[extropy-chat] "Dead Time" of the Brain

[J. Andrew Rogers]

On Apr 25, 2006, at 6:18 PM, Heartland wrote:
> As I said before, I don't expect anyone to understand what I wrote  
> just by thinking
> about it for few minutes.


Though disagreement should not be construed as misunderstanding either.


> What you are saying is obviously true, but you are
> talking about representation of a process and I'm talking about  
> what a process
> actually is.


It is information.  All of it.  Whether or not it is dynamic or  
static, whether it is a "representation" or an "is", the information/ 
algorithm is the same.  Assuming otherwise is a common failure of  
intuition.  Only an external observer sees a difference, and then  
only because the external observer is adding information to the  
system.  Do you think the specialness of your "being a process" (as  
opposed to all other expressions of the same information) is  
dependent on the existence and nature of an external observer?


> It should be sufficient, but that is only my opinion. True  
> disagreement is based on
> understanding, not misinterpretation. I don't really think that  
> anyone disagrees
> with me, yet.


You do not grok information.  My disagreement follows from that.

Cheers,

J. Andrew Rogers