[General] Verification of Light Interactions

Thu Sep 10 04:27:23 PDT 2015

Hi Al

Having done some work in the field of artificial intelligence.

Neurons fire on somewhat of a sigmoid curve when the electrical impulses from all input synapses reach a threshold. Each synapse has a weighted value (attenuation or amplification). The networks are quite complex, and have both analog and digital components.  But the fact that all of this can be modeled in a computer is an illustration that the problem can be broken down into binary logic.  But binary is not how nature is doing it. The fact that we solve these problems using binary tools does not mean nature does it this way.  Nature does it more efficiently.

I do not feel there must be consciousness in everything, or that space is necessarily built from consciousness.  But I do feel there must be an intelligence generated origin of the universe.

For me it seems that there is just too much that is perfect in the design, to assume otherwise.

Chip

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of af.kracklauer at web.de
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 1:46 PM
To: davidmathes8 at yahoo.com; general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
Cc: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>; M.A. <ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu>
Subject: Re: [General] Verification of Light Interactions

OK, name one (1) interaction that can't be broken down into a long string of binary switches.  (In technical terms: name a numbering system that cannot be converted to binary.)  

Likewise, name a series of words that cannot be reduced to (encoded as) digits in any base, and then reduced to binary.

Everything we "know" has been convayed to us using language.  For most readers here that's English (but could be any human language).  All of them are routinely encoded as numbers, mostly binary even, so who needs mystical fantazmagorical goings on to discuss the "mind"?   There is nothing in anybody'a head but a large bunch of synopsis (molecular switches) that obviously individually can't do anything but turn on and off (transmit or block).  Isn't that amazing enough? 

Gesendet: Mittwoch, 09. September 2015 um 06:56 Uhr
Von: davidmathes8 at yahoo.com <mailto:davidmathes8 at yahoo.com> 
An: "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> >
Cc: "M.A." <ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu <mailto:ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu> >
Betreff: Re: [General] Verification of Light Interactions

Logic gates alone do not provide a human interface. 

Also, in the attempts I've seen to understand the physics of consciousness, one ends up considering DNA as an antenna with the brain as a transceiver. Not everything need be a digital computer.

 On top of the simplest binary logic computer, there needs be layers of firmware, system software for the operating system, layers in applications and layered communications. In a computer network the  communications channels typically use  <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model> OSI 7 seven layers of software and firmware over hardware (x.200 specification). TCP/IP is only a four layer model. Current implementations use additional layers and separate channels for management and security. 

Only one switch may be necessary but that switch better be really, really fast. One can do a lot with a single switch, preferably optical. Paging Alan Turing...

Turing_machine <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine> 

*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Turing_machine> Universal Turing machine
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternating_Turing_machine> Alternating Turing machine
*	Quantum Turing machine <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Turing_machine> 
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-deterministic_Turing_machine> Non-deterministic Turing machine
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read-only_Turing_machine> Read-only Turing machine
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read-only_right_moving_Turing_machines> Read-only right moving Turing machines
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probabilistic_Turing_machine> Probabilistic Turing machine
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitape_Turing_machine> Multitape Turing machine
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-track_Turing_machine> Multi-track Turing machine
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine_equivalents> Turing machine equivalents
*	 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine_examples> Turing machine examples

The current status is that we can have a single atom switch, and switching can be done by a single photon. 

 Of course, your switch may vary. 

David

  _____  

From: "af.kracklauer at web.de <mailto:af.kracklauer at web.de> " <af.kracklauer at web.de <mailto:af.kracklauer at web.de> >
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> 
Cc: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> >; M.A. <ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu <mailto:ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu> >
Sent: Tuesday, September 8, 2015 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: [General] Verification of Light Interactions

If the most complex computer system is nothing but a (big) collection of off-on switches (binary logic), surely "the" mind, with orders of magnitude more switches, need be little else.   

Gesendet: Mittwoch, 09. September 2015 um 00:58 Uhr
Von: "Richard Gauthier" <richgauthier at gmail.com <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com> >
An: "Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion" <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> >, "M.A." <ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu <mailto:ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu> >
Betreff: Re: [General] Verification of Light Interactions

Please ignore last email, I hit send by accident.
Richard

> On Sep 8, 2015, at 3:57 PM, Richard Gauthier <richgauthier at gmail.com <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Sep 8, 2015, at 12:35 PM, M.A. <ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu <mailto:ambroselli at phys.uconn.edu> > wrote:
>>
>> Hi Richard,
>>
>> Interesting discussion.
>> Why do you think that 'mind' may not be an epiphenomenon of
>> matter? (I mean 'matter' here in the broader sense that includes
>> EM and all the other known interactions - essentially Chandra's CTF)
>>
>> I've recently heard (on NPR I believe) an argument that it is
>> essentially impossible for us to reach a point at which we have
>> expressed everything one can possibly express on twitter (i.e.
>> within the confines of 140 characters). The argument included
>> time scales on the order of the current age of the universe,
>> and, I believe, only one language.
>>
>> Now, the human (or even animal) body (including brain) is
>> infinitely more complicated than 140 characters and in a
>> continual feedback loop with its surroundings that consists
>> itself of a mind-boggling number of (evolved) initial
>> conditions etc.. I would not find it surprising at all that
>> something like intelligence/mind/awareness would emerge.
>>
>> I'm not saying I understand it, but I don't find it surprising.
>> Incredibly complex systems can do (at least) one of two things:
>> they can be on a path that causes them to blow up eventually
>> (a lot of stars do that, I hear), or they settle into some kind
>> of interesting dynamic steady state. Not sure were humanity falls.
>> But then again the time scales are mind-boggling, too. Maybe it
>> all just blows up in the end, and sometimes something interesting
>> happens along (for part of) the way...
>>
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>
>>> Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:52:11 -0700
>>> From: Richard Gauthier <richgauthier at gmail.com <mailto:richgauthier at gmail.com> >
>>> To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion
>>> <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org <mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org> >
>>> Subject: Re: [General] Verification of Light Interactions
>>> Message-ID: <5AE0CAA3-2648-4AE7-A87C-B261D99E886B at gmail.com <mailto:5AE0CAA3-2648-4AE7-A87C-B261D99E886B at gmail.com> >
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>>>
>>> Hello Chandra,
>>> Thank you for your detailed explanations. Whether or not the CTF (or
>>> the ether) is conscious is definitely an open question. We still need
>>> to know how mind and subjective experience arise in this physical
>>> universe, since that?s how we know about the physical universe. The old
>>> materialistic explanation that mind is an epiphenomenon of organized
>>> matter (?the brain secretes thought as the liver secretes bile.?) may
>>> satisfy some materialists (thinking themselves to be scientific). But
>>> this is not the only possible explanation of mind. Matter itself is yet
>>> to be fully understood. It?s unlikely to be composed of other matter
>>> ?all the way down?.
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>> On Sep 7, 2015, at 12:46 PM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra

_______________________________________________
If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at davidmathes8 at yahoo.com
<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1 <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/davidmathes8%40yahoo.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1> &unsubconfirm=1">
Click here to unsubscribe
</a>

_______________________________________________ If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at af.kracklauer at web.de <mailto:af.kracklauer at web.de>  Click here to unsubscribe  <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/af.kracklauer%40web.de?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20150910/eb2d9001/attachment.htm>