Thanks Lonnie, great reading.

On Jul 26, 2011 6:19 PM, "Lonnie Clay" <claylon...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Yes einseele you make a good point. The label or address if you prefer is
> not the thing. Others here have made similar observations in the context
of
> philosophical viewpoints regarding what awareness perceives as opposed to
> what exists. I feel sufficiently inspired this morning to add a penny of
my
> thoughts to what I suspect is going to be a long thread.
>
> Whence come original thoughts, new ideas, intuitive leaps? Do they spring
> forth from nothingness, being spontaneously created by a critical mass of
> associations? I think that it was Thomas Edison who said "Genius is 1%
> inspiration and 99% perspiration." In other words, inventing something is
> easier said than done. Some say that inspiration comes from GOD. But that
> just shifts the burden to higher ground, because where then does GOD get
the
> raw material for inspiration?
>
> Perhaps someone is a master chef, taking ingredients plucked from the
garden
> or bought at a store and preparing them into a tasty concoction which
gives
> us food for thought. But once again, that begs the question. Whence come
the
> seeds which grow into the ingredients? Where does the chef live, what does

> that KITCHEN look like, what are the kitchen implements, who manufactured
> them?
>
> Let's backtrack a bit trying to get at the roots of thinking. "Information

> alters consciousness." At conception we humans are single cell lifeforms
> created by the cooperation of an egg with an invading sperm cell. Their
DNA
> strands split apart then fuse together to form a new instructional
sequence
> for a hardware specification which has been proven as robust in its fault
> tolerance, adaptive in its processing, heterogenous in its expansion, and
> self limiting in its overall design. So eventually you obtain from that
cell
> a human body which contains nervous, circulatory, respiratory, skeletal,
> digestive, immune, muscular, and other systems each of which has subsystem

> structures composed of cells. At the core of every cell is a DNA strand
> which is a variant of the combined DNA at conception. A cell is itself a
> complex and fascinating package in the microscopic domain. I am a software

> engineer rather than a biologist, so I will butt out of that topic before
I
> make a silly blunder.
>
> They say that self awareness begins in the womb with sensations of
pressure,
> specifically the pulsing of the mother's heartbeat and sensations of
warmth.
> Later on once the other glands have developed come sound etc. But has the
> fetus learned anything before leaving the womb? In most cases, there is a
> definite yes, because one of the things which uncomfortable fetuses do is
> kick out to let mother know that baby is uncomfortable. Baby will kick
more
> often if mother makes baby comfortable in response to kicking. So there
you
> have it, without instruction in higher institutions of learning even
FETUSES
> understand feedback control theory to a certain extent! LOL LOL LOL!
>
> Encoded in that DNA strand are the instructions for self assembling a
> complete baby, provided that nutrients are available to the cells of the
> fetus in the womb. Implicit in the design of nerve cells is the ability to

> communicate, store information, and *get this* correlate data in
interaction
> with other cells through threshold triggering of nerve impulses. A nerve
> cell is a networked computer wrapped in foil. It has an identity depending

> upon its location in the body, a state vector of biological molecules and
> electrical energy, and a transitional rule subsystem which based upon DNA
> interprets the cell's state in relation to stimuli to determine what the
> next state will be.
>
> This post is getting to be a bit long, so the discussion will be continued

> in the next post, upcoming.
>
> Lonnie Courtney Clay
>
> On Tuesday, July 26, 2011 5:13:14 AM UTC-7, einseele wrote:
>>
>> Information technology is a good tool to point an address concept that
>> once in a while I use to bother all of you :-)
>> If we for instance take the string: 'Hello world' and want to express
>> it through a binary code, (this is not trying to discuss IT but
>> linguistics), we get then the following number:
>>
>>
0100100001100101011011000110110001101111001000000111011101101111011100100110110001100100

>>
>>
>> If you want it into octal is:
>>
>> 110145154154157040167157162154144
>>
>> And there you go
>>
>> If you want to play with this, like trying your name or other options
>> there are a bunch of sites which you can visit, like:
>>
>> http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/1PldXx/nickciske.com/tools/binary.php
>>
>> The question is, which is the difference under the information point
>> of view between
>>
>> Hello world
>>
0100100001100101011011000110110001101111001000000111011101101111011100100110110001100100

>>
>> or
>> 110145154154157040167157162154144
>>
>> The answer is none
>>
>> All three (and many other) point to the same address, using a
>> different mean
>>
>> All three are just the pointers, and the address is just one.
>>
>> Finally, where is that information (I equal here information =
>> address)
>>
>> Information can only be pointed, and will be always absent. Knowledge
>> and information shares this part
>>
>> IMHO this is a spatial concept were pointers has of course mass,
>> contrary to information which can only live in the empty part of the
>> equation.
>>
>> This is not new of course, it is just the same old battle in
>> epistemology but under a linguistic point of view
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Epistemology" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/2uGB35c0yMUJ.
> To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.

Reply via email to