IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Sensation - How does one have the conscious experience of it?

KP-PC k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%
Fri May 2 19:23:06 EST 2003

An imagined discourse:

"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:%gssa.62820$cO3.4193827 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| [...]
| The =image= is literally external to us.
| [...]

Other: "Ken, how stupid is that? To use a favorite phrase of yours,
'Are you 'blind'?' Do you go around in darkness, or, when you move
about, do you experience the sensation of seeing objects in your
environment? Of course you do. Where is that experience, if not *in*
your brain?"

Where does a lens 'experience' EM radiation?

Within itself?

Or is the lens' 'experiance' at it's focal distance - say on a sheet
of paper onto which the lens' refractory dynamics 'project' the EM

Other: "The lens doesn't experience light. It just refracts it. It's
your brain that sees the visual-spectrum radiation that's reflected
from the sheet of paper. It's you who experiences it, not the lens.
The lens is just a non-experiencing mathematically constrained
refractor. It doesn't experience. You do. 'Get it?`"

Yeah, I do.

But the EM doesn't go beyond the retina [at least not in a
'visually'-detectable way].

That's why the actual 'image' stays right there, at the retina - just
as it can exist, detectably, on the sheet of paper.

Other: "But the sheet of paper doesn't *experience* it!"

Neither do our brains. We experience the neurophysiological
'translation' of visual-spectrum EM radiation.

All of the order that exists within our experiencing of the EM is
already in the EM. Our experiencing of the EM and it's inherent order
is 'just' a topologically-multijective 'homeomorphism' of the result
of the EM radiation's activation of the rods and cones in the retina.
As it passes through various 'way stations', the multijective
topological distribution transforms the receptor activation, en
route, so that each various 'way station' within the neural
architecture receives activation that =it= 'experiences' and
'comprehends' in terms of it's localized functionality with respect
to globally-integrated TD E/I-minimization. For instance, as is
discussed in AoK, Ap6, a 'violent' "non-linear perspective"
acceleration will be "configured"-into, and activate the
"fight\flight" mechanisms [brain stem; superior colliculi; amygdalar
'reflexes'. AoK, Ap5]. That's the way those mechanisms 'see' and
'experience' the information-content that's in the EM that doesn't
detectably make it past the retina.

All of 'vision' is 'just' more of the 'same'-stuff, all mapped with
respect to 'self', with directionalities 'turned outside-in,
upside-down, and backward' by the "special topological homeomorphism
of central nervous systems" [AoK, "Short Paper", Ap3, 5, 6 & 7], so
that 'self'-experienced directionalities occur 'appropriately' with
respect to the directionalities inherent. including the
'directionality' inherent in affective alignment. in the external 3-D
energydynamics that are the external visual-spectrum EM radiation.

'Experience' is 'just' the =net= result of the massively-parallel,
massively-topologically-multijective, activation that the external EM
induces within the retina's receptors.

Other: "But how does the image apear to be out there with respect to
us? How do we carry it around with us?"

It is. We don't.

As above, we 'carry' the globally-integrated neural energydynamics
around with us. The 'image' is 'just' what happens in the retina as
the external 3-d energydynamics 'slide' over it. Folks have
'difficulty' with this stuff because they've not learned and
comprehended the functional Neuroanatomy.

What we 'carry around' with us is 'blindly'-automated 'knowledge'
with respect to directionality with respect to the visual-spectrum EM
that 'stops' at the retina.

What's so 'strange' about 'experiencing' what Physics Verifies in
right 'on' a sheet of paper?

Other: "But we *see* it. The paper doesn't *see* it."

We're Alive. The paper isn't.

Other: "A tree is 'Alive', but it doesn't *see* EM radiation."

Yes, it does. That it does can be observed in the dynamics of its
helio-trophy. The tree 'moves toward' the 'light', and in it's doing
so, we can literally observe it's 'climbing' of the WDB2T

The sheet of paper just 'sits-there' - inanimate - not-Alive.

What I'm working toward - what the specific WDB2T energy-gradient
local-minimum out of which I'm doing work to haul folks'
understanding is - is to disclose to folks the Consequences inherent
in folks' being so 'familiar' with the way their nervous systems do
the 'same'-stuff that bacteria and trees do [and the rest of all of
Life does] that they 'fall into the trap' of considering their way of
doing the 'same'-stuff as being something other than 'just' a
more-refined version of the 'same'-stuff that all of Life does.

Trees 'see' the 'light'. They just don't go around making a
'big-deal' about it. [this difference in 'consciousness' can be
explained, too].

What we 'experience' as, and give the name, "vision", is 'just' more
of the same-stuff that bacteria and trees do [and all of Life does].
Exquisitely-more-refined [although less refined than is the visual
experience of an eagle], but, fundamentally, the 'same'-stuff -
'climbing' the energy-gradient that is WDB2T.

What's the 'big-deal'?

The 'big-deal' is just an illusion that derives in the prevailing
absence of understanding with respect to how nervous systems process
information - folks 'sense' their absence of understanding with
respect to how nervous systems work and 'make up'
haphazardly-defined, self-perpetuating [be-cause of the
'blindly'-automated 'resistance' to the TD E/I(up) inherent in
experiencing "rendering useless"; AoK, Ap8] say-nothing 'place
holders' to 'excuse' and 'celebrate' the gaps in their understanding
[which, with respect to nervous system function, have been huge,
[ALL, Please Forgive me] even within Neuroscience].

Get it?

'Vision' is 'just' a very-selective response to the 'sea' of EM
radiation in which we are immersed. All of it's parameters derive
'moving away from' the relatively-simple stuff inherent in our "getti
ng a bump on the head". [Note well, 'normal' reading relies on
'vision', but reading is cognition that's much-larger than vision -
and Visually-Impaired folks' brail-abilities allow us to observe that
vision is not a prerequisite of reading].

Vision is what happens when visual-spectrum EM interfaces with the
rods and cones. Folks only 'think' it's 'miraculous' because folks
just don't understand how nervous systems process information.

Folks 'celebrate' their Ignorance, in a way that 'excuses' them from
having to do anything about it [which is just more
'blindly'-automated TD E/I-minimization with respect to folks'
'sensing' of their absence of understanding], by giving such a grand
name - "the hard problem".

'Vision' is 'just' what happens within our nervous systems when
visual-spectrum EM impinges upon the rods and cones of the retina.

High-tech detectors vastly-exceed the capabilities of our innate
'vision'. These detectors' information is 'transformed' into
viaual-spectrum images, say via photography, or false-color
representations, and we can 'see' such information-content
transformations, and think about them - but all that's happening is
'just' more globally-integrated TD E/I-minimization.

What's the 'big-deal'?

Other: "The big deal is that we *experience* seeing. We are aware."

It's all 'just' as has been discussed above.

Bacteria and trees do [and the rest of all of Life does] their
versions of the 'same'-stuff.

All the order is right-there in the EM that doesn't make it
[detectably] past the retina.

What's such a 'big-deal' about interfacing with order that's
right-there to interface with?

Other: "We *experience* it."

Yes, we do :-]

So do bacteria and trees [and the rest of all of Life].

Other: "Bacteria aren't conscious of their experience."

They are - else they wouldn't 'know' how to move with respect to
their nutrient concentration gradients. It =is= a pretty-primitive
form of 'knowing', but there it is - 'just' what happens within
bacteria when they experience their nutrient-concentration-gradient
'window' upon the physically-real universal energy-flow that is

The 3-D energydynamics inherent in our nervous system when we
'experience vision' can be traced through our nervous system just as
the 3-D energydynamics that occur within the bacterium when it
'experiences' its nutrient concentration gradients can be traced
through it.

That's all our nervous systems do, too, except our nervous systems
are extremely-very-much-more capable of 'grasping' WDB2T, and
'climbing' it, despite the myriad 'masks' it 'wears'. Within our
nervous systems. such 'climbing' of WDB2T includes
massively-parallel, massively-multijective,
massively-cross-correlated, massively-integrated functionality that,
from the 'level' of single ions to the 'level' of the "supersystem"
[AoK, Ap5] is tightly integrated via TD E/I-minimization, all in
rigorous accord with WDV2T ^ -1.

There's no 'big-deal' - just Capability to 'climb' the WDB2T

Other: "But I *experience* it! I'm *aware* of it!"

So do trees. So are trees.

The only 'differences' derive in the differences between trees' 3-D
energydynamics and Humans' 3-D energydynamics. 'Vision' is our
analogue [one of them] of trees' helio-trophism we 'grow toward' the
'light' we 'see'.

Perhaps, to some extra-terestial Being is to us as we are to trees

The 'big-deal' is just 'place-holder' stuff [the stuff of a
topologically-distributed "prefrontal constellation"[AoK, Ap7]
"tuning-precision-void" [AoK, "Short Paper"] that 'blinds' folks to
the gap that derives in the prevailing absence of understanding with
respect to how nervous systems process information, not in anything
that's actually 'difficult' in the way our nervous systems process

The difference involved is analogous to the difference in
understanding during Ptolemaic Astronomy's 1000-year reign, and

Heliocentricism replacing Earth-centricism, accompanied by the
discarding of 'epicycle' 'place-holders'.

The solution is simple, no?


Do the work inherent in understanding how nervous systems process
information - 'climb' up out of this particular local-minimimum with
respect to universal WDB2T.

Because the 'climbing' happens within individual nervous systems,
each of us can contribute to the mapping of the route, each of us can
cheer folks' progress, but no one can 'climb' for anyone other than

To understand entails the doing of information-processing work.

K. P. Collins

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net