the neural net and artificial intelligence

Cijadrachon cijadra at zedat.fu-berlin.de
Tue Dec 29 03:22:24 EST 1998


(To certain people: Maybe skip.)

>>  The brain certainly does need training. 
If the area around was a way that is covered by natural programs, then
what training would THE brain need?

Let's assume that where the rankfighting and aggression programs are
from receives no training in a human brain.
Then what?

>>I suppose you might
>>  want to claim that your brain discovered geometry, DNA,
>>  or computerized gene sequencing? Or even how to drive a car?

Even if parts of my brain discovered how to know a bit about HOW to
drive a car,  even without areas of my brain trying to segregate far
enough to attempt to watch another areas-unit of my brain driving I
had someone along in the car shouting for some prayer's book.

;-)

And if I went akasha surfing in another brain and started to perceive
DNA the mere idea of triggering the wrong energies going through it or
doing other stuff wrong do make that sound like something where I am
nor sure if I'd really want areas of my brain to discover that.

>>  All observers need driving lessons before they are allowed
>>  to drive their brains anywhere.
That might depend on where you were or are and what you use for
driving.

>...The homunculus is the little man who sits in the
>middle of your head, watching a TV screen, and punching buttons. 

Fascinating. 

Maybe change it to that there is the option to perceive not just one
screen but different inputs. And maybe to tuning to stuff instead of
punching buttons.


>Some, more sophisticated, envision a mind (soul, self),
I define mind different and the selves I know about have no soul nor
any of the systems I know about in my head.
> that selects from the  data proffered by the brain, 
Intellectual uerrrgh.

THAT selects from THE data PROFFERED BY  THE  BRAIN.

How sophisiticated indeed...

>We limit our investigation of the (rat, cat, man) brain to the material
>world. 

Would you mind stopping WEing and THEing like some US-Americans do?

I never met THE rat or THE cat, nor THE man.
I met different persons often with very different personalities of the
rat, cat and human races, both males and females, and a few who were
not complete.  Without imprisoning persons of other races I wonder how
you are wishing to investigate them, apart from linking with mammals
magically, but then you'd likely not use the words "material world".

>Mind is not part of the material world. 

Mind is a vague English term for which I find no direct easy
translation to my language. But apart from that: Let me guess, if I
amputate your limbic system out (cingulate gyrus can stay), then or
course that would not effect you much?

Do you need to believe in life after death (apart from maggots getting
full with you)  or need some justification for neuros cutting around
in others I areas in the brain to get energy data 
that might be abused as control data within the future?

All human minds I ever perceived far enough had I areas within the
limbic system, all who were self perceivers named the hippocampus as
own base.

>There can be no homunculus to train the mind. 
Actually the neuros invented neat names for areas of the brain,
at times seeming to aim at displaying non-understanding with
complicated terms. Or to aim at that folks of their branches having to
learn that stuff are not having it as easy as they could if they were
to change the namings to a simpler systems with names of areas to do
with main functions of regions.

Homunculus is some invented term and that with just one screen and
buttons toi press to me sounded more symbolic, as I guess the author
was far enough in anatomy. "The mind" is some vague English term.
Sounds even more vague than many emotional expressions of people who
are headblind.

Therefore what you are saying could also be
"There is no invented X to train the vague U."

>The synapses of the neural net are altered by the signal
>energy that flows through it, that is all.

Error.

We are having loads of signals here in Berlin that are passing through
the systems, and if you magically occiptially link enough then there
are enough other areas of the brain also being passed by signals
from&for other areas, and yet I'd not bet on that that is altering
them.

So far it was my understanding that opposite to the magic data between
brains the synapse data is needing atomic based structures.
Therefore there is something about the word "energy FLOW" tht is
sounding rather weird to be used for that.

THE synapses of THE neural net is also very difficult to judge as that
is resembling someone saying "the vehicle" without specifying if he
means a car, sledge, soap box on four skate board, space ship or
something else.

The "that is all" however I find real funny.

Alone to know that one can reprogram loads of stuff in the brain is
within Carlos Castaneda regarded as sort of some last secret and I
know of course that also it is possible to alter hardware for magic
perception in other brains and some other stuff I do not want to
mention.  ...Next time someone should go scared because on sense
enhancers I made magical alterations irrversible in his head, then I
might try to tell him that stuff in his head is 
>altered by the signal energy that flows through it, that is all.
(Lol... <};-)

> The signal energy originates in
>the sensory neurons that transduce energy arriving from the exterior
>universe.

Would you mind mentioning such transducing closer and the areas with
the neurons that you are referring to?

And also why you are believing that stuff that might be limited for
long times to other systems should have effects in systems up to
physical alteration power though for all I know those are often not
even connected to there magically / with axon activity?

>It is natural for an academic to say that no agglomeration of neurons could
>have the beautiful thoughts that flow through his mind. He is mistaken.

That might depend on how you define mind.

The way I define it  a lot of thoughts certainly do not flow through
some areas of the mind, 
and if the sequencer (the motoric thinking unit) would dare to send me
it's thoughts we'd probably go for internal combat until it stops that
or I'd freak out.  And I guess it would not appreciate it either if I
were to connect to it for no reason so that it has to process my
signals. 

I do not even get why you assume that his thoughts would be beautiful,
as if the thinking areas were not ITs but HEs and as if the whole were
to do with some emotion generators and endorphines, and as if the
other's own areas were just up to thinking about beautiful stuff.



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list