<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
On 18/04/2023 12:26, Brent Allsop wrote:<br>
<br>
> Oh, so a picture is composed of all the properties of the
electrons in all the wires, representing all the pixels of a
picture.<br>
<br>
No.<br>
<br>
The properties of the electrons, such as spin, mass, charge, etc.,
aren't really relevant, except as they relate to the ability of the
electrons to carry bits of information.<br>
<br>
They don't have to be electrons, they could be pulses of pressure in
tiny pipes filled with gas, they could be protons, or magnetic
signals, or electromagnetic waves or vibrations in a
beer-cans-and-string computer, etc. All of those things will have
different properties, but they can all carry information, which is
the important thing.<br>
<br>
The picture is built up of the information carried by the electrons
(or whatever), assembled into an information structure (a model) by
whatever system is capable of doing so. 'a picture' is a totally
abstract thing, which can be represented by any number of
arrangements of matter like numbers in a table, beads on string,
packets of charge in an array of capacitors, tiny LEDs on a screen,
waves of depolarisation in a bundle of axons (arranged into spike
trains), and so on.<br>
<br>
Even pixels aren't necessary, and aren't the lowest-level components
of pictures. Pixels are just a part of the way we normally create
pictures in computer systems. No pixels in a painting. You could, if
you wanted, call the individual rods and cones in the retina
'pixels', but that's not really what they are.<br>
<br>
It's all about information. Everything else is just the embodiment
of the information, and is infinitely variable.<br>
<br>
> These "models in our heads" are made of real world things,
which have qualities we directly apprehend in an infallible way, via
the computational binding.<br>
<br>
They have to be <i>embodied</i> in something, but it doesn't really
matter what, as long as the system works. They are <i>made of</i>
information, not 'things' (unless you want to call an information
pattern a thing, in which case they are a thing). I don't know what
you mean by 'qualities we directly apprehend', but it sounds
distinctly dodgy to me. Literally speaking, nothing can be directly
apprehended, and as I've said above, the qualities of the things
used to embody the information hardly matter. Again, it's all about
information.<br>
<br>
And nothing is infallible!<br>
<br>
Ben<br>
</body>
</html>