Knowing the mind of God

marchog

Free Member
Oct 14, 2007
936
8
54
Ten years ago I could have answered that, because I was half interested.,

What amused me more was Kasparov getting **stuffed** by Judit Polgar....then trying to think up excuses - or that is how I remember it!!

I missed that....she was a long way below him. A very very long way above me though. If you're not looking it up neither will I. Wikipedia says 200 million per second but I thought it was 2 million. Kasparov would have only been a couple a second....or would he? what cognitive process was he using? As noone knows it is hard to see how you can be confident that there is an information theory entropy problem with my inherited memory hypothesis.
 
Upvote 0
I missed that....she was a long way below him. A very very long way above me though. If you're not looking it up neither will I. Wikipedia says 200 million per second but I thought it was 2 million. Kasparov would have only been a couple a second....or would he? what cognitive process was he using? As noone knows it is hard to see how you can be confident that there is an information theory entropy problem with my inherited memory hypothesis.

I recollect that knowing he was beaten he would not even finish the game... to avoid declaring a result . She was only 14?15? at the time.


I think you are missing the point.

The biggest advantage people have over computers at chess is positional assessment. And that has always been the problem. Computers have to use brute force to go very deep on many variations to see how the positional advantage plays out, where the power of guys like fischer is to determine the positional factors that lead to the victory - expecting them to pan out on variations

What has improved over the years is computer positional assessment
So Programs like MCHESS even in 1992 were able to play at national standard

THe mind is incredibly good at pattern recognition, and I spent a few years trying to simulate that on computers in hush hush military world.

However I think you are confusing two factors.

The bit capacity of DNA (limited)
And the bit capacity of the brain (Enormous).
And the same parallell processing of visual data, can also be responsible for positional pattern assessment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

marchog

Free Member
Oct 14, 2007
936
8
54
I played it badly. Everyone liked Fischer. The best guy I beat was 1905. I would be happy with that. My local club had Iolo Jones who would play for Wales at the Olympiad and was 2350. I beat his dad T.Llew Jones. Iolo used to blink excessively...I think he may have been an android. Goldcrest Steve was also disturbed by the game...
 
Upvote 0
No, no, you make my point for me. The enormous bit capacity of the brain is the key and this is under the influence of environmental factors and also rather undeniably maternal factors throughout gestation.

But, the entropy of DNA is a bottle neck in maternal neural linkage capacity - even if that was a mechanism for "other life" memory - so could not run to movie style images.
 
Upvote 0

marchog

Free Member
Oct 14, 2007
936
8
54
But, the entropy of DNA is a bottle neck in maternal neural linkage capacity - even if that was a mechanism for "other life" memory - so could not run to movie style images.

No, I'll give you that move back. Embryology is the transmission line, the broadband umbilical chord of the broad. I am saying imagination is coded for, when this phenotypically manifests later after sensory input, one single bit for 'room' equates to a million million bits of brick.

edit - this is not my language, but you know what I mean for '1 bit for room'...rather than every pixel that makes up the text etc..
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
No, I'll give you that move back. Embryology is the transmission line, the broadband umbilical chord of the broad. I am saying imagination is coded for, when this phenotypically manifests later after sensory input, one single bit for 'room' equates to a million million bits of brick.

edit - this is not my language, but you know what I mean for '1 bit for room'...rather than every pixel that makes up the text etc..

Entropy is the information theoretic measurement of how the minimum amount of information can pass to code for a specified set of outcomes.
And believe me, visual experience is incredibly greedy.

So whilst it isundeniable that some neural connection patterns are coded through DNA, eg the response of every small mammal to suck on a teat, specific visual recollection is not reducable to sensible genetic code....except and unless the SAME visual memory is encoded into all offspring in which case the entropy is nothing, so the dna space taken is none. Anyone involved in practical coding knows that it is hard to get close to theentropy limited on complex but extremely likely presentations
 
Upvote 0
I played it badly. Everyone liked Fischer. The best guy I beat was 1905. I would be happy with that. My local club had Iolo Jones who would play for Wales at the Olympiad and was 2350. I beat his dad T.Llew Jones. Iolo used to blink excessively...I think he may have been an android. Goldcrest Steve was also disturbed by the game...

You cant like Fischer, you are too young!!

He was stuffing top grandmasters 6 -0 when I was just in senior school.
I used to follow every game. One of the most interesting books was by Gligoric about a speed chess tournatment all of them played..Spassky Petrosian Tal etc.. And fishcer wooped them all. The interesting part is the interviews witht them

Only a brief interlude for me. For a period of 3-4 years in early seniors choolI competed 2-3 times a week for school, town. city, county, top few boards which is how I met Miles and other borderline national class. We didnt have grandmasters then, seem to remember Jonathan Penrose was as good as it got. Was playing competitive bridge too for a while, but didnt have time for both so dropped bridge.. Didnt have time for congrresses so no idea how good I was. Used to like playing through old masters games almost more than competing. Loved Marshall and some of the old masters best games etc, and used to play obscure 20th century gambits to confuse the hell out of opponents who were stuck in modern era. Gave it all up at the age of 16 when golf took over instead. Just burnt out. Never played seriously since, although did get interested in some championshipes and made it my mission to beat some of the PC programmes until the mid nineties when it started getting too hard!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

marchog

Free Member
Oct 14, 2007
936
8
54
Entropy is the information theoretic measurement of how the minimum amount of information can pass to code for a specified set of outcomes.
And believe me, visual experience is incredibly greedy.

So whilst it is undeniable that some neural connection patterns are coded through DNA, eg the response of every small mammal to suck on a teat, specific visual recollection is not reducable to sensible genetic code....except and unless the SAME visual memory is encoded into all offspring in which case the entropy is nothing, so the dna space taken is none. Anyone involved in practical coding knows that it is hard to get close to the entropy limited on complex but extremely likely presentations

I didn't put it very clearly as I was drunk - I wasn't expecting to be drunk as that would suggest my consciousness was merely material, and you said it wasn't. So it would seem to be, with me choosing cjd as our judge and jury, your fault. I'll send you the laundry bill too.

I am suggesting something quite different that avoids the bottle neck. I am suggesting a nested hierarchy of triggers. How many genes does it take to make a brain? Very many and one. At the right point in the chain one switch will cause nothing or a trillion somethings. I am suggesting the 3D Tomb Raider engine comes 'off the shelf', but - this point is important - it too is zipped and built up in the first years of sensory input.

Now give me a magic nun under the age of 5 and I am scuppered.
 
Upvote 0

marchog

Free Member
Oct 14, 2007
936
8
54
You cant like Fischer, you are too young!!

He was stuffing top grandmasters 6 -0 when I was just in senior school.
I used to follow every game. One of the most interesting books was by Gligoric about a speed chess tournatment all of them played..Spassky Petrosian Tal etc.. And fishcer wooped them all. The interesting part is the interviews witht them

Only a brief interlude for me. For a period of 3-4 years in early seniors choolI competed 2-3 times a week for school, town. city, county, top few boards which is how I met Miles and other borderline national class. We didnt have grandmasters then, seem to remember Jonathan Penrose was as good as it got. Was playing competitive bridge too for a while, but didnt have time for both so dropped bridge.. Didnt have time for congrresses so no idea how good I was. Used to like playing through old masters games almost more than competing. Loved Marshall and some of the old masters best games etc, and used to play obscure 20th century gambits to confuse the hell out of opponents who were stuck in modern era. Gave it all up at the age of 16 when golf took over instead. Just burnt out. Never played seriously since, although did get interested in some championshipes and made it my mission to beat some of the PC programmes until the mid nineties when it started getting too hard!!

I've always felt sorry for Spassky. Outside of the game he is only remembered as a loser rather than a genius. I always lost when trying to play like Fischer....king's gambit etc. Doesn't work just because you know the first ten moves. Fischer was mysteriously disappeared.

But we're boring everyone. Show us the healings. I don't see why I should fry for eternity just because you're in a huff.
 
Upvote 0
The 'What's it like to be a bat?' is a great exercise and nice thinking, but the vogue is that there are no such things as qualia and consciousness doesn't exist, we are all fundamentally zombies. Part of the zombie code is to disbelieve this.

The extent to which anyone agrees or disagrees with nagel's deductions is secondary to the fact that he addresses a very important issue.

I include a link to the essay ( I think it is , although it is years since I read it so cant be sure it is not a fake,and dont have time to read it) - I would urge people to read it before reading critiques. Inevitably critiques express a more or less subjective bias on the part of the critiquer - the same reason that much of Wikik is an opinion on a subject, rather than an impartial view of it - for the reason that those who critique or create parts of Wiki do it because of a passion for either the subject or an opinion of it, and that does not always motivate objective treatment

All I am saying is read the original before dissenting views.

http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/nagel_nice.html
 
Upvote 0

marchog

Free Member
Oct 14, 2007
936
8
54
The extent to which anyone agrees or disagrees with nagel's deductions is secondary to the fact that he addresses a very important issue.

I include a link to the essay ( I think it is , although it is years since I read it so cant be sure it is not a fake,and dont have time to read it) - I would urge people to read it before reading critiques. Inevitably critiques express a more or less subjective bias on the part of the critiquer - the same reason that much of Wikik is an opinion on a subject, rather than an impartial view of it - for the reason that those who critique or create parts of Wiki do it because of a passion for either the subject or an opinion of it, and that does not always motivate objective treatment

All I am saying is read the original before dissenting views.

http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/nagel_nice.html

Fair enough ad. Another good case for dualism is made by David Chalmers. I think Pinker's on the materialist side, and Dennett certainly is. His book 'Explaining consciousness' is the one changing the zeitgeist, although maverick genius A.G.Cairns-Smith has had a pop at it too.

Now why did I get drunk the other night? What is happening with Alzheimers or brain damaged people's minds? The materialist position is straightforward, the dualist must claim the material platform is some kind of transponder for consciousness unspecified elsewhere and the material damage is disrupting the signal. On parsimony we may razor away dualism.

Bilocation would however be undeniable proof of dualism. Here Hume helps us.
 
Upvote 0

cjd

Business Member
  • Nov 23, 2005
    15,996
    3,432
    www.voipfone.co.uk
    Big Christian day today, Pentecost. Called the day that Christianity was born. I wonder how many Christians know that? Also it's the Holy Ghost's big day - presumably his (its?) second - the first being his impregnation of the Virgin of course.

    Pentecost

    Pentecost is the festival when Christians celebrate the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is celebrated on the Sunday 50 days after Easter.

    Pentecost is regarded as the birthday of the Christian church, and the start of the church's mission to the world.

    The Holy Spirit is the third part of the Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that is the way Christians understand God.

    Pentecost is a happy festival. Ministers in church often wear robes with red in the design as a symbol of the flames in which the Holy Spirit came to earth.

    Hymns sung at Pentecost take the Holy Spirit as their theme, and include:

    Come down O Love Divine
    Come Holy Ghost our souls inspire
    Breathe on me breath of God
    O Breath of Life, come sweeping through us
    There's a spirit in the air
    Spirit of the Living God, fall afresh on me
    Pentecost Symbols
    The symbols of Pentecost are those of the Holy Spirit and include flames, wind, the breath of God and a Dove.

    The first Pentecost
    Pentecost comes from a Jewish harvest festival called Shavuot.

    The apostles were celebrating this festival when the Holy Spirit descended on them.

    It sounded like a very strong wind, and it looked like tongues of fire.

    The apostles then found themselves speaking in foreign languages, inspired by the Holy Spirit.

    People passing by at first thought that they must be drunk, but the apostle Peter told the crowd that the apostles were full of the Holy Spirit.

    When you see it written like down that you wonder how anyone can really take it seriously.
     
    Upvote 0

    cjd

    Business Member
  • Nov 23, 2005
    15,996
    3,432
    www.voipfone.co.uk
    I've just been to Vienna for a few days. It's a town that looks like it's not done anything new for 300 years. It was only when I got home that I realised that almost all those enormously expensive buildings - and they are everywhere - are almost all secular, Opera Houses, Theatres, Galleries and Palaces.

    It's bothered me for years that the religious infrastructure in the UK is hideously expensive. Almost every tiny village in the UK has at least one church, often 2 or even three. And they are always massively out of proportion to the villages they are in. Building them must have been an enormous, overbearing investment by the community - and that doesn't even count the salaries and pensions and housing of the priesthood that serviced the hardware.

    It didn't make any sense to me until I twigged that in the mediaeval church the populous were investing in their own survival. They believed that by worshipping their gods and building their houses of worship their harvest would come home, their family wouldn't die of plague and the witches and demons could be held at bay.

    It's the giraffe's neck - an extreme survival solution that looks silly to disinterested observers.
     
    Upvote 0
    D

    Deleted member 3454

    Big Christian day today, Pentecost. Called the day that Christianity was born. I wonder how many Christians know that? Also it's the Holy Ghost's big day - presumably his (its?) second - the first being his impregnation of the Virgin of course.

    When you see it written like down that you wonder how anyone can really take it seriously.


    Why not watch this and see if it helps clarify anything? It got Radio 1's Chris Moyles talking on his show this morning.
     
    Upvote 0

    cjd

    Business Member
  • Nov 23, 2005
    15,996
    3,432
    www.voipfone.co.uk
    Why not watch this and see if it helps clarify anything? It got Radio 1's Chris Moyles talking on his show this morning.

    I watched about half of it but had to give up when it all became too much for me - it's just too hard to watch religion as showbiz...... All I can say is that it's not quite as horrible to see as a American evangelical event.
     
    Upvote 0

    marchog

    Free Member
    Oct 14, 2007
    936
    8
    54
    Yes fire away with colour.

    Sorry fell asleep after some newfangled non-drowsy hayfever tablet. I'll type the page out presently - then find some links to papers/pictures. Give me ten minutes (got some strange stuff on experiments done on conscious brain surgery patients too for later....the brain switching the order in which things occured in real time etc)
     
    Upvote 0

    marchog

    Free Member
    Oct 14, 2007
    936
    8
    54
    Colour is generally regarded as a property of objects in the world, or at least of the light that is reflected from objects. In fact there is no colour ‘out there’ – it is constructed by our eyes and brains. Light waves that are usually associated with ‘green’ for example, may be experienced as yellow or grey according to what else the brain is experiencing at the time, what it expects to see, and what it has just seen.

    This initial classification of a colour is made by retinal neurons. The brain then continues to sort the incoming stimuli into various colours according to a classification system which is partly innate and partly learned.

    Imagine a band of colour blending smoothly from red at one end to blue at the other. Now imagine dividing the band into thousands of tiny slices, each one so thin that the difference between one and the next along is so slight as to be imperceptible.

    Now think of a person naming the colour of each slice in turn, moving along the spectrum from one end to another. If they start at the red end, they would name the first slice, obviously, red. Then, because they would be unable to detect any difference between the slices, they would name the next one red too. And the next, and the next, and the next…Right up to the blue end.

    In fact, of course, we don’t do this. Rather at some point in the exercise we make a decision to switch colour categories. However, the decision would not be based on a perceived difference between one slice and the next because there would not be one – rather it would reflect a shift from one conceptual category to another. We don’t see the dividing line between one colour and the next – we impose it.

    Some languages divide the visible spectrum into many more colour categories than others. English speakers, for example, divide the colour ‘space’ into eight categories (red, blue, green, pink, purple, orange, yellow and brown), whereas the language pf the Berinmo tribe, in Papua New Guinea, has only five colour names for the same range. But the difference between the two cultures is not just that they use different words for the same colour qualia – rather that they actually experience different things when they look at the same colour.

    A study by Jules Davidoff, of Goldsmith’s College in London, found that Berinmo speakers do not just have a relatively crude way of describing colour differences, they also perceive fewer distinctions. This suggests that having a language-based concept for a particular colour may be necessary in order for us to see it as distinct from another. It could be that the relatively impoverished colour lexicon of the Berinmo tribe reflects some difference in the colour part of their visual sensory cortex so that it is not equipped to make fine colour distinctions. An alternative interpretation is that the Berinmo have not developed the language-based concepts required to make the distinctions, so that although their colour neurons register subtle colour changes in the same way as English speakers, these changes are not represented at a higher cognitive level and therefore do not become conscious.
     
    Upvote 0

    marchog

    Free Member
    Oct 14, 2007
    936
    8
    54
    How about that? Did you know you can see with your blind spot too? - lights shone right to left or left to right over people's blind spots will elicit the response 'I never saw nuffink'. Yet if the person is asked to guess which way they consistently get it right.
     
    Upvote 0

    marchog

    Free Member
    Oct 14, 2007
    936
    8
    54



    There is a whole body of experimental-psychological work measuring the span of the "now" (or - "the psychological moment" as it is usually referred to in that literature). A common technique is to check the minimal (physical) time span at which two consecutive stimuli are perceived as two rather than one. The main lesson that this literature reveals is the the value of the span measured varies with practically all the factors one may think of: the sensory modality, the nature of the stimuli, the task, the specific technique of measurement. All this indicates that, indeed, psychological time is determined by psychological factors, and that it has no independent, absolute sense outside the specific context of action.


    I think this may have been what kenuk was on about 2 years ago when he said time did not exist.
     
    Upvote 0

    cjd

    Business Member
  • Nov 23, 2005
    15,996
    3,432
    www.voipfone.co.uk
    All this 'does reality exist stuff' is now an A level Philosophy question - " How do we know we're not in the Matrix?" (Real question).

    My answer has always been "If I can't tell, it doesn't matter'.

    Another philosopher, when asked a similar question, booted the questioner up the backside and asked if it felt 'real'.

    I'm with the pragmatists
     
    Upvote 0

    marchog

    Free Member
    Oct 14, 2007
    936
    8
    54
    Another philosopher, when asked a similar question, booted the questioner up the backside and asked if it felt 'real'.

    I doubt he left by the first floor window either.

    Yet how about this - your philosopher's brain started to execute this voluntary movement before he 'decided' to boot the questioner up the arse. A wave of neural activity known as the readiness potential is detectable half a second before the person is aware of their decision to act.
     
    Upvote 0

    cjd

    Business Member
  • Nov 23, 2005
    15,996
    3,432
    www.voipfone.co.uk
    Also the pain reflex is wired directly to muscles - your hand moves before your brain feels pain and can send a signal telling the hand to get out of the fire.

    And anyway, where is pain? Somewhere in your hand, your brain or the room?
     
    Upvote 0

    stockdam

    Free Member
    Jul 3, 2008
    2,234
    308
    I had a friend in Uni who was doing Philosophy and one night (err ok it was every night) I went out to the pub. I asked if he was going too but he said he had an essay to hand in the next day but he hadn't started. He said it was titled "Why" and went into a long speech about what he was going to write.

    I just told him to write "Why not?" and come to the pub.

    He did and got a "first class" mark for his essay.

    So it's not always quantity that matters.


    We also had debates about pain and reality but to be honest I was more interested in going to the pub.
     
    Upvote 0

    marchog

    Free Member
    Oct 14, 2007
    936
    8
    54
    Also the pain reflex is wired directly to muscles - your hand moves before your brain feels pain and can send a signal telling the hand to get out of the fire.

    There is no readiness potential produced for reflex actions. But Libet found in hundreds of trials that in the 'voluntary' case, the 'decision' to move occurred 350-400 milliseconds after the EEG spikes revealed the RP. The movement itself then took place two tenths of a sec after that. The 'decision' was not the cause of the action!
     
    Last edited:
    Upvote 0

    cjd

    Business Member
  • Nov 23, 2005
    15,996
    3,432
    www.voipfone.co.uk
    the 'decision' to move occurred 350-400 milliseconds after the EEG spikes revealed the RP. The movement itself then took place two tenths of a sec after that. The 'decision' was not the cause of the action!

    I don't find that terribly surprising - all that's being said is that the action starts in the subconscious and we then become aware of it (sometimes and only if necessary).

    If it didn't, our conscious brain would be having to work out each step we took and each eye blink. No room left to think; like Vista on 1 meg of RAM
     
    Upvote 0

    Latest Articles

    Join UK Business Forums for free business advice