[extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out

Tue Dec 13 01:38:42 UTC 2005

Sorry I really didn't mean to violate the norms.  I didn't know I needed an 
acceptable behavior
to state my opinion.

Anna

>From: Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net>
>Reply-To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>,   spike 
><spike66 at comcast.net>
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out
>Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 17:26:14 -0800
>
>Isn't this poster under moderation?
>
>I felt sympathetic for her at first, since it seemed that she was
>sincere but extremely confused.
>
>However, this post, with the long portion at the end consisting of
>rearranged pieces of
>http://www.matzkefamily.net/doug/papers/mitfinal.html
>but apparently without any explanation or attribution appears to
>violate the norms of acceptable behavior of the ExI list.
>
>- Jef
>
>On 12/12/05, Anna Tylor <femmechakra at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>Tue Nov 15 17:55:51 MST 2005 Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> 
>wrote:
> >
> > >>that publication was so ill-formed that some other members of this 
>list
> > >>were, in private emails, saying I should not respond to a "kook" as 
>in,
> > >>someone passing off ideas that can never in fact be reduced to
> > >>practice,and whose noise does not help anyone make actual progress.
> >
> > After reviewing the document, although it may not be
> > written in a formal matter, I can only see two major
> > problems with the document. (Besides grammar and
> > spelling)
> >
> >
> > >>and most of the time when untrained humans think they
> > >>have ideas that are of use to the trained, they are not in fact of any
> > >>significant use - to the point that the cost of the time to listen to
> > >>and comprehend the idea dwarfs any potential benefit to the trained
> > >>individual.
> >
> > Tesla, Newton and Einstein where therefore, untrained.
> >
> > >>Note the emotional accusation: by asking people instead of looking
> > >>things up yourself, you know you're being irresponsible.  This is
> > >>almost never actually the case - the *answerer* may know of this
> > >>alternate path, but *you* did not.  However, you know it now - and you
> > >>might want to use it a lot, before you try to describe what it's like
> > >>to use it a lot.  There are enough people who really do use it a lot,
> > >>who will be insulted (or worse) by inaccurate depictions of what it's
> > >>like to use it a lot (and thus to be one with the Internet).
> >
> > You are absolutely right.
> >
> > >>I believe that you are on the path
> > >>to a much clearer document.  Perhaps it would work if you collected
> > >>your thoughts, rewrote the work, then went away from it for a day or
> > >>two (to clear your short term memory of thoughts associated with it)
> > >>then reread it, looking for ways to restate things even more clearly.
> > >>(In this case, any understanding located solely in your short term
> > >>memory would be lost - but that's a good thing, since it lets you
> > >>identify many of the confusing points in your wording, and you still
> > >>understand your thoughts well enough to restate them.)
> >
> > That's exactly what I did, thank you.
> >
> > >>Quite a lot of people on this list would take the
> > >>existence and use of such things as obvious and granted:
> >
> > Maybe some take it as the obvious, I guess I apprehended it a completely
> > different way
> >
> > Anna
> >
> >
> >
> > A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of
> > computational leverage
> >
> > Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties
> > of the universe (such as space, time, and number of
> > dimensions) derived from modern physics consistency
> > arguments.
> >
> > The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would
> > require a sparse, high dimensional spacetime
> > (unrestricted locality) and a formalized observer
> > mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a
> > superset of inertial frame properties).
> > This solution simultaneously addresses the
> > semantical issue of unrestricted locality by
> > maintaining a space/time metric but by going
> > beyond the non-locality constraints of 4D physical
> > implementation layers.
> >
> > A nonphysical mind really does exist:
> > It should be amenable to study in the
> > same fashion as other physical theories that
> > deal with indirectly observable phenomena.
> >
> > Since humans are intelligent as well as conscious,
> > they can predict computational theory to the key,
> > requirement for a solution to the mind-brain puzzle.
> > Such a theory must address the representational
> > issue of information versus knowledge (or knowing).
> >
> > The problems.... vision and language,
> > dynamic motion control, and cryptography, far exceed any conventional
> > computing machine ability.
> > Future scalability lrestrict's  how to powerfullly design or build.
> >
> > The reasons:
> > ordinary human intelligence may be a prerequisite
> > to understanding consciousness.
> > These strategies for providing extraordinary computing
> > resources might also provide insight concerning
> > computational processes with properties suitable
> > for consciousness. It is possible that systems that
> > exhibit the self organization required for human
> > "real intelligence" (nothing artificial about it),
> > may exhibit consciousness.
> >
> > Physics must ultimately develop a solution for human
> > "real intelligence", because it represents an
> > evolutionary, complexity increasing informational
> > process. This process must not violate what
> > physicists know about the evolution of the
> > complexity of the universe.
> >
> > The question: Consistency frameworks form the
> > physical foundation for multiple observational
> > viewpoints or different "Points of View".
> > Formally defining the interaction between
> > the observer and the "action or thing being observed"
> > is part of understanding the observation process.
> > Historically, scientists have prided themselves
> > in their belief that true science occurs when the
> > observer does not participate or disturb an act of
> > measurement. Unfortunately, quantum physics
> > measurements depend on how a question is asked or
> > what question is asked. If an experiment asks
> > particle questions then the results are particle
> > answers. If an experiment asks wave questions
> > then the results are wave answers. Likewise in
> > relativity, asking how much "energy" is in a system
> > is dependent on the observer's velocity and
> > acceleration.
> >
> > The main idea stated in Einstein's relativity:
> > principle was that "all inertial frames are
> > totally equivalent for the performance of all
> > physical experiments."[18] In other words,
> > no matter where you are in space or what
> > speed you are traveling, the laws of physics
> > must be the same.
> > The laws define the possibility that all
> > actions as well as the process of observing
> > those actions are from any vantage point.
> > One major outcome from relativity was experimental
> > proof that the speed of light is constant no matter
> > how you measure it, and no matter what speed you
> > are traveling. In fact, mass, energy, distance,
> > and time have changing values depending on
> > one's speed.
> >
> > Facts:
> > 1) Consistency is more primitive than
> > conservation laws of energy/mass, or space and time
> > 2) Consistency requires light to follow locally
> > "straight line" geodesics (curved spacetime)
> > 3) Consistency mechanisms behave as superluminal
> > synchronization primitives
> > 4) Consistency mechanisms interact outside normal
> > excluding illegal time loops
> > 5) Increased dimensionality increases degrees of
> > freedom
> > 6) These ideas appeal to researchers studying the mind
> > and consciousness because certain biological[20],
> > psychological[21], parapsychological[22],
> > and meditative research[23] strongly suggest
> > that these properties are exhibited by the mind.
> >
> > An interesting point to note concerning computational
> > leverage mechanisms is that they deal with cosmological
> > issues such as the framework of spacetime and the
> > structure of the universe, and are thus, "outside
> > the box" of what is normal day-to-day physics.
> > This is not surprising given that the evolution
> > of the mind (both collectively and individually)
> > deals with many of the same issues (information,
> > complexity, and energy) as the evolution of the
> > universe.
> >
> > Conclusion:
> > Modern physics theories that are based on observer
> > consistency arguments have already defined many
> > possible avenues for computational leverage based
> > on indirect measurement and extraordinary views of
> > space and time. These models of sparse
> > hyperspacetime form a consistency backdrop for
> > all possible events and all possible observer
> > interactions. Consciousness may be a direct
> > consequence of a dualist model of the mind-brain
> > based on these consistency and computational
> > leverage mechanisms. If the dualist model of the
> > mind exists outside normal spacetime, then the mind
> > is akin to a "Godel machine" that is capable of
> > stepping outside of our normal spacetime limits.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Take advantage of powerful junk e-mail filters built on patented 
>Microsoft(r)
> > SmartScreen Technology.
> > 
>http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
> >   Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN(r) Premium right now and get 
>the
> > first two months FREE*.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

_________________________________________________________________
Take advantage of powerful junk e-mail filters built on patented Microsoft® 
SmartScreen Technology. 
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines 
  Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the 
first two months FREE*.