the neural net and artificial intelligence
cijadra at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Tue Dec 29 03:22:33 EST 1998
(To certain people: Skip all apart from first sentence of second
>An animal behaves in its own interest.
I heard of someone being helped to land who needed that by dolphins,
and have seen enough other acts and also heard of them where actions
where done that indicated interest oriented at another not even of the
>It must build models of reality based on its own perspective.
I am not sure that there are many into such,
as with lower neocortex capacities (and maybe still using it for older
perception settings) it might be harder to build models of realities
and easier to scan parts of the one that is there,
without making models of it,
like some humans might in excess.
I noticed that cats are able to generate models of reality, and some
others might as well.
I do not know enough about dreaming to be sure how many models of
reaality might pop up there, though I am not sure to what extent that
is falling under "building".
>Being aware is nothing if you are not self aware.
To me that sounds like you did not even reach limbic segregation yet,
which is sort of a prestage to self-perception.
>Self aware in this context as in behaving towards the benefit of the self (...)
For that for all I know no self awareness is needed.
The sequencer could do that at times.
Self aware means exactly that: SELF aware.
People aware of the own areas tend to be able to discern them from
several other areas in the brain around, though I never met anyone
perceiving all nor anyone perceiving all details about a single area.
>Finally, and this is no small point, HOW are the non physical soul
>and the physical body connected? How can the non physical have an effect
>on the physical?
>>how the brain thinks. It will then be evident that there is no awareness (consciousness,
>> soul) in the physical universe. Man will turn to religion.
...rrare humanum est.
>...evolutionarily beneficial? Acting with regard to the self certainly is,
> doesn't this lead to a self awareness we call consciousness?
>Consciousness has two aspects: One, alertness, is objective, the
>other,awareness, is subjective.
>All animal life that possesses a neural net is alert.
Concerning the meaning of the last word I was taught: No.
>It reacts to its environment in a manner that differs from life without a neural net.
Who would have thought so.
>Awareness is not part of the material world, awareness belongs, ultimately,
Surrrre, and all who are not into any therefore are not aware of
anything at all.
>It is the soul that is aware.
>We like to think that some who are alert, are also aware.
WE certainly do not.
Aware of what?
What you write is making little sense to me.
But I guess there is a way to test your awareness:
Describe to me the yellowish halo around Jesus head in many drawings
and the slightly more "whitish" halos of some Asian energy workers
in relation to differences between them
concerning healing other people
and also other aspects if you want to.
If you are sense censored Christian then now might follow some
babbling about God combined with zero awareness of how to generate the
according energy ranges yourself.
If you are using awareness enough to write about it
then I'd also be interested in differences within areas of the brain
that you are aware of when tuning to between them.
> I would like to extend awareness to all who possess a neural
So, would you like to extend that there, how gracious.
I take it that you are sense censored?
And I guess in your religious existing of oh such awareness
if one person did injure some plants and the other person watered them
and was nice to them there'd be zero reaction differences of all
plants that was done to if one or the other entered the room and got
>Evolution is a concept of the physical world. Awareness is not part of that
Odd that someone actually invented different some letters for blind
people that you are sensing via the fingers instead of asking them to
read them with the non-physical awareness.
As awareness is not part of the physical world as you perceive it
it is also weird that many people with brain damages are not able to
perceive as much at once around them then some who are having less
> Awareness can not be beneficial or non-beneficial to
>survival of the individual. It is totally irrelevant.
I am sure that to be aware or not to be aware of some huge hungry
creature with impressive teeth coming up to you to eat you is sure
totally irrelevant for the survival of the individual.
Your awareness of such matters is amazing.
>>What about enlightenment? That is the final jump out of the loop. I think
>>it is an important concept, and one that should not be sniffed at as
>>religious nonsense. Godel proved that no system can describe reality
>>completely accurately, so transcending the system is the only way to see
>> the truth.
>I argue that in the first half or three quarters of the next century neuroscientists will work out how the brain
I argue that not the whole brain thinks but just some areas, and
therefore they will not work out how THE brain thinks.
If they finally get how to perceive better subatomically with some
thousands of years behind some others they might get some basics, too.
>It will then be evident that there is no awareness (consciousness,
>soul) in the physical universe. Man will turn to religion.
How good of you to know that, especially since some who need a
psycho-crutch already are clinging to one or several of aall the
religons that are there, and others who might be male or female
non-religious people might not even care what neuro proves or does not
prove, as that is not making lazying one the beach, having sex or
cooking real nice food or other stuff that they might be interested in
much better than it already is for them.
Maybe your awareness of the physical universe is not perceiving that
some of the ones in it want to have a nice time in life and are
getting it to the extent that they are not needing some psycho-crutch
of some unproven gods or other titles or other unspecified beings to
be there. And that the interest in having good sex or/and good food
might be considerably higher than to wether or wether not the thalamus
is to do with the sequencer's thinking,
and that they might not even be interested reading from you that they
are having no awareness nor any forms of consciouness.
>An estimate of the number of neurons in the human brain is 100 billion. How
>many neurons in the entire net? 200 billion? What shall we say about the
>cost of a neuromime?
The logic escapes me. Areas of the body and brain are of a bigger
system. Forms of akasha (energies) of systems are of relevance.
It is not humane to simulate or use I areas of us mammals, and I do
not recommend to simulate or use what in bionet.neuroscience and in
some other rooms I refer to as the third emotion generator.
If someone after his death wants systems that are not including the
main other I area to be (ab)used or the whole to be somehow (ab)used
that I regard as different
from evil activities that involve imprisoning people of other races,
declaring parts of their brain the own possession to be messed around
in, maybe even to get energy data that could be abused for human
and attempts to simulate parts of systems having I perception and who
are in nature never without certain other systems, together part of a
>It seems more reasonable just to talk about designing one,talk is cheap.
It does not seem reasonable to me.
Discussion of such nature could be held magically without a single
word being spoken, and that would automatically disqualify all who
were never accepted into magic teaching or were of a nature that they
are not far enough for it.
If they are far enough within magic branches which are often teaching
inner and outer balances and positive inner developments,
then the risk if abuse is not that high.
Simplified what you "see" to do with areas of the brain could probably
be imitated even in far simpler forms and not necessarily based on
systems of us mammals.
It is just freaking dangerous for many reasons, and as long as
humanity is still having members dying because they did not have money
that in other places might be wasted for stuff not needed for
survival, then there is still enough to do, apart from peaceful ways
of reducing the human population within the next thousands of years so
that natural balances can return more and not more and more other
thinking beings are extinguished.
>It seems also more reasonable to talk about the neural net rather than the
>brain, it gives a sense of balance.
About the sense of balance of wires of different systems.
>If we have an explanation of how man's (rat's, cat's) neural net works we
>have a good design for a machine brain.
Let me guess, and if I tell you all about wires then "we" have a good
design for factory machines?
Would you mind stopping WEing like some US-Americans do?
With ideas some others consider idiotic.
>This would seem obvious.
To me it sounds about as intelligent as someone declaring the wires of
his machine the machine.
Telepathy has been researched for thousands of years and for thousands
of years energies that are able to pass between human brains for
hundreds and more of km are known.
As for that subatomic energy structures seem relevant, and after atom
level ones and whata they make next maybe internal produres in
different cells - and I do not understand enough about the glia -, and
as there are areas where I do not even get what understanding them for
would be good for concerning the building of artificial intelligences,
I do not get what you find obvious about that.
Personally for example if such would interest me one of the first
internal processings I might go for might be to compare "seeing"
different human brain akasha with each other and to contemplate what
seems to be relatively easy to transfer between brains and what not
and then to contemplate the "what not"s and gather internal and
external data about that.
>Remember we are not talking about building it, just designing it.
Do you believe that that is making the people who could tell you a lot
about such telling you it?
If being at idle talk, we could as well talk how to make a questioning
system to all humans and maybe others to make sure that no one is
against that the day some people are interested in it.
>Those interested in how the brain works might look at
To read about THE brain and THE neural nets?
I'd rather have someone show me and let me practice what to do so my
car would work better.
Not all is a wise thing to discuss in words.
Far less with those who before the building of another being are not
discussing what errors could mean for that person
nor discuss the dangers for humans
nor how to ask all humans to make sure that no one is against it,
so that that way it is more O.K. if one of the later artificial
intelligences should decide that it is better for the planet and
itself to remove humans.
Bloxy's at hotmail.com (Bloxy's) wrote:
>The very idea of "transcending" is stupid.
Then it is sure no problem for you to transcend to enlightenment.
There are not that many on Earth who sober can,
and in the advanced cultured they usually tend to be very admired.
I did not hear of you yet, which is odd, as someone able to learn
transcending and reaching the levels where you could become a healer,
communicator into space and medium to transit energies between many
different energy forms,
... and then calling such amazing wide range perception as people good
in transcending tend to have stupid, should have spread far more.
Here in these lands there are very few who can transcend far as
Catholics killed people using senses like those needed for that for
centuries, as of course transcending is the prestage of perceiving
into anothers system and altering stuff there like Jesus did or for
non healer purposes like getting rid of a load of alien priests
Christ-babbling who do not seem becoming for the health of the local
I guess though that you are having reasons to find it stupid,
and would be very interested to hear about your theories about own &
frontal cortex areas and transcending.
(Unless you were simply someone demonstrating own intellectual levels
by insulting others and being too stupid to understand that what he
I assume that if you were to make intelligent remarks about
transcending including areas of the brain like the own areas and the
front of the frontal cortex that for a change might actually be
interesting for some in all the three rooms this is going to.
>So all you have left with is guilt,
Neither this nor some of the stuff before made much sense to be, but
that might be as it seemed to be cultural references.
>as you can not "concure" you simpliest motivations,
>such as sex and food.
Meaning my brain areas in a more narrow sense I am not aware to have
much to do with either.
Actually among my most simple motivations might be the one to not have
to do much and therefore log off a lot.
>You keep "transcending"
>the life itself,
>never quite satisfied with the results.
>Else why would you even bother about this idea
Do you believe that all are like you content to stay on the deflective
ranges like some Vatican sense censored sheep scared of the
transcending ranges and bleating about magic being of the devil
or like you finding it stupid to go to wide range transcending
perception and better to stay on the limiting deflective ranges like
the sense censored do?
I do not even get what you are finding that much more intelligent
about limiting your perception by censoring out all the many
transcending ranges that are possible for training humans to the
little narrow band perception of deflective ranges.
That to me is like someone holding his hands in front of his eyes and
finding all stupid who are perceiving further than he does.
And then asking why there are others who are not content to do like
>Why do you need to jump higher, than your own dick?
>Don't you know, that no matter how high you jump,
>it will ALWAYS be with you?
A good pair of big scissors might solve that problem.
More seriously I prefer, too, if you are remaining on the deflective
ranges and avoid the transcending ranges.
But you should also contemplating accepting that for other people it
is important to not just perceive so "narrow-band" and that they wish
to learn more.
For you sex and eating might be very important.
For others to transcend and reach enlightenment ranges might be very
For me the own areas are ways more to do with transcending than with
sex or eating, as I am an energy range selector of the brain, and it
is among my tasks to select between different ranges displayed to me
within a cingulate area and to select between other energy data.
I like to transcend with other people who are into such.
In your systems hypothalamus programs might be more important.
I know women where neither sex and food nor energy steering are
seeming central fixing most of the time but there are amygdala
programs that are seeming very important to them.
Or in other words there are some men liking to play chess not liking
chance games as rolling dice that much and there are men liking to
play with dice not liking thinking games like chess that much, and
there are some women who might not like either much and prefer
gossipping and emotion sharing by far. Some boys might not even get
how people can be physically that still for that long and prefer games
with running and forms of physical contests in them.
Different people different tastes.
>What about enlightenment? That is the final jump out of the loop.
>I think it is an important concept, and one that should not be sniffed at as
Guess I do not know eough about religions to get the loop bit.
Within magic transcending stages towards enlightenment are important
for extending into other forms for aksha.
And altered resistence for student energy teaching / practicing.
>Godel proved that no system can describe reality completely accurately,
>so transcending the system is the only way to see the
And if I proved that no big stone can swim in liquid alcohol here but
would sink, so then if there were no alcohol here it could not sink
anymore through anything... ?!
If you transcend the system then you are out the other side, but that
does not say how much of the truth about it you perceive nor how much
beyond you are perceiving.
If some magician were to transcend your head, a plant behind you, a
wall and maybe some galactic stuff as well, that does not mean that he
is actually understanding all there is to understand about the
energies that he is transcending.
As long as you find the ranges that are subatomically through the
other forms of akasha without causing them too many disharmonies, you
might very well transcend a lot if you are good enough in tuning.
That however is not a statement about how much of the truth you
>Buddha and the magic moment.
More information about the Neur-sci