Subjective Geometry

Status
Not open for further replies.
/I don't really think this differentiation is needed; artificially created neural nets can also learn.

yes but they are not aware they are doing so. I think of them as flat, with consciousness adding another layer of depth. i'm not saying that it is impossible for a nueral net to become conscious, i just don't think current comprehension can lead to it.

/To create a mind?...

To understand mind. I suppose you might be able to create one after you understood it.. but that's a whole other ethical connundrum. To risk potential extermination as a species by creating beings superior to ourselves is a pretty squishy subject to me.

/I still don't think you have adressed my question.

"If the brain is in essence a machine, then what is the control of the brain?"

A straight answer: The same parameters that control your computer or the growth of fungus in dirt - the parameters of existence (physics).

/You seperate the brain and the mind.

Yeah, in the context of the brain, the mind is the part of it that has the ability to be brought into immediate focus. I would say the property of consciousness adds an aspect to "mind" that warrents classification as I have done.

/There must be a control, so what is it?

A control of mind? I would say "that which you consider you" is in control.

/So a baby has no mind for it has yet to experience?

A babie's "experience" begins in the womb. They are 'conscious' but do not yet have a 'sense of self'.

/Well without a mind at birth, how then does the experience mean anything?

A baby has a mind at birth but it is quite simple. Random and instinctive exporation of their surroundings lead to the further development of mind and eventually to a sense of self. From my experience with my children, I could see it in their eyes between 6 months to a year... they became aware of themselves in a very simplistic manner.

/I think the reasons why I ask the question then are different from why I ask it now. How does an altered consciounesses factor into this geometry?

It temporarily changes the shape of the lense as I described before (which is itself comprised of the geometry of one's experience).

/I will rephrase: How does the brain recognizing that the present is a moment in what is a series of moments factor into its operation? Feedbacks, etc..

Well, it's always right now so I don't really understand your question.

/I have to think whether or not this was the question as I originally intended

Brother I know the feeling.

/I think this question refreshes my memory. What I am asking is what do you consider memory to be within the scope of the net/pattern?

Very much so, yes.

/So if there is an unended path, it is allowed to linger?

Hmm.. think of it more as seeing a shape in the clouds or say you go around dropping different colored tiles all over the ground.. each of them has meaning in and of itself and may even relate to the others.. but when you go up to the 3rd story and look down on it, you notice you ended up painting a picture of Jerry Garcia... that is epiphany. It's like a bunch of nodes in a nueral network all fold together somehow, creating a circuit that did not previous exist that both integrates and strengthens the connections that comprise it... leading to an understanding that would not have been allowed if the previous nodes didn't exist.

/We'll get to it.

Allright then.

/So if a new born baby is fed intravenously, within a darkened room, with a constant (thereby essentially nulling it), air, etc temperature, how will that affect the development/creation or working of the mind?

/without any other stimulous?

nominal mind (given that instance of course, each mind has its own 'nominality' so to speak). no stimulous = minimal development. nuerons with connect, but with no direction from stimulous, leading to a meaningless mind.

/What of an adult who has had experiences?

That is difficult to say. There is a general nuerophsyical commonality between most adults I'd think, but then the configuration of the individual could overcome who knows what? Yeah, you need to know the initial conditions to even hypothesize.
 
Last edited:
/The brain and the mind can be perceived as the same thing.

That is pointless cris. The definition of mind should likely somewhat differ from brain eh, as they are two different words meant to describe different but related things? I would think that via your perspective mind would be a subset of brain, since I'd think mind only inclusive of that which could be brought to focus (that that it WILL be, just that it COULD be). You can't really bring control of your electrochemical processes into your conscious control (typically anyway). Mind and brain might potentially be synonomous, but in almost all humans I think the distinction valid (via what I take as your perspective I mean). For instance wouldn't "mind" depend on those neural networks you were talking about? If an infant has a brain but no mind, how can mind and brain be considered the same?
 
Wes,

An analogy is house and home. While “house” might represent the structure the “home” is the result, but they are inseparably linked. If you damage the house or destroy it then the home is consequently damaged or destroyed.

In this sense “brain” and “mind” have the identical relationship.
 
Wes,

If an infant has a brain but no mind, how can mind and brain be considered the same?
Click to expand...
That’s because if an infant has a brain then he has a mind. Once the brain begins to form then mind begins at the same time. The are inseparably linked and are essentially the same thing.
 
Thefountainhed,

I am still bemused by how these paths can somehow generate consciousness. I mean even if you had closed nets for every possible experience that one can ever have, how can they all access the same memory and realize themselves at one time? Hmm. Perhaps if they all operated in parallel, then concsciusnesses would be possible.
Click to expand...
Think of 100 billion neurons all firing at 200 times per second and in parallel – that is an equivalent clocking frequency of some 20,000 GHz, or roughly 10,000 Intel Pentium 2GHz processors. This is an unimaginable processing power all crammed into such a small space.

I think the main difference between the human brain and its ability to be self aware is evolution. By our kind having experienced, our barins are aligned towards those experiences. The nd result is a net that can easily generate paths to handle these experiences when encountered. But do they all operate in parallel.

H,mm. I haveto develop this thought through. I think I have something there.
Click to expand...
Sounds good to me.
 
Originally posted by Cris
Wes,

An analogy is house and home. While “house” might represent the structure the “home” is the result, but they are inseparably linked. If you damage the house or destroy it then the home is consequently damaged or destroyed.

In this sense “brain” and “mind” have the identical relationship.
Click to expand...

I buy that.. it just seemed that in the context you were saying that they "were the same" that the distiction was particularly relevant.
 
Think of 100 billion neurons all firing at 200 times per second and in parallel – that is an equivalent clocking frequency of some 20,000 GHz, or roughly 10,000 Intel Pentium 2GHz processors. This is an unimaginable processing power all crammed into such a small space


Yea, but it is entirely different; we have to be able to reproduce evolution to achieve consciousness in that manner. The architecture of a pentium chip is completely different to that of a net in the brain...
 
wow, on the dreams tip - i just had the thought that I wonder if dreams are at all related to the continual advance or alteration of nueoron interconnection in the brain as you sleep. That sorting out process I mentioned earlier, partially it has to be growing your brain to reflect the additions and subtractions to your existing nueron interconnections. *shrug* Hmm.
 
Wow, haven't thought about this thread in a while. I like it though.

I'm somewhat confused by your comments however. Were you talking to yourself in that second post there?
 
wesmorris said:
Wow, haven't thought about this thread in a while. I like it though.

I'm somewhat confused by your comments however. Were you talking to yourself in that second post there?
Click to expand...

hey dont worry about am just glad to know that there are creative mind appraoching a.i. with the open mindedness off a child
 
wesmorris said:
In essence, I think humans think in abstracted time. The basic conscious organization of historic input being filed into conceptual relationships which all 'feel like time' because in essence they are a reorganized regurgitation of it. They are the impression in the 'inner clay' (so to speak), the resultant of to experienced time being broken down and categorized it into the inner network of concepts (inherently unique to the individual). All of this such that we might survive the constant changes in the physical world due to the 'passage of time' (which I have a sort of problem with in some ways because there is no actual time (the past and future are only abstracts) other than "the present" (Okay, I realize that technically other times exist given other inertial reference frames but I don't think they are relavent to the point, or maybe they are on a fundamental level in that this phenomenon contributes to the fact that the condition of consciousness can exist in the first place)).

for instance, say you have five sheets of rubber stretched out. as time passes, each of five senses plus a combinatory feedback loop makes an impression into the rubber sheet that corresponds to the appropriate sense... the feedback loop makes an impression which is integrated as the appropriate weight applies to each sheet. if each sheet were digitally overlapped there would be places where all five existed in the same space. That would for its own shape, or 'solution set' might be considered the 'sum of consciousness' at any time p (the present). the rubber sheet stretches and stretches, changing over a whole life. The solution set is merely the resultant of these changes with the integrated feedback loop.


I realize "time" is a weird thing to say that we think in, but by it I mean something like "a chronilogical oriented abstracted subjective experience" .
Click to expand...


thier is no objective time other than the time it takes matter to stop vibrating at that conclusion the realization will come to all subjects that time never existed and only our subjections will reamain (heat,life,energy,consciousness)exist as the infinity while matter will exist as the finity. hey who knows maybe ther would come a time that something along these line can be proved beyond the shadow of a douth what doesn't exist is probably the meaning to what does exist
 
matter never stops vibrating, but it does wink in and out of existence at the subatomic level - at least that's what science sez.
 
The brain as a whole produces a continuously changing (as a result of all of the changing data that comes in) gestalt. This giant configuration of everything active in our brains is our emotion. It's a general "feel" about what's going on in our lives. It's a schema in constant flux.

Humans also have developed language, a way of simplifying emotion, and convey it to others. We take our feelings and abstract symbols for them. "This isn't what I mean, but it's the closest word I can think of." Think of why thesauruses are so popular.

The combination of emotion and language makes what we call consciousness.
Click to expand...
Well said. Which also makes logic suppressed or units of emotion? I agree with this because the brain’s main function is to keep us alive as long as possible. The brain is just an interface between the “I” and the environment. The brain itself is constructed of certain languages, and all protocol follows this incredible language. I think emotions are like the frequencies of our vibrations. Thus all calculated outputs are subject to these frequencies. I believe everything that happens in the brain happens outside it, after all the brain is still a product of the universe. All we really do is label things while some call it learning. All these being true as long as we did not write the program of the universe. However rationality and irrationality compliment each other. For example Mathematics, a language itself, or emotion, is organized by the rationality side of the mind to balance things and make them make sense. Let’s take a language like French; it’s a subset of emotion, each consonant and word further smaller subsets, and each letter even further subset. Due to these subsets it’s daunting to then say French as a whole is either an emotion or a rationale, though fundamentally a language. I think this is how the brain is, an expert linguist whose desk space is riddled with emotions and rationale. I think there is a universal language the brain is accustomed to; I think this language is so complex that it develops by itself thanks largely to its hardware. Make no mistake form follows function, and I am talking somewhere between the physical make up of the brain and the human body. Like they say anybody can learn anything “ its all about relation”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top