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

[John K Clark]

"Heartland" <velvet977 at hotmail.com>

> BEC is when atoms become undistinguishable.

Yes.

That only means that their trajectories merge.

Only?

> Big deal.

It was a big enough deal to receive a Nobel Prize.

> BEC doesn't "erase the history".

It most certainly does, it means it's imposable to distinguish the history
of one atom from the history of another.

> Just because you cool down the atoms doesn't mean that records (as in
> paper/electronic records)  tracking past locations of those atoms are
> being magically erased too.

Those paper records are useless because after atoms formed a BEC it will
never be possible to know which atom your paper records refer to. Your paper
records may say that one particular hydrogen atom, let's call him Bob, did
this that and the other thing, but after Bob became part of a BEC it is
imposable to say which of the billions or trillions of atoms is Bob the
atom.

When you warm up the BEC the atoms come back but they have lost their
individuality, there is no way to know which atom is which because as I've
said before atoms have no scratches on them to tell them apart.

> If there  are 2 instances of brain type AND each instance produces one
> instance of mind type, then why do you write that "there would be
> only one instance of mind type?"

If two phonographs are in perfect synchronization  and both are playing
Beethoven's Ninth Symphony then only one symphony is playing; and if you
destroy one phonograph the music does not stop. This sort of thing is not
possible with objects, if I have two bricks and destroy one brick then
something has chanced, I only have half the number of objects I had before.
One noun plus another noun always gives you 2 nouns, but one adjective plus
another adjective may or may not give you 2 adjectives.

So there is one question you must ask yourself, is the mind more like a
symphony or more like a brick?

> Assuming transfers were equally gradual

It doesn't make the slightest difference if the transfers were fast or slow.

> A is A and B is B. Same as the last time.

No last time you told me the original is the original, this time you tell me
A is A; both responses were quite true and both were quite useless. For the
last 3 posts I've been trying to get a straight answer out of you, I
specifically asked is A the original or is B the original and all I get from
you is A is A. Oh well, I also predicted you would evade that question as
you have evaded so many others, and indeed you have.

> Brain object consists of all nonessential matter

If it doesn't do anything then why even talk about it, and why even use the
word "brain" to refer to it?

  John K Clark