At some point, wouldn't we enter David Deutsch (or Neal Stephenson) territory?
... where the idea is that the computation in our nervous system is mappable to
the computation going on around us. If consciousness isn't compressible
because it's an artifact of that mapping, then faster neurons wouldn't make us
more rational in any sense. But it may give us super powers ... like running
really fast ... or deriving nutrition from eating grass or maybe seeing a wider
spectrum of color, etc. But it wouldn't necessarily change our intent or
purposeful, self-references.
I suppose we could also invoke Buzsáki or the like, as well... that the larger
("beat") frequencies of collections of neurons may not change even if the
individual neurons' rate does change.
And then there's the extra-neural computation, as well, including glial cells
and glucose across the BBB. The success of your Josephson Junction ANN would
become a question of the power generation and distribution, regardless of the
computational question of whether the high-dimensional, multi-rate (chemical)
space can be reduced to electrical signals. (I wouldn't have gone here if I
weren't currently in the throes of a massive headache. [sigh] Will robots get
headaches?)
On 05/08/2017 12:31 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Seems to me there's a question of dynamic range, temporally speaking. In
> classical computers, that is dealt with by separating exponents and mantissas
> as in floating point arithmetic. If everything compresses by 7 order of
> magnitude, then perhaps it would just be a matter of adding 7 more digits
> (e.g. bits) of precision to the exponent. Then it would be faster and cover
> the relevant part of the dynamic range of the environment.
--
☣ glen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
