On 2/24/2026 4:26 AM, Alastair wrote:
This story illustrates the problem with the ill-defined boundary of
applicability of 'vague' terms like 'thought' (and 'information
processing' as applied to brains) - neural restructuring perhaps
including weaker-synapse pruning during sleep is likely to have played
a key role in enabling Poincare's brain to reframe the problem, and
maybe that was all that was needed to make the final step
macro-consciously at the bus stop; I am not sure I would call this
sleep episode 'thought' (the same applies to any other non-dream
sleeping brain activity)
Who said anything about sleep or dreaming. Poincare' didn't say he had
dreamed about the problem. He said he hadn't thought about it. The very
fact that you don't know this famous story, which every mathematician
not only knows but has experienced the same, makes me think you have
never done any mathematics.
, but 'information processing' at the micro-level (say massively
parallel neurotransmitter activity) might just be defensible as a
rough description of the neural restructuring and other relevant
micro-events. I don't know how a substantially higher level
information processing model will help even if it were possible - back
to precisifying the terms used again.
Perhaps the basic question hinges on whether appropriately organised
brain activity that constitutes 'thought' was necessary to reframe or
prepare the problem for solving, at some stage during the prior weeks.
"Hinges on"? How could it be otherwise. His brain solved a problem
subconsciously that he had consciously failed to solve. Of course it
re-framed or manipulated the problem in some way. But it did NOT
"prepare the problem for solving". The solution, complete, came to him
in that instant.
Brent
Alastair
On Monday, February 23, 2026 at 10:54:46 PM UTC Brent Meeker wrote:
That's why I referred to /information processing/ as a broader
term subsuming conscious thought. I assume you are familiar with
Poincare's account of how a the solution to a mathematical problem
suddenly came to him as he was about to step onto a bus, even
though he hadn't thought about it (consciously) for weeks.
Brent
On 2/23/2026 12:08 AM, Alastair wrote:
Just to clarify, my 'extended' version of physicalism isn't
intended to replace the standard version, which accepts the
existence of elementary particles, the Big Bang etc (QM is a more
complicated and partly unsettled issue). It just focusses on
certain forms of brain activity corresponding to thoughts.
If meaning is given by common use, then 'thought' - not a
technical term - is confined to awake humans (and perhaps their
dreams, and conceivably also a few other creatures) . . . for
now. Meanings can change over time.
Alastair
On Saturday, February 21, 2026 at 10:46:21 PM UTC Brent Meeker wrote:
A lot of biological information isn't even instantiated in
neuronal activity, it's in one's "gut" metaphorically speaking.
I seems to me that a common mistake in idealism is to take
consciousness as the whole of thought. Yet we know that
(c.f. Poincare') most thought is unconscious information
processing.
Brent
On 2/21/2026 2:16 AM, Alastair wrote:
Most of this is fascinating, insightful and deep - from what
I can understand of Parts I to IV. (I am wondering: did you
have more than cosmetic help from AI?)
I would also be interested to know your definition of
'information' (as bitstrings or equivalent? or as their
chosen interpretation? or something else?). Semantic
imprecision can be a barrier to adequate understanding and
agreement in these (and many other) kinds of situation, so
good definitions are important.
My own preferred version of physicalism has thought events
as mass neural events and so can include ideas, concepts
etc, including thoughts in and about a language, any of
which could in theory be correct or incorrect (the physical
laws underpinning those events operate correctly
regardless). It would not appear to fall foul of any of the
criticisms in part I of the article if these are framed
outside the context of information as being ontologically
primary; ie from this point of view physicalism is
self-consistent, in this version of it at least, and so
contradicts the assertion that ontologically primary
information is the only self-consistent position available.
We may well have already detected electrical signals
corresponding to thoughts and could even one day decode
them, if we can for example individualise them to key
neurons or assemblies and then bulk-analyse them across
macro-time; but I don't understand sufficiently to say
whether or not this this would refute the idea that
information is ontologically primary - this brings us back
to the definition of information used, and perhaps also to
that of 'computational structures'.
Alastair
On Sunday, February 15, 2026 at 8:52:30 AM UTC Quentin
Anciaux wrote:
Hello everyone,
I’m sharing the continuation of The Sapiens Attractor.
If you’re interested in the deeper structure behind the
idea, you can read it here:
https://allcolor.medium.com/the-sapiens-attractor-maximal-informational-realism-and-the-god-loop-26393e34fa46
Hope you’ll enjoy it.
Best,
Quentin
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in
rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails
from it, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4bffdfb3-cd5f-4211-9b82-d001637573c3n%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4bffdfb3-cd5f-4211-9b82-d001637573c3n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/5fbe7e73-2312-4bfe-9ac8-921818e0aaa6n%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/5fbe7e73-2312-4bfe-9ac8-921818e0aaa6n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/bed7fc9c-9efa-41c0-b175-a3826b932437n%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/bed7fc9c-9efa-41c0-b175-a3826b932437n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/723624fd-6a61-4cf0-b41b-1ccfb82f638d%40gmail.com.
