Re: What does this have to do with electronics?

From: Dirk Bruere at Neopax (dirk_at_neopax.com)
Date: 09/15/04 

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 20:00:42 +0100

Kevin Aylward wrote:

> Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:
>
>>Kevin Aylward wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Dirk Bruere at Neopax wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Kevin Aylward wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>There is an experiment that has been done with rats that shows
>>>>>>that when they learn, they actually do form new synapses.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Whats your point?
>>>>>
>>>>>This is trivial. Its what the brain does dah...Real, physical
>>>>>process take place to form memories. What has this got to do with
>>>>>consciousness?
>>>>
>>>>Nobody knows the answer to that one.
>>>>Consciousness *appears* to be independent of memory.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>...
>>>>>Consciousness certainly exists, beyond reasonable doubt. However,
>>>>>it doesn't do anything physically. Its a VDU.
>>>>
>>>>There are some who deny that consciousness exists at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>Give them a good kick in the balls, then ask them for their opinion
>>>again, assuming their nuts are not stuffed in their mouth.
>>>
>>>These type of dudes are mislead. They confuse proof of consciousness,
>>>which is impossible, with existence. Goedal shoes shat true
>>>statements can exist without being derivable from existing axioms.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>IMO consciousness is also tied up with the illusion that time flows,
>>>>when all our best theories say it doesn't.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>...
>>>>>Show me the bloody *evidence* that some magic occurred. Show me a
>>>>>physical action that absolutly *requires* magic for it to work.
>>>>
>>>>And it would be labelled 'unknown phenomenon' - magick would not get
>>>>a look in.
>>>
>>>
>>>And just what unknown phenomenon do you have in mind?
>>
>>Well, the obvious one is that related by PEAR.
>
>
> Oh... I thought I gave an account in this thread on why those type of
> accounts are dubious.
>
> I'll repeat it here:
>
>
>>PEAR http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/
>
>
> I have to say that I am very sceptical on this. In fact I admit I am
> biased upfront.
>
> For starters, saying that "consciousness" effects the results is not
> provable and or misleading. This assumes that "consciousness" is
> something that can do something, but is non physical itself. Evidence
> says that the physical process of the brain undertakes all actions, and
> simply reports this to the VDU named "consciousness". The real physical
> processes of the brain say, I am taking action, based on prior inputs to
> do something, and simply reports to the VDU that its equivelent to the
> VDU itself insigating action. Its an illusion.
>
> The issue here is not about consciousness at all, despite such vacuous
> claims. It is, can the *electro-chemical* process of the brain,
> irrespective of whether or not there is consciousness, produce an effect
> on remote equipment?
>
> A fundamentally question in all of these examinations is this. Just how
> random is random? As I have explained before, the Brain is a Darwinian
> Machine. It relies on the generate, select and replicate algorithm. It
> needs a random trait generator. How is this trait generator constructed,
> in *detail*? The same process that occurs to make "random" natural
> external process are the same ones that exist in the brain, as dah...
> that's what the brain is made from, natural processes. I suspect that
> classical randomness is dominant (i.e. no QM), and that the brain can
> naturally correlate external randomness to its own internal random trait
> generator. A bit like spread spectrum. The TX an RX have the *same*
> pseudo random generater to enable a decode.

And I commented that if the brain could correlate with QM generated randomness
then that would be a world changing paradigm shift. 

-- 
Dirk
The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How do you proof your own work?
    ... but I am so afraid of getting one of those red errors that I ... account things like make sure there's a billing number, ... > The reason I ask is that an MT told me that her brain tends to fix ... > especially difficult for those who proof as they transcribe. ...
    (sci.med.transcription)
  • Re: how to reply to this fool?
    ... But, alas, this doesn't take into account the fact ... that the chimp DNA is 7.5% longer. ... looked at which genes in humans and chimps were under positive ... brain development, Zhang noted. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Administrator Lockout!?!
    ... > I set up two accounts on my computer, one administrator ... > account got locked out (on the admin user computer ... In arguing that current theories of brain function cast suspicion on ... "pop psychologists" and their many recycling self-improvement schemes. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
  • Re: What does this have to do with electronics?
    ... I thought I gave an account in this thread on why those type of ... >> says that the physical process of the brain undertakes all actions, ... It needs a random trait generator. ... Kevin Aylward ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: What does this have to do with electronics?
    ... Some rational explanations ... Consider my random trait generator ... does the brain actually, in detail, implement its trait variations so ... generator produces a new architectural idea. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)