LOGIN
Steven Reubenstone
25
Community Expert
Mechanical Engineer & Tinkerer of Things.
 · New YorkU.S.
Share
Report
Get Link
QUESTION
Open

Rob Freeman what type of mathematical background/physics background do you have?

0 like 
Like
Award Contribution
Load 2 previous comments
Steven Reubenstone
25
Community Expert
Mechanical Engineer & Tinkerer of Things.
 · New YorkU.S.
Share
Report
Get Link

Mostly because I have always dreamed of collaborating with other math afficianados/experts on some of my ideas, and also contributing to their work…i really believe that to solve major issues like deconstructing neural networks it’s going to take some deeply abstract thought to really understand the brain – i’ve always had a hunch that the wave equation has it’s place somewhere deep in the mind. Just my personal thought. Would you be interested in checking out some of my work?

Also, I am going to promote your Project to start getting it some help/participation.

Like
1 like 
Award Contribution
Label resister (Project Leader)
 · Los AngelesU.S.
Share
Report
Get Link

Ha. Fine. I didn’t know how much of a story you wanted.

I did undergraduate physics with a theoretical specialization. But have spent most of my time subsequently thinking about computational linguistics.

I wouldn’t like to think it is a hammer making every problem a nail, but as a study of the underlying properties of the world physics does seem to have broad applicability.

On your intuition, I can give you a lot.

First a presentation of my own from some years ago along the same lines:

http://www.academia.edu/1692943/Wave_Linguistics (sorry academia.edu can be intrusive to access, write if you want it sent separately.)

Then the “Quantum Interaction” community, who had a conference for a few years, perhaps still:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21128285.900-quantum-minds-why-we-think-like-quarks/

And more, and better. My current angle is that an understanding of some distributional properties suggests nice answers for a model to go beneath quantum mechanics. Certainly it seems to be a general thing for assemblies to display “quantum” properties.

So I go somewhat the opposite way to the Quantum Interaction community. I think actually the mind may not require too much work. However the expansion of that simplicity can obviously be very rich. And accessing the simplicity does require a different understanding of the relationship between complexity and simplicity. Which a knowledge of some of the insights of things like wave equations can help with, yes.

By all means I’d be happy to look at anything you’ve done in the area.

Re. my project. I’ve made A LOT of progress myself just this last week. I was actually verging on changing and going to “stealth” with it. Because I think it has a lot of potential, and I’m not sure if open collaboration is the right model in the short term.

But I do welcome collaboration from someone with the right skills. Perhaps with an NDA, at this stage. Just to see how things pan out with this latest development.

Like
1 like 
Award Contribution
Bi Sh
1
Apprentice
Design Invention Research
 · KathmanduNepal
Share
Report
Get Link

is Cyto-Skeleton Quantum WF Collapse Model by Penrose relevant?

Like
0 like 
Award Contribution
Bi Sh
1
Apprentice
Design Invention Research
 · KathmanduNepal
Share
Report
Get Link

or the findings of Blue Brain Project… locating the experience in cortex…

Like
1 like 
Award Contribution
Label resister (Project Leader)
 · Los AngelesU.S.
Share
Report
Get Link

Hi @Bi Sh. No, I don’t think Penrose’s ideas are correct. From memory he thinks computation is proven to be unable to compute some things, so there must be something other than computation, hence quantum mechanics in… microtubules, or something. Wrong conclusion. But he does use argument based on incompleteness theorems, and I do think aspects of those theorems are relevant. Not because they say computation is unable to compute some things, but because of what they say it is unable to compute. Which I think can be summarized as abstractions of itself. Computation cannot always abstract or reduce itself. This is turning it around. Viewed in this way the same results actually say computation has much more power. More power than can be described/abstracted. So much so that when viewed from the point of view of abstractions it appears random. Hence freewill, creativity.

I don’t know the results of the Blue Brain Project you talk about. I think the cortex is important for the creation of our mental world in terms of objects, yes.

Like
1 like 
Award Contribution
Bi Sh
1
Apprentice
Design Invention Research
 · KathmanduNepal
Share
Report
Get Link

as far as i know… Human experience is already correlated neurally… for example im holding a Red Rose n Smelling it n remembering some things too… that all can be located to the exhaustive level in neural imprint. Associated emotions, plans, visions, intensions, free-will still to be nailed down… many say we can never do it… Mind cant b created out of matter… but Virutal Mind can b simulated…

Like
0 like 
Award Contribution
Leave a reply...
DISCOVER
CHAT
ALERTS
DISCUSSIONS
FEED