--- "John G. Rose" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > And that is the whole point.  You don't need to simulate the brain at
> > the
> > molecular level or even at the level of neurons.  You just need to
> > produce an
> > equivalent computation.  The whole point of such fine grained
> > simulations is
> > to counter arguments (like Penrose's) that qualia and consciousness
> > cannot be
> > explained by computation or even by physics.  Penrose (like all humans)
> > is
> > reasoning with a brain that is a product of evolution, and therefore
> > biased
> > toward beliefs that favor survival of the species.
> > 
> 
> An equivalent computation will be some percentage of the complexity of a
> perfect molecular simulation. You can simplify the computation but you have
> to know what to simplify out and what to discard. Losing too much of the
> richness may produce a simulation that is like a scratchy audio recording of
> a philharmonic or probably even worse the simulated system will not function
> as a coherent entity, it'll just be contentious noise unless there is ample
> abetting by external control. But a non-molecular and non-neural simulation
> may require even more computational complexity than a direct model.
> Reformatting the consciousness to operate within another substrate without
> first understanding its natural substrate, ya, still may be the best choice
> due to technological limitations.

By "equivalent computation" I mean one whose behavior is indistinguishable
from the brain, not an approximation.  I don't believe that an exact
simulation requires copying the implementation down to the neuron level, much
less the molecular level.


-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-------------------------------------------
singularity
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/
Modify Your Subscription: 
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=96140713-a54b2b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to