noise). Only if you can see and make sense out of what you are looking at. That is the only mapping going on. If there existed nothing in the universe who could

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-17 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 17 Oct 2011, at 12:50, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: We are on the exact same page. This is why I keep barking in Stathis direction - his view is that there are no emergent properties because everything that

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-16 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 16 Oct 2011, at 04:22, Terren Suydam wrote (answering Craig): Exactly. I think that it can be better understood as a phenomenon which is not only an emergent property of ensembles of neurons, but granular properties in the moment of an individual entity's behavior over time. It has to go

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-16 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/16 Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be On 16 Oct 2011, at 04:22, Terren Suydam wrote (answering Craig): Exactly. I think that it can be better understood as a phenomenon which is not only an emergent property of ensembles of neurons, but granular properties in the moment of an

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-16 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 15, 10:22 pm, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: I think we are talking past each other. There is the behavior of neurons at the single-neuron level. That is fairly well understood. Nothing about

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-16 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 16, 1:37 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: That's what I wanted to explain to craig... when you run a program on a computer... the low level of the computer (the transistors of the cpu) are constraint by the program, it is the high level (the program) that drives the

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-16 Thread meekerdb
On 10/16/2011 11:43 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Emergent properties of electromagnetism are also electromagnetic, are they not? No. Forming images is an emergent property of electromagnetic waves which in turn are an emergent phenomena of Maxwell's electromagnetism. Electromagnetism is

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-16 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 16, 8:38 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/16/2011 11:43 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Emergent properties of electromagnetism are also electromagnetic, are they not? No.  Forming images is an emergent property of electromagnetic waves which in turn are an emergent

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-16 Thread meekerdb
On 10/16/2011 5:53 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 16, 8:38 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/16/2011 11:43 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: Emergent properties of electromagnetism are also electromagnetic, are they not? No. Forming images is an emergent property of electromagnetic

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-15 Thread meekerdb
On 10/14/2011 8:48 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 14, 10:46 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/14/2011 7:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 14, 9:00 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.netwrote: On 10/14/2011 5:16 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: You already noted that diurnal cycles

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-15 Thread John Mikes
Dear Craig, where did you take it from that *WILL* does exist indeed? We experience a *decision* - sometimes with the 'urge(?)' to fulfill it, based on comparing partially conscious circumstances (anticipatory included) and getting into some 'evaluation'(?) of what seems to be advantageous and

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-15 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 14, 11:48 pm, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: I have said many times already, if you think that I am talking about something thay contradicts physics then you don't understand what I'm talking

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-15 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 15, 3:02 am, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/14/2011 8:48 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 14, 10:46 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net  wrote: On 10/14/2011 7:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 14, 9:00 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net    wrote: On 10/14/2011

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-15 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 15, 10:59 am, John Mikes jami...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Craig, where did you take it from that *WILL* does exist indeed? Technically I think that will could be said to 'insist' rather than exist, and as such a subjective experiential phenomenon, it is nothing like a discrete object or

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-15 Thread Terren Suydam
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: I think we are talking past each other. There is the behavior of neurons at the single-neuron level. That is fairly well understood. Nothing about the spontaneous activity you referenced really challenges anything

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 13, 11:21 pm, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: Hey Craig, On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: You have misunderstood what spontaneous neural activity means. There is no misunderstanding. It's not even controversial, you're just

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread Terren Suydam
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, Stathis's interpretation is the one shared by most of the neuroscientific community. By and large most scientists do not take seriously the idea that the behavior of neurons and other cells is explainable in

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread meekerdb
On 10/14/2011 12:40 PM, Terren Suydam wrote: I think spontaneous in the context of the video and papers you linked means, unexplainable activity in terms of what you would expect neural circuits to be doing when the organism doesn't appear to be doing anything. But it certainly does not mean

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 14, 3:40 pm, Terren Suydam terren.suy...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Actually, Stathis's interpretation is the one shared by most of the neuroscientific community. By and large most scientists do not take seriously

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 14, 3:58 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/14/2011 12:40 PM, Terren Suydam wrote: I think spontaneous in the context of the video and papers you linked means, unexplainable activity in terms of what you would expect neural circuits to be doing when the organism doesn't

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread meekerdb
On 10/14/2011 5:16 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: We all have many clocks that we can turn to to help us arrange our activities. Sometimes what we see when we look at the clock makes us do something that we would rather have waited longer to do. In that sense, a clock on the wall is 'providing some

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 14, 9:00 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/14/2011 5:16 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: You already noted that diurnal cycles get synced by light/dark cycles.  The point is that you don't will these cycles, yet you rely on them: to wake up on time, to remember appointments,

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread meekerdb
On 10/14/2011 7:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 14, 9:00 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/14/2011 5:16 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: You already noted that diurnal cycles get synced by light/dark cycles. The point is that you don't will these cycles, yet you rely on them: to

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 14, 10:46 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/14/2011 7:13 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 14, 9:00 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net  wrote: On 10/14/2011 5:16 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: You already noted that diurnal cycles get synced by light/dark cycles.   The point

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-14 Thread Terren Suydam
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: I have said many times already, if you think that I am talking about something thay contradicts physics then you don't understand what I'm talking about. Some people do, but you don't. Thats ok, not everyone is

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-13 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 13, 12:47 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The model of a neuron does not include the inputs. A larger model of a network of neurons includes inputs and outputs from all the neurons in the

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-13 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The external inputs themselves are not modelled, they are provided by the environment. What is an 'external input' made of? Are you saying that there are physical pieces of the outside world stuck inside of your

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-13 Thread Terren Suydam
Hey Craig, On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: You have misunderstood what spontaneous neural activity means. There is no misunderstanding. It's not even controversial, you're just plain denying the uncontested facts. Don't you think that if there

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-12 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The model of a neuron does not include the inputs. A larger model of a network of neurons includes inputs and outputs from all the neurons in the network but does not include external inputs. Without any external

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-11 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/11 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 10, 10:32 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/10 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com No. Your claim is that all inputs must also be neurological. He *never* said that. What he said is this : If you know the

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-11 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 11, 2:52 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/11 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 10, 10:32 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/10 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com No. Your claim is that all inputs must also be

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-11 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If you simulate a neuron, then you predict what the neuron will do given certain inputs. The model of the neuron does not include the inputs. No. Your claim is that all inputs must also be neurological. You say

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-11 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 11, 8:45 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If you simulate a neuron, then you predict what the neuron will do given certain inputs. The model of the neuron does not include the inputs. No.

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-10 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 3:29 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 9, 12:09 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 8, 12:12 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat,

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-10 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 10, 7:57 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: A simple model of a car's steering would involve knowing the gear ratio between the steering wheel and the front wheels. You could then predict which way the car will turn given the driver's input. The same is true of a

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-10 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/10 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 10, 7:57 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: A simple model of a car's steering would involve knowing the gear ratio between the steering wheel and the front wheels. You could then predict which way the car will turn

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-10 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 10, 10:32 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/10 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com No. Your claim is that all inputs must also be neurological. He *never* said that. What he said is this : If you know the input + the working of a neuron, you can predict the

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-10 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Sep 29, 11:14 pm, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Craig, do the neurons violate the conservation of energy and   momentum?  And if not, then how can they have any unexpected effects? Here's a post I did today that hopefully helps clarify how I think it works:

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-09 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 9, 12:09 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 8, 12:12 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-09 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 8, 7:21 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/8 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 8, 12:12 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Of course all the parts of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-08 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 8, 12:12 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Of course all the parts of the car determine how it will move! You can predict exactly what the car will do if you know how it works and you have the

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-08 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/8 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 8, 12:12 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Of course all the parts of the car determine how it will move! You can predict exactly what the

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-08 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 8:06 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 8, 12:12 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Of course all the parts of the car determine how it will move! You can

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 6, 10:24 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The mind may not be understandable in terms of biochemical events but the observable behaviour of the brain can be. Yes, the 3-p physical behaviors

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/7 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 6, 10:24 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The mind may not be understandable in terms of biochemical events but the observable behaviour of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 7, 10:28 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/7 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 6, 10:24 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The mind may not be

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Quentin Anciaux
If you have the prediction and not the model... then you don't have the same external input. The internal stimuli are modeled by the model, that's the all point of the model. If it's not the case, then simply the model is wrong. 2011/10/7 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 7, 10:28

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On 08/10/2011, at 12:02 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: it is something-it-is-like to be a leaf, and the qualia may differ depending on whether the leaf goes left or right. As with a brain, the leaf does not break any physical laws and its behaviour can be completely

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 7, 12:38 pm, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: If you have the prediction and not the model... then you don't have the same external input. The internal stimuli are modeled by the model, that's the all point of the model. Subjective internal, not medical internal. If it's

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If a motor neuron involved in voluntary activity fires where you would not predict it would fire given its internal state and the inputs then it is *by definition* acting contrary to physical law. Every firing of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 7, 7:10 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If a motor neuron involved in voluntary activity fires where you would not predict it would fire given its internal state and the inputs then it is

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 7, 7:10 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If a motor neuron involved in voluntary activity fires where you would

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 7, 8:23 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 7, 7:10 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If a

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-07 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: Of course all the parts of the car determine how it will move! You can predict exactly what the car will do if you know how it works and you have the inputs. What you are talking about is either tautological and

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-06 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 10:39 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If you are right then there would be a violation of physical law in the brain. You have said as much, then denied it. You have said that neurons

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-06 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 10:39 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If you are right then there would be a violation of physical law in the brain. You have said as much, then denied it. You have said that neurons

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-06 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/6 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 5, 10:39 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If you are right then there would be a violation of physical law in the brain. You have said as

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-06 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 6, 9:14 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/6 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com Likewise for a program running on a computer... The physical attributes of the cpu are modified by the program.. Sort of, but not exactly. The program exists in the minds of the

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-06 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The mind may not be understandable in terms of biochemical events but the observable behaviour of the brain can be. Yes, the 3-p physical behaviors that can be observed with our contemporary instruments can be

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Quentin Anciaux
Hi, 2011/10/5 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 4, 8:46 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/4/2011 5:15 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 4, 2:59 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal completeness; the idea that the 3-p observable

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 12:23 am, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/4/2011 8:14 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 4, 8:46 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/4/2011 5:15 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 4, 2:59 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 12:27 am, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: According to Craig, the 1-p influence (which is equivalent to an immaterial soul) is ubiquitous in living things, and possibly in other things as well. But he doesn't say what effect is has.  It could be anything and hence could

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 2:54 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, 2011/10/5 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com Consciousness happens. Physics has nothing to say about what the content of any particular brain's thoughts should be. If give you a book about Marxism then you will have

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/5 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 5, 2:54 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, 2011/10/5 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com Consciousness happens. Physics has nothing to say about what the content of any particular brain's thoughts should be. If

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Oct 2011, at 02:51, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 3, 11:16 am, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: I don't think that there are any arithmetical beings. In which theory? In reality. That type of assertion is equivalent with because God say so. Reality is what we try to figure

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 10:15 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: No they are not saying that. They are saying that a model of the brain fed with the same inputs as a real brain will act as the real brain... if it was not the case, the model would be wrong so you could not label it as a model of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/5 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 5, 10:15 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: No they are not saying that. They are saying that a model of the brain fed with the same inputs as a real brain will act as the real brain... if it was not the case, the model

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 11:54 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/5 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 5, 10:15 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: No they are not saying that. They are saying that a model of the brain fed with the same inputs as a real brain

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: In fact, Craig himself denies that his theory would manifest as violation of physical law, and is therefore inconsistent. There is no inconsistency. You're just not understanding what I'm saying because you are only

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 5, 10:15 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: No they are not saying that. They are saying that a model of the brain fed with the same inputs as a real brain will act as the real brain... if it was not

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 6:40 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: In fact, Craig himself denies that his theory would manifest as violation of physical law, and is therefore inconsistent. There is no

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 5, 7:10 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 5, 10:15 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: No they are not saying that. They are saying that a model of the brain fed with the

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-05 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: If you are right then there would be a violation of physical law in the brain. You have said as much, then denied it. You have said that neurons firing in the brain can't be just due to a chain of biochemical events.

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The neurons are firing in my brain as I'm thinking, but if you could go down to the microscopic level you would see that they are firing due to the various physical factors that make neurons fire, eg. fluxes of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 4, 2:11 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: The ion channel only opens when the ligand binds. The ligand only binds if it is present in the synapse. It is only present in the synapse when the presynaptic neuron fires. And so on. It's the 'and so on' where your

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Quentin Anciaux
2011/10/4 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 4, 2:11 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: The ion channel only opens when the ligand binds. The ligand only binds if it is present in the synapse. It is only present in the synapse when the presynaptic neuron fires.

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 4, 8:54 am, Quentin Anciaux allco...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/10/4 Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com On Oct 4, 2:11 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: The ion channel only opens when the ligand binds. The ligand only binds if it is present in the synapse. It is

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 04 Oct 2011, at 02:29, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:09 AM, Bruno Marchal marc...@ulb.ac.be wrote: I agree with Craig, although the way he presents it might seems a bit uncomputationalist, (if I can say(*)). Thoughts act on matter all the time. It is a selection

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread meekerdb
On 10/3/2011 11:11 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Craig Weinbergwhatsons...@gmail.com wrote: The neurons are firing in my brain as I'm thinking, but if you could go down to the microscopic level you would see that they are firing due to the various physical

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 4, 2:59 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal completeness; the idea that the 3-p observable state at t is sufficient to predict the state at t+dt.  Craig wants add to this that there is additional information which is not 3-p observable and which

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread meekerdb
On 10/4/2011 5:15 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 4, 2:59 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal completeness; the idea that the 3-p observable state at t is sufficient to predict the state at t+dt. Craig wants add to this that there is additional information

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 5:59 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal completeness; the idea that the 3-p observable state at t is sufficient to predict the state at t+dt.  Craig wants add to this that there is additional information which is not 3-p observable and

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 4, 8:46 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/4/2011 5:15 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 4, 2:59 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal completeness; the idea that the 3-p observable state at t is sufficient to predict the state at t+dt.

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 4, 9:32 pm, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 5:59 AM, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal completeness; the idea that the 3-p observable state at t is sufficient to predict the state at t+dt.  Craig wants add to this

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread meekerdb
On 10/4/2011 8:14 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 4, 8:46 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/4/2011 5:15 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 4, 2:59 pm, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal completeness; the idea that the 3-p observable state at t is

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-04 Thread meekerdb
On 10/4/2011 6:32 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 5:59 AM, meekerdbmeeke...@verizon.net wrote: This goes by the name causal completeness; the idea that the 3-p observable state at t is sufficient to predict the state at t+dt. Craig wants add to this that there is

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-03 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 2, 7:00 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: If they are part of the same thing, then it is presumptuous to say one causes the other. One might at well say the neurons firing caused the thought of

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-03 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 03 Oct 2011, at 01:08, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 2, 7:00 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: On 10/2/2011 10:14 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Oct 2, 9:28 am, Stathis Papaioannoustath...@gmail.com wrote: So you do believe that ion channels will open without an observable cause,

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-03 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Oct 3, 8:29 am, Stathis Papaioannou stath...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 2, 7:00 pm, meekerdb meeke...@verizon.net wrote: If they are part of the same thing, then it is presumptuous to say one causes the other.

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-03 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Sep 29, 11:14 pm, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Craig, do the neurons violate the conservation of energy and   momentum?  And if not, then how can they have any unexpected effects? They don't have any unexpected effects, they just have unscheduled effects. I don't understand why

Re: Bruno List continued

2011-10-03 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 29, 11:14 pm, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote: Craig, do the neurons violate the conservation of energy and momentum?  And if not, then how can they have any unexpected effects? They don't have any

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   >