Sum of all natural numbers = -1/12?

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/the-sum-of-1-2-3-4-5-until-infinity-is-so-1503066071 -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@goo

Re: The Singularity Institute Blog

On Friday, January 17, 2014 6:14:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 16 Jan 2014, at 20:12, meekerdb wrote: > > On 1/16/2014 3:42 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > The "singularity" is in the past, and is the discovery of the universal > machine. In a sense, we can make it only more stupid,

Re: The Singularity Institute Blog

On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 4:06:19 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 15 Jan 2014, at 05:33, meekerdb wrote: > > A long, rambling but often interesting discussion among guys at MIRI > about how to make an AI that is superintelligent but not dangerous > (FAI=Friendly AI). Here's an am

Re: Donald Hoffman Video on Interface Theory of Consciousness

't know what he would say, but to me, the interface is representing the presence of experience on some distant level. The raw stuff of the universe, in my view, is self-nesting sensory-motive phenomena...represented by more of the same. Thanks, Craig > Cheers, > > Dan >

Donald Hoffman Video on Interface Theory of Consciousness

Donald Hoffman Video on Interface Theory of Consciousness A very good presentation with lot of overlap on my views. He proposes similar ideas about a sensory-motive primitive and the nature of the world as experience rather than “objective”. What is n

Re: The Scale of Digital

On Sunday, January 12, 2014 5:02:07 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > On 13 January 2014 02:35, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> How large does a digital circle have to be before the circumference seems >> like a straight line? >> > That depends on who is viewing it

Re: Tegmark and consciousness

On Sunday, January 12, 2014 10:43:41 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 12 Jan 2014, at 14:18, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Sunday, January 12, 2014 5:41:15 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 12 Jan 2014, at 05:12, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote: > >

Re: Better Than the Chinese Room

On Sunday, January 12, 2014 10:51:37 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 12 Jan 2014, at 14:40, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > Here then is simpler and more familiar example of how computation > > can differ from natural understanding which is not susceptible to

Re: The Scale of Digital

On Sunday, January 12, 2014 10:45:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 12 Jan 2014, at 14:35, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > How large does a digital circle have to be before the circumference seems > like a straight line? > > Digital information has no scale or sense o

Better Than the Chinese Room

Here then is simpler and more familiar example of how computation can differ from natural understanding which is not susceptible to any mereological Systems argument. If any of you have use passwords which are based on a pattern of keystrokes rather than the letters on the keys, you know tha

The Scale of Digital

How large does a digital circle have to be before the circumference seems like a straight line? Digital information has no scale or sense of relation. Code is code. Any rendering of that code into a visual experience of lines and curves is a question of graphic formatting and human optical in

Re: Tegmark and consciousness

On Sunday, January 12, 2014 5:41:15 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 12 Jan 2014, at 05:12, Colin Geoffrey Hales wrote: > > RE: arXiv: 1401.1219v1 [quant-ph] 6 Jan 2014 > Consciousness as a State of Matter > Max Tegmark, January 8, 2014 > > Hi Folk, > Grrr! > I confess th

Re: Tegmark and consciousness

On Sunday, January 12, 2014 12:21:48 AM UTC-5, stathisp wrote: > > > > I'm a lump of dumb matter arranged in a special way and I am > conscious, so I don't see why another lump of dumb matter arranged in > a special way might not also be conscious. What is it about that idea > that you see as

Re: Tegmark and consciousness

On Saturday, January 11, 2014 11:12:46 PM UTC-5, ColinHales wrote: > > RE: arXiv: 1401.1219v1 [quant-ph] 6 Jan 2014 > > Consciousness as a State of Matter > > Max Tegmark, January 8, 2014 > > > > Hi Folk, > > Grrr! > > I confess that after 12 years of deep immersion in science

Physics as the Production of Realistic Fantasy and Fantastic Reality

When working with private physics, the operators used are metaphorical and implicit, not explicit. Qualia is LIKE the “mass” of privacy. The will to will is like the “Energy” of privacy, and realism is like the “c²”. In my understanding, the notion that c is the speed of light is really a leg

Re: Is this question a question?

"Can fact exist beyond the dimensions of perception?" No. Existence and perception are the same thing, although your or my perception can't include all that can be perceived. "Does ${this} question make sense or does it not?" Everything makes sense to some extent. "To cut it short, I am questi

Playing Cards With Qualia

Here is an example to help illustrate what I think is the relationship between information and qualia that makes the most sense. Here I am using the delta (Δ) to denote "difference", n to mean "numbers" or information, kappa for aesthetic "kind" or qualia, and delta n degree (Δn°) for "differ

Re: Consciousness as a State of Matter

Eh, just looks like more information-theoretic functionalism. Explanatory Gap? Hard Problem? States of matter make sense...solid, liquid, gas, plasma - hungry doesn't fit in. On Wednesday, January 8, 2014 12:57:37 PM UTC-5, telmo_menezes wrote: > > In case you haven't seen it... > > http://arxi

Re: Putting it all together

Richard > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > >> >> <https://24.media.tumblr.com/6b06d8de192011e7a0e1179d34958785/tumblr_myu2nxlpcz1qeenqko1_500.jpg> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subs

Putting it all together

-- 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 everything

The Simplest Complete Model of Everything

Law (-∞) :: Presence +∞ Logic (-3) :: Imagination +3 Matter (-2) :: Mind +2 Energy (-1) :: Impulse +1 Information (-0) :: Entropy +0 (More complicated version: http://multisenserealism.com/thesis/8-matter-energy/schemas-and-frames/colorball-diagram-explained/) -- You received this message b

Re: "humans are machines unable to recognize the fact that they are machines,"

On Sunday, December 29, 2013 6:42:20 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 28 Dec 2013, at 15:40, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > "humans are machines unable to recognize the fact that they are machines," >> > > Who wrote this? > > *any* ideally correct ma

Re: "humans are machines unable to recognize the fact that they are machines,"

magine that the invention of a common structure would serve to organize and enhance aesthetic values. With the information primitive, both sense and physics are incoherent and absurd. > It's beginning to sound a lot like woo, so I'd better stop there. > Seems ok to me? Thanks, Craig

Re: Metaphor, Electricity, Sun and Moon…

On Friday, December 27, 2013 11:40:08 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > On 28 December 2013 17:34, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> It could be said that the electric force, figuratively if not literally >> (but maybe literally, given a rehabilitated view of physics), c

"humans are machines unable to recognize the fact that they are machines,"

> > "humans are machines unable to recognize the fact that they are machines," > I would re-word it as 'Humans are not machines but when they introspect on their most mechanical aspects mechanistically, they are able to imagine that they could be machines who are unable recognize the fact." I

Re: What are wavefunctions?

I also suspect that quantum makes spacetime rather than being phenomena which take place in spacetime, if that's what you're proposing. I'm not sure however that explaining physical space as information space is ultimately an improvement. Without linking either one to awareness, the result is s

Metaphor, Electricity, Sun and Moon…

A post from today... If you had walked up to someone living in prehistoric times and had a conversation about the Sun and the Moon, it would probably be an easy way of talking about the concept of opposites. It’s an embodied metaphor which is almost absurdly plain. The Sun, a featureless disk

Re: Minds, Machines and Gödel

On Wednesday, December 25, 2013 2:09:07 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 25 Dec 2013, at 16:18, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, December 25, 2013 5:07:22 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 24 Dec 2013, at 17:31, Craig Weinber

Re: A proper definition of reality

I think that you are on the right track and I both understand and agree with your view of theory and reality all being part of the same ocean - however, there is a difference between an artist painting a picture and a painting of an artist painting a picture of himself. The former can be said t

Re: Minds, Machines and Gödel

On Sunday, December 22, 2013 7:21:05 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 21 Dec 2013, at 17:32, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > > > > On Thursday, December 19, 2013 10:13:25 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > On 19 Dec 2013, at 15:07, Craig

The difficulties of executing simple algorithms: why brains make mistakes computers don't.

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-12-odd-easy-feat-mind.html Even scientists are fond of thinking of the human brain as a computer, > following sets of rules to communicate, make decisions and find a meal. > > Almost all adults understand that it's the last digit—and only the last > digit —that

Re: Bruno's mathematical reality

For me, the critical issue for accounting for everything under a single reality theory is what I call the Presentation Problem. In simple terms, there is no logical reason for the logical universe to produce shapes, colors, flavors, or feelings of any kind when we already know that information

For Profit Online University (Short Video You Should Watch)

http://t.co/cFfMA7zzPB Adult Swim has been quietly airing this fake infomercial for "For-Profit > Online University" all this week at 4am. *FPOU* is a one-off special from > a conglomerate of former *Onion *writers called Wild Aggressive > Dog, > which is m

Re: Minds, Machines and Gödel

On Thursday, December 19, 2013 10:13:25 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 19 Dec 2013, at 15:07, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Thursday, December 19, 2013 5:23:20 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> Hello Craig, >> >> >> That is

Re: It's really all math

On Friday, December 20, 2013 5:26:15 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 20 Dec 2013, at 02:15, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it > funny? Is math surprised that its math? > > > It is of course o

Re: It's really all math

educed. > > > On 20 December 2013 14:15, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it >> funny? Is math surprised that its math? >> >> >> On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 2:07:47

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

On Saturday, December 21, 2013 4:15:58 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > > If you say they are not conscious because they are only made of > mathematical relations, then you are admitting philosophical zombies exist. > If you assume that mathematical relations are conscious because they remind u

Re: It's really all math

If it's all just math, what is the unexpected surprise that makes it funny? Is math surprised that its math? On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 2:07:47 AM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > http://abstrusegoose.com/544 > > Brent > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group

Re: Question for Bruno Regarding the question of whether information is physical.

On Wednesday, December 4, 2013 4:21:32 PM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona wrote: > > > > > 2013/12/4 Craig Weinberg > > >> >> >> On Wednesday, December 4, 2013 12:00:39 PM UTC-5, spudb...@aol.com wrote: >>> >>> I read Caroll's article a

Re: Question for Bruno Regarding the question of whether information is physical.

On Wednesday, December 4, 2013 12:00:39 PM UTC-5, spudb...@aol.com wrote: > > I read Caroll's article and wind up with more questions about his > statement. First, what does he consider non-physical? Thoughts in our head, > dreams. But those of the biochemical interaction fizzing about our > n

Re: Online opinions of Dennett and Chalmers-- the clueless two

By materialist, he really means atheist or non-Christian. On Sunday, December 1, 2013 12:04:50 PM UTC-5, jessem wrote: > > Chalmers a materialist? That seems like a pretty bizarre and/or uninformed > description, given that the idea he is best-known for is that the "hard > problem" of first-pers

Babies Have Self-Awareness From The Minute They're Born

> > Babies Have Self-Awareness From The Minute They're Born > > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/22/babies-self-awareness_n_4323481.html > > By: By Stephanie Pappas, Senior Writer > Published: 11/21/2013 12:10 PM EST on LiveScience > > With their uncoordinated movements and unfocused eyes,

Re: Everything is real or unreal?

For humans, this is what is real: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=82c_1384436180 What quantum mechanics tells us is that reality is a relation between fundamental relativism and derived absolutes, as well as derived relativism and fundamental absolutes. In short, reality cannot itself be absolut

Re: QM Primer

<http://24.media.tumblr.com/81bb846756fd19a9561c4bceae885d3e/tumblr_mw2xreqAQl1qeenqko1_500.jpg> Another diagram, maybe better? On Sunday, November 10, 2013 8:42:34 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote

Re: QM Primer

On Sunday, November 10, 2013 8:42:34 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > >> Thanks for uploading it, great job! >> >> Here's what I propose to re-interpret QM: >>

Re: QM Primer

Thanks for uploading it, great job! Here's what I propose to re-interpret QM: Beams exist only within the experience of the various participants, not as literal beams across a vacuum. There are no literal waves or part

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Thursday, November 7, 2013 10:22:48 PM UTC-5, cdemorsella wrote: > > > > > > *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg > *Sent:* Monday, October 28, 2013 8:40 PM > *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.c

Re: shouldn't biology get a reboot?

On Wednesday, November 6, 2013 4:06:29 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 06 Nov 2013, at 07:14, Chris de Morsella wrote: > > > A human has something like ten times as many bacteria in its body than it > does cells with human DNA. Pretty much all life forms are in fact complex > multi-sp

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Friday, November 1, 2013 11:27:19 PM UTC-4, cdemorsella wrote: > > > > > > *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg > *Sent:* Friday, November 01, 2013 1:45 PM > *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.co

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

raig > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 9:46 PM, LizR >wrote: > >> On 25 October 2013 14:31, Craig Weinberg >> > wrote: >> >>> >>> Looking at natural presences, like atoms or galaxies, the scope of their >>> persistence is well beyond any human r

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Thursday, October 31, 2013 12:06:52 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 30 Oct 2013, at 18:01, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 4:52:49 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 29 Oct 2013, at 19:15, Craig Weinberg wrot

Re: If human beings are nothing more than matter, why are you conscious as yourself?

On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 9:53:17 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: > > On 31 October 2013 14:46, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 8:00:58 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: >>> >>> This is one of the "big questions" along with "s

Re: If human beings are nothing more than matter, why are you conscious as yourself?

ing. > > > On 31 October 2013 12:35, Stathis Papaioannou > > wrote: > >> On 30 October 2013 16:07, Craig Weinberg > >> wrote: >> >> > We don’t know that chemical reactions are unconscious... >> >> The brain is chemical reactions and co

Re: If human beings are nothing more than matter, why are you conscious as yourself?

On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 7:35:26 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On 30 October 2013 16:07, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > > We don’t know that chemical reactions are unconscious... > > The brain is chemical reactions and consciousness seems to happen when > t

Re: Neuroscientists discover new 'mini-neural computer' in the brain

Ok, by me, although for an off-topic subject, it is interesting how frequently it comes up. On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 5:50:46 PM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: > > Brent and Craig, > > Politics are typically a trigger for endless off-topic discussions. I > respect your opinions, but maybe we

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 4:52:49 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 29 Oct 2013, at 19:15, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:01:25 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 29 Oct 2013, at 16:17, Craig Weinberg

Re: Neuroscientists discover new 'mini-neural computer' in the brain

On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 7:05:47 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:51 AM, meekerdb > > wrote: > > On 10/29/2013 4:17 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > > > But this is how I see the concept of Übermensch. The idea got horribly > > distorted by subsequent political

Re: If human beings are nothing more than matter, why are you conscious as yourself?

utation, sense does not need to repeat itself in order to get the point. It can deliver a set of associations through a broad gesture that is multivalent and meta-phoric. Through gravity (entropy squared), the universe is reigned in and Occam's catastrophe is ground to insignificance

If human beings are nothing more than matter, why are you conscious as yourself?

A Quora answer to the following question. Nothing new for me here probably, but It's maybe organized in a more concise way. > Philosophy: If human beings are nothing more than matter, why are you > conscious as > yourself?

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

require that they are already aware of each other. It's circular reasoning...the pile of puppet parts that pretends to be fooled into acting like the puppet that it never was. Craig > John M > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Bruno Marchal > > wrote: > >>

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:57:29 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 10/29/2013 5:40 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:52:12 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: >> >>>

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:29:21 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: > > On 30 October 2013 14:26, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 8:40:52 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: >> >>> On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>> >>

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 9:08:53 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On 30 October 2013 00:37, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > >> >> Physics is what happens in the natural world due to natural > processes. > >> > > >> > > >> >

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 8:40:52 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: > > On 30 October 2013 13:24, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:52:12 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: >> >>> On 30 October 2013 07:15, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>>

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 6:52:12 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: > > On 30 October 2013 07:15, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> Matter is concrete sense that extends to the inertial frame of the body. >> Get rid of your body, and your dream is matter. >> &g

Re: Neuroscientists discover new 'mini-neural computer' in the brain

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:11:56 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 29 Oct 2013, at 17:07, freqflyer07281972 wrote: > > What are the 8 hypostases? I've seen this referred to a few other times on > this list and have never really known what it refers to. > > > It is eight intensional var

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:01:25 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 29 Oct 2013, at 16:17, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > > > > On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:56:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:23, Craig We

Re: Universe from Pixels?

I wonder if we used a photon multiplier that looked like Mickey Mouse and then discovered that photons looked like Mickey Mouse if it would occur to anyone that some of our assumptions might have been premature. On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:03:39 AM UTC-4, spudb...@aol.com wrote: > > Here is

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:56:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 29 Oct 2013, at 14:23, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > > > > On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:05:52 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:47, Craig

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:52:49 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On 29 October 2013 12:54, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > > > > > On Monday, October 28, 2013 8:18:04 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > >> > >> On 29 October 2013 01:12, John Mikes w

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:05:52 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:47, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Monday, October 28, 2013 1:38:58 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 28 Oct 2013, at 15:12, John Mikes wrote: >>

Re: Neuroscientists discover new 'mini-neural computer' in the brain

On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:08:16 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 28 Oct 2013, at 19:55, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Monday, October 28, 2013 1:53:02 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> >> >> I refer you to my rare posts

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Monday, October 28, 2013 10:10:45 PM UTC-4, cdemorsella wrote: > > > > > > *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg > *Sent:* Sunday, October 27, 2013 4:23 PM > *To:* everyth...@googlegroups.c

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Monday, October 28, 2013 8:18:04 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On 29 October 2013 01:12, John Mikes > > wrote: > > What do you call "ANY PHYSICS"? is there a "God given" marvel (like any > > other religious miracle to believe in) callable "PHYSICS"? I consider it > the > > explanation of

Re: Neuroscientists discover new 'mini-neural computer' in the brain

On Monday, October 28, 2013 1:53:02 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > > > I refer you to my rare posts where I suggest that the level is the > molecular level, and should include the glial cells, which in my opinion > (from diverse reading) handle to information. > > I also defend the idea t

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Monday, October 28, 2013 1:38:58 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 28 Oct 2013, at 15:12, John Mikes wrote: > > What do you call "ANY PHYSICS"? is there a "God given" marvel (like any > other religious miracle to believe in) callable "PHYSICS"? > > > I think Stathis was referring to an

Neuroscientists discover new 'mini-neural computer' in the brain

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-10-neuroscientists-mini-neural-brain.html Dendrites, the branch-like projections of neurons, were once thought to be > passive wiring in the brain. But now researchers at the University of North > Carolina at Chapel Hill have shown that these dendrites do more

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Monday, October 28, 2013 12:40:43 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > > > > On 28 October 2013 00:10, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:11:35 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: >> >>> >>> >

A Post About # and *

Part of my approach to making new sense of the universe involves indulging in meditations on unintentional symbolism. Any pattern that catches my attentio

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

l rather than that it can compose high fidelity reality out of senseless mistakes. Craig > > *From:* everyth...@googlegroups.com [mailto: > everyth...@googlegroups.com ] *On Behalf Of *Craig Weinberg > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 23, 2013 1:46 PM > *To:* everyth...@googlegrou

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

> Yes… I can see how one could assume that. But not exactly what I assume > though. Who knows if there is a real world? > > All I know (and even that is open to question) is I experience my > existence as occurring within this (shared) high fidelity environment that > in my experience – for m

Re: Dialetheism

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 10:33:51 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: > > On 26 October 2013 20:01, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> On Friday, October 25, 2013 7:09:47 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: >> >>> On 26 October 2013 06:23, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>> >

Re: Neural activity in the brain is harder to disrupt when we are aware of it

On Sunday, October 27, 2013 2:11:35 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > > > > On 24 October 2013 07:46, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-10-neural-brain-harder-disrupt-aware.html >> >> We consciously perceive j

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 6:34:04 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Craig Weinberg > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, October 26, 2013 5:29:46 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: > >> > >> > Co

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 6:27:40 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 26 Oct 2013, at 11:54, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 26, 2013 5:18:14 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 26 Oct 2013, at 10:41, Craig Weinberg wro

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 5:29:46 AM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: > > > Couldn't there just be a routine that traps the error of believing they > are > > intelligent? > > In parallel to Bruno's reply, one problem I see with naif AI is one > that you may sympathise with: it is mostly built

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 5:18:14 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 26 Oct 2013, at 10:41, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Saturday, October 26, 2013 3:36:59 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 25 Oct 2013, at 19:33, meekerdb wrote: >

Re: Dialetheism

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 3:30:11 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 25 Oct 2013, at 19:23, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Friday, October 25, 2013 10:11:04 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 24 Oct 2013, at 18:53, Craig Weinberg wro

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 3:36:59 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 25 Oct 2013, at 19:33, meekerdb wrote: > > On 10/25/2013 3:08 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > Now take the game of go: human beings can still easily beat machines, > even the most powerful computer currently available.

Re: Dialetheism

On Friday, October 25, 2013 7:09:47 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: > > On 26 October 2013 06:23, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> The argument against comp is not one of impossibility, but of empirical >> failure. Sure, numbers could do this or that, but our experi

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Friday, October 25, 2013 4:30:34 PM UTC-4, cdemorsella wrote: > > > -Original Message- > From: everyth...@googlegroups.com > [mailto:everyth...@googlegroups.com ] On Behalf Of meekerdb > Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 10:46 AM > To: everyth...@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: Dou

Re: Could the Higgs boson convert mind to matter ?

You don't have to be a Platonist to accept that space is not substantial. To me, space is attenuation of sensitivity. What looks like space to us is the result of our body's relation to other bodies of similar scale. Even if adding mass made something 'physical', there is nothing non-physical a

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Friday, October 25, 2013 1:33:02 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote: > > On 10/25/2013 3:08 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > Now take the game of go: human beings can still easily beat machines, > even the most powerful computer currently available. Go is much more > combinatorially explosive than chess, so

Re: Dialetheism

On Friday, October 25, 2013 10:11:04 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 24 Oct 2013, at 18:53, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 24, 2013 10:16:55 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 23 Oct 2013, at 20:07, Craig Weinberg wrot

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Friday, October 25, 2013 10:51:12 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 25 Oct 2013, at 14:33, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > > > On Thursday, October 24, 2013 11:09:40 PM UTC-4, chris peck wrote: >> >> *>> The alien might be completely confident in h

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

; > > From: stat...@gmail.com > > Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 13:11:47 +1100 > > Subject: Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article > > To: everyth...@googlegroups.com > > > > On 25 October 2013 12:31, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > > > >> You could

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Thursday, October 24, 2013 10:11:47 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On 25 October 2013 12:31, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > >> You could say that human chess players just take in visual data, > >> process it in a series of biological relays, then send electri

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

te: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:46:54 +1300 > Subject: Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article > From: liz...@gmail.com > To: everyth...@googlegroups.com > > On 25 October 2013 14:31, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > > Looking at natural presences, like atoms or galaxies, the scop

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Thursday, October 24, 2013 9:46:54 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: > > On 25 October 2013 14:31, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > >> >> Looking at natural presences, like atoms or galaxies, the scope of their >> persistence is well beyond any human relation so they do des

Re: Douglas Hofstadter Article

On Thursday, October 24, 2013 7:16:55 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > > On 25 October 2013 03:39, Craig Weinberg > > wrote: > > > http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/11/the-man-who-would-teach-machines-to-think/309529/ > > > > > The M

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >