SV: Capacity of the brain
KPaulC at email.msn.com
Fri Sep 17 20:55:46 EST 1999
Kragen Sitaker <kragen at dnaco.net> wrote in message
news:_KyE3.17143$N77.1265489 at typ11.nn.bcandid.com...
> In article <#ysTAVVA$GA.269 at cpmsnbbsa03>,
> Ken Collins <KPaulC at email.msn.com> wrote:
> >nervous systems parallelize at the 'level' of continuously-distributed
> >at each 'point' the realm of computation is infinite.
> that may 'be' but in 'reality', there is some 'noise' in 'any' system
> that passes signals 'around'. because of 'this', there 'has' to be a
> 'point' below 'which' differences in signals don't 'matter'.
over the relatively-short-term, i agree. over relatively-long terms, what
was, initially, discarded as 'noise' can be 'recognized' as 'valuable'
information, because, no matter what, it's recurring.
and the 'level' at which such recurrence-detection occurs stretches all the
way into the infinities i'm 'having fun' dropping-jaws with. (not really
'having fun', it just needs to be gotten-across, and i'm so tired that i'm
having to do-it with a little 'goosing'-whoopsie-daisy-ness)
> >it's 'exasperating' that folks 'think' 'consciousness' is so trivial as
> >be, in its underlying stuff, 'coutnable'.
> what do you 'know' about 'consciousness'? i think i will 'put' you in
> my 'killfile'.
knock yourself out.
answer: more than anyone else in History, save One. and, i expect, more than
anyone else presently alive will ever know. (it's a long 'story'.)
K. P. Collins
More information about the Neur-sci