[General] To realists out there

Wed Jan 24 09:41:12 PST 2018

Hi Shandra,

Yes, the system can be used to correctly apprehend physical reality, but I have found out that it allows more than this mere possibility, I found that it allows guaranteeing that physical reality can be correctly understood. This is what transpires from the synthesis that can be made of the leading edge research carried out by these neurophysiologists. This is what I have been documenting.

We also have the urge get off this single planet to ensure the survival of the species, as you note. But since at any time we can be wiped out by a single major meteorite like the one that sealed the fate of the dinosaurs, we obviously have interest in establishing at least one self-sustaining colony elsewhere as soon as possible.

I don't think it is necessary or even required that the global human culture becomes evolution congruent, as you say. I came to the conclusion that only a minimal triggering threshold number (to be established) of evolution congruent individuals would be required, as always happened in the past, to induce the required major push.

My conclusion is that this can be accomplished not too far in the future by insuring that the largest number possible of children reach in time (before the age of 7) full mastery of all verbal skills, which is the mandatory requirement to awaken individual curiosity and eventual orientation of individuals towards leading edge fundamental research.

I am optimistic for the future.

Best Regards

André

---
André Michaud
GSJournal admin
http://www.gsjournal.net/
http://www.srpinc.org/

On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 14:26:19 +0000, "Roychoudhuri, Chandra"  wrote:

Andre: I am inspired by your comments!  J

I am rushed to prepare for the SPIE Photonics West at San Francisco to deliver a paper and also the 9th yearly workshop on the nature of light. Therefore, detailed discussions will have to wait.

Yes, our neural network has the capability of using our neural network to develop “free will” better than other self-aware species. So, I agree, “….the system can be used to correctly apprehend physical reality”. We have already gone to the moon and are seriously preparing to go to Mars. These planetary bodies came into being before the early human species even learned to talk properly. 

These modern travel plans are not necessary engineering skills to survive within the biosphere. However, deep within our evolving biological intelligence that we cannot fathom yet, we have the biological urge to start finding other planets in other stars since the Sun is going to be a Red Giant; and the effect will start engulfing the earth within a billion years!

However, we need to figure out how to get the global human culture become evolution congruent, rather than evolution deniers. It is now a serious global problem. L

Chandra.

From: André Michaud [mailto:srp2 at srpinc.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 7:23 PM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
Cc: Roychoudhuri, Chandra; srp2 at srpinc.org
Subject: RE: [General] To realists out there

Hi Shandra,

I am elated that you would be so aware of the double interface that the neocortex interposes between our "awareness" and the outside physical reality, which also includes the "emotional signals" apparently originating in the hypothalamus, that Chauchard identified as the seat of what he named "bio-awareness", that  integrates and then provides these signals at the input layer of the neocortex as "feelings" of well being or discomfort or any other emotional reaction.

I found that not many people have dug into the literature to even become that aware of this state of fact and what problems this presents us with in our attempts to understand physical reality, that is distinguish our subjective inner model of reality and actual objective reality.

I did not know about this experiment with the inverting prism. I agree with your conclusions about the experiment.

We certainly cannot undo the correlating processes that were directly pre-programmed by the genetic code. It is indeed possible to directly program 1 and 2 layer neural networks, even artificial ones, and there is no other mechanical way that instinctive survival reflexes could have been genetically established in our brains, including how the network is hard wired, so to speak, to associate the visible light frequencies with the subjective "colors" that we "see", as well as all automatic processes going on inside our bodies. Failure of this programming results in some people being color-blind for example for certain colors.

This is how all instinctive and automatic processes are hard-wired into the various parts of our brain by the genetic code.

All of our emotions are carried to the entry layer of the neocortex at the same time as all other perceptions from our senses and subjectively "color" all of our conclusions, if we are not careful to take them into account as we consider possibilities. As you say, we can learn to manage them in real time.

I would say that the story of the "five blinds and the elephant" is more concrete than the so abstract and not obvious to decode allegory of the cave, but it obviously carries the same message. The same also with the "Cartesian doubt" philosophy. My own, and I think Einstein's versions can be summarized as "keeping no stone unturned" in the search for clues.

You write "Oh yes, one more point. We are barely beginning to understand how our neural network has been creating our awareness and consciousness."

It would appear so only because the leading edge research that was carried out on the various aspects of this issue by renowned neurophysiologists have never been integrated and synthesized, mainly due to the language barrier, but also due to the incredibly high level of abstraction that needs to be reached in reading their work. Even if "awareness" per se is still an unresolved issue, the automatic actual correlating process of multi-layer neural networks are rather deeply understood, and the "functional analyses" carried out by Pavlov, Hebb and Chauchard definitely explain how the system can be used to correctly apprehend physical reality.

Their names are even rather widely known except for Chauchard maybe. They are Pavlov, Hebb, Eccles, and also sociologist Korzybski, who deeply studied the difference between the names that we give to all "real objects" and the "real objects" themselves, each of us giving the same "name" a different extent of meaning, or even a different meaning, depending on the extent of our knowledge base and life experience, including the emotional connotations that we attach to this object, etc. He is the originator of this little summarizing sentence of the process, that you may have heard or read: "The map is not the country".

Actually, attempting to make the community aware of their research and discoveries is my main project. I still have 2 more papers to issue before all the required pieces will be in place.

Best Regards

André 

---
André Michaud
GSJournal admin
http://www.gsjournal.net/
http://www.srpinc.org/

On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 21:36:19 +0000, "Roychoudhuri, Chandra" wrote:

Andre:  

You have presented your logical analysis very “objectively” to my mode of thinking! 

If someone puts on a pair of glasses consisting of two image inverting prisms; s/he will be stumbling for a short period (person-to-person variable). Then, the outside world will become right-side-up again. After taking off the glasses, our neural network will have to revert back to standard “reality” again, which itself is an inverted image on the retina. This experiment was done at least 50 years ago.

However, we have not evolved to do neural processing to correct eye-lens-distorted images on the retina. That is why the ophthalmologists are still in business! 

We also cannot undo (and should not) our subjective interpretation of color. EM waves, or “Photons”, are not colored. Objective property is the frequency of light that facilitates the frequency-resonant electronic transition in the molecules in our retinal cones. These separate sets of “color coded” cones send separate signals to be synthesized into SUBJECTIVE color interpretation by the neural network. Even tiny critters have evolved with this hard-wired subjective interpretation. This is essential for quick recognition of our surroundings for our survival. Otherwise, we would have needed prolong analysis of every component of the images falling on the retina. Food or poison, threat or friendly – these decisions have to be made rather fast. Impressed and overwhelmed by these evolutionary creativities, humans have developed the subjective tendency to pray to their chosen gods, images of whom have been invented by us! Seeing “color” is subjective; but it is hard-wired for us by nature. Do we fully understand how many more such subjective interpretation propensities are hard-wired into our neural network? Some functionalities are flexible. As an obvious example, all of our emotional interpretations are carried out by the neural network. Fortunately, if we remain aware of this reality, we can learn to manage our emotions in real time. Human society will be better off recognizing this fact.

I like the story of the “five blinds and the elephant”, better than Plato’s, because it is more advanced in thinking strategy. We all subjectively map the Cosmic Elephant a bit differently out of the same ontological reality. Our awareness about this subtleties allows us to extract partial ontological realities. That is why it is so important that we keep comparing our notes, collaborate and keep synthesizing better and better epistemological reality that steadily approaches towards the actual ontological reality. The ontological reality, the cosmic system, was created, as we understand now, some 13.5 billion years ago. Human analytical intelligence started making serious theories about our solar and cosmic system barely half a millennia ago!! 

Oh yes, one more point. We are barely beginning to understand how our neural network has been creating our awareness and consciousness. However, the neural net is sustained and nurtured by a complex system of ten trillion human cells and one hundred trillion symbiotic and synergistic micro biota as an integrated system. This is a marvelous system engineering achievement by nature through the collaboration of 110 trillion independent living cells. No human has yet achieved the state of enlightenment to physically understand, appreciate, and identify what different functions any particular cell is carrying out at any particular moment. We are still pretty far away from defining what is human consciousness. Human consciousness is not confined within the domain of our skulls! Forget about building robots that can out-smart human creative intelligence. We have not yet succeeded in defining the collective molecular functionalities behind the emergence of humans intelligence. Otherwise, we would have been designing all of our babies to be super creative? 

It is still good to be humble and keep sharing and collaborating. Diversity is not just a politically expedient expression; it is at the very foundation of the successful biospheric evolution, which include humans as one of the species, albeit with the best engineering capabilities, so far. Our engineering successes are fundamentally more important than our theory making capabilities. Let us remember that it is because our primitive engineer forefathers, like Lucy and her husband, kept on creating tools and technologies, to persistently create better and better living conditions, which has made us the top-dog species of today. That was only five million years back. Lucy’s did not even have a serious language in the modern sense; forget about making mathematical theories. But their engineering activities assured our successful evolution. 

Theories that succeed in modeling at least some partial ontological realities, do facilitate accelerated innovations. We know many such examples from modern history of science that we brag about. But logically correct looking theories, devoid of ontological realities can slow down innovations and dumb-down our engineering capabilities to overcome biospheric calamities, natural or man-made. J 

Chandra.

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of André Michaud
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2018 7:03 PM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
Subject: Re: [General] To realists out there

Hi Wolfgang,

This example does not need to make any a-priori assumption that there is an objective reality.

We know that what we think we "see" is due to the constant arrival of photons of the visible frequencies range individually hitting the millions of sensory cells in our retinas. The related electro-chemical impulses that the neurons located in the retinas send to the intercalary layers of the neocortex still arrive there separately. The coherences (shapes, colors, etc) present in the flow at any given moment are automatically decoded, selected and "displayed" in real time to the output layer in the visual cortex for our "awareness" to become cognizant of.

If the images move when we warp our retina by pushing on it, it can only be because it affects the angle at which the photons travel to the retinas through the eye. The same if you close your eyes. Light stops hitting the cells, diminishing the intensity and number of signals going to the visual area.

We are physiologically unable by structure to become aware of the arrivl of the individual signals to each neuron in the retina, although we now understand that this is what happens. We can become aware only of the result of the processing done by the neural net in simultaneously correlating the whole collection of individual signals "after" they have been received and correlated to identify the detailed "images" that we then can become aware of. 

That's how every part of the neocortex operates as was discovered by Donald Hebb.

The individual input signals reaching the retinas are "real", but the "images" that we "see" are the result of the automatic processing of the 6 layer neural network and are completely resolved only when reaching the output layer after having electrochemically gone through the thickness of the network. Even artificial neural networks operate like this, whether real networks built with electronic parts or simulated by programming on linear processors.

What Chip is talking about is that we need to understand better what produces and sends these signals that hit the retinas. That's the physical reality he is talking about. The elementary particles making up the atoms that make up all existing bodies, including our own bodies, and even our neocortices.

The shadows on Plato's cave refer to someting else. The inner working of the neocortex was studied and understood by Hebb only in the 1940's. Plato had no idea that it even existed. The shadows on the back wall of the cave refer to the fact that we tend to become deeply certain of our conclusions. So deeply certain that once reached, it is very difficult for us to question them and reconsider, even when faced with new evidence that a conclusion could be questioned. The Cave allegory carries an even a deeper message, that even if we succeed in requestioning our deepest conclusions, we should question them again, because we will again become too deeply certain to put them in question.

Best Regards

André

---
André Michaud
GSJournal admin
http://www.gsjournal.net/
http://www.srpinc.org/

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:19:41 -0800, Wolfgang Baer wrote:

Andre:

Please take a step back and look at your example. Is it not based on the a-priori assumption that there is an objective reality and signals from that assumed objective reality flow through our neural structure? What if we eliminate this assumption? What if we realize that our mental processing starts with the interaction at the retina. We do not know what caused it a-priori but what we are doing and have always done is attempt to find explanations for the imges produced by that interaction. We explain the shadows in Plato's cave.

I thought this simple and clear example is demonstrable proof that we do not see objects. Nothing profound or complex. The object does not move when the screen on which an image is projected is warped. Because they do move when we warp our retina by pushing on it we do not see objects but processed images. It has been a puzzle for me that this simple and demonstrable proof is

This does not mean its all in the mind, it means we all see our own interpretation and once understood it leaves the door open for alternative and hopefully improved concepts of reality as quantum theory has shown us.

wolf

Dr. Wolfgang Baer

Research Director

Nascent Systems Inc.

tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432

E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com

On 1/22/2018 5:26 AM, André Michaud wrote:

Hi Chip,

I absolutely agree with you.

Each of our "awarenesses" is separated from this really existing physical reality by the double interface provided by each our neocortex. 

Our nerve endings feed the "signals" they receive from "outside" to the entry layer of the neocortex (a 6-layer neural network), which is the outer interface. The intercalary layers automatically correlate in real time the tens of millions of signals into coherences that are automatically provided at the output layer (the second interface) of which our awareness is constantly observing. 

These research were carried out by neurophysiologists Ivan Pavlov (available only in Russian and German), Donald Hebb (available only in English), and Paul Chauchard (available only in French) mainly.

If you are interested, a general summary of their research is available here: 

https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/on-the-relation-between-the-comprehension-ability-and-the-neocortexverbal-areas-2155-6180-1000331.pdf

Best Regards

André

---
André Michaud
GSJournal admin
http://www.gsjournal.net/
http://www.srpinc.org/

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 05:37:43 -0600, "Chip Akins" wrote:

Hi Wolf

Yes. I agree that we need to make that next step of describing what is going on which creates what we can observe.

But I also firmly believe that there is an independent objective reality which is described by the energy and its reaction to space. And that we are also made of the same kinds of thing which we observe (Energy reacting with space creating particles, etc.).

The independent objective reality does not depend on us for it to exist, but we can interact with it and make small changes to it in the scheme of things. The building, tree, mountain, planet, or galaxy, are still there, whether we observe them or not.

We can change the shape of the lens in our eye and distort an image just as we can change the shape of an external lens and distort an image. The laws which govern these reactions are not changed. Those laws, those causes, which define our universe, are the reasons that particles exist and behave as they do. It is not our observation which defines those objective laws of the universe. But we can do a much better job of understanding those laws. That is the next step.

Chip

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Baer
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 7:58 PM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
Subject: Re: [General] To realists out there

Chip:

The point is we do not see objects out there, we process the imagefalling on our retina using our encoded beliefs into a mental mage display, we do not directly see objects but instead created the perception with all its properties

If we saw objects directly they would not move when we fiddle with the image in the experiment I described 

And because we do not see object directly but only perceptions that we believe is reality, once we realize reality is NOT objects then the door is open to ask the question, "Is there a better assumption about what explains our sensations?"

And a step along this path was taken by Quantum Theory which substitutes probability waves for the classic object reality.

But probabilities are squirmy and unsatisfying to me and most of us in the forum- instead as my paper for FQXI proposes I believe reality is better described by events, and specifically closed action cycles in time. This is not solipsism. It does not mean there is nothing external. It means the next step in our world view is to replace objects and probabilities with interacting events. 

And specifically for your paper it means space is no longer an independent objective thing out there but rather a creation that explains certain repetitive sensations and therefore Lorenz is right there is a fundamental background, and Einstein is right every coordinate frame defines it own space. But neither of them have made the next step. That we are all measuring through our coordinate frames and learned theories that continue to evolve.

hope this helps it certainly helps me to try to find the words that explain Plato's cave idea in modern terms.

wolf 

Dr. Wolfgang Baer

Research Director

Nascent Systems Inc.

tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432

E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com

On 1/21/2018 1:57 PM, Chip Akins wrote:

Hi Wolf

But we do have physical explanation for the distortion of an image by a non-uniform convex lens. The refractive properties of the lens are well known and documented, so that we can accurately predict the distortion a particular lens will cause.

While we are made of material molecules, atoms, and particles, which have an electromagnetic set of characteristics, and that means that our perceptions are based on our physical makeup, and our abilities to sense certain electromagnetic interactions, the fundamental reality that exists in the universe can continue to exist without any one of us, or all of us.

The evidence indicates that it is not only illogical but extremely arrogant to assume otherwise. Our consciousness does not create material objects in the universe, but it does allow us to sense and interpret what we sense in various, sometimes erroneous, ways. There are many ways for us to test this hypothesis, and we actually test it many times each day. 

Just my two cents, and my 5 senses. Opinion and tangible physical mechanisms respectively.

Chip

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chipakins=gmail.com at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Baer
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2018 2:53 PM
To: Nature of Light and Particles - General Discussion  <general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Subject: [General] To realists out there

To all:

I just submitted an essay contest to FQXI that is a short version of the physics of the observer I am working on. One of the responses claims I am completely off the mark and was signed "realist" 

Some of you may have the same "realist" inclinations so think of this simple experiment:

Consider any object lens image setup.

Bend the image screen and you will see the image is distorted, but no such distortion changes the object.

Now do the same thing but use your eye as the lens image part of the setup.

Close one eye. With the other focus on an object - say a coffee cup on the desk 1 meter away. Now push the open eye from the side with your finger. This bends the retina and also moves or distorts the coffee cup.

There is no physical mechanism in our current science that accounts for such a distortion of the coffee cup if the coffee cup you see is an independent object.

Conclusion: Neither the coffee cup nor anything we see in our daily environment is an independent objective reality. We are living in an interpretation of sensor interactions that is implemented by a physics inside the observer. Developing and defining this physics and straightening out the errors that have crept into our current physics due to the assumption that reality is the way we see it is the the the challenge confronting science today 

If you want to look at the paper click on

https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3043

If you want to rate it it might help me win, never know.

Thanks

Wolf

-- 

Dr. Wolfgang Baer

Research Director

Nascent Systems Inc.

tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432

E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com

_______________________________________________

If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com

<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=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 srp2 at srpinc.org

Click here to unsubscribe

_______________________________________________

If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com

<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=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 srp2 at srpinc.org

Click here to unsubscribe

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20180124/fae97cdb/attachment.html>