Fluff-er-Nutters

kenneth collins kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Sun Dec 5 00:18:49 EST 2004


Additional comments added at
the end [full prior msg copied
because the context is needed].

"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in 
message 
news:d2psd.1030834$Gx4.864460 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| "kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in
| message
| news:Mbzrd.81043$7i4.34956 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
|| [...]
|| Your brain's already sorted-things-
|| out, so, when a New thing is en-
|| countered, it's connectedness
|| just "happens".
||
|| There's no 'magic' in any of this.
|| [...]
|
| I noticed something [that's quite
| Fun] the other 'day'.
|
| I usually just eat plain peanut
| butter [on] bread, but a couple of
| 'weeks' ago, I bought some
| marshmallow [to Remember
| "Fluff-er-Nutters" from my
| Childhood. For those not in
| the U. S. A., "Fluff" is a name-
| brand of a spreadable marsh-
| mallow.]
|
| Anyway, while making a "Fluff-
| er-Nutter", I dug my knife into
| the marshmallow, to gather the
| amount I wanted to use.
|
| Doing this left a "gouge" in the
| surface of the marshmallo[w] in
| the container.
|
| I put the top back on, and put
| the marshmallow away.
|
| To my surprise, when I went
| to make another sandwitch,
| a couple of 'days' later, the
| surface of the marshmallow
| was really-smoothe.
|
| I'd 'expected' it to act like
| peanut butter, which holds its
| "gouges" :-]

I'm long-'familiar' with peanut
butter -- TD E/I(min).

| I forget the term for it, but the
| marshmallow slowly =flowed=
| to fill-in the "gouge".
|
| So, in the vein of my previous
| post, linked-to-above:
|
| gouge-in-marshmallow and TD E/I(up).
|
| 'unfamiliarity' and TD E/I(up)
|
| gouge-smothing-out and TD E/I-minimization.
|
| 'familiarity' and TD E/I-minimization.
|
| Get it?

But, in the nervous-system case. where's
the =information=?

| Just as the physical properties [molecular
| structure] of the marshmallow governed
| it's becoming smoothed-out, the phys-
| ical properties of nervous systems gov-
| ern the way that the TD E/I(up), that's
| experienced when 'unfamiliar' stuff is
| encountered within one's experience,
| becomes TD E/I-minimized, and TD
| E/I-minimization happens =in-the-back-
| ground=, 'just like' in my jar of marsh-
| mallow, sitting on the shelf, smothing
| itself out, in-the-background.


But, in the nervous-system case. where's
the =information=?

| Except, with respect to "knowledge",
| the nervous systems dynamics go in
| the opposite direction.
|
| In the marshmallow, the beginning,
| "gouged", 'state' is the more-ordered
| 'state'
|
| In nervous systems, the ending, TD
| E/I-minimized, 'state' is the more-
| ordered 'state'.
|
| The "repulsiveness" of TD E/I(up)
| [beyond the threshold for "curiosity"
| [AoK, Ap5]] is =literally= a Recog-
| nition of "Disorder", the capacity for
| which is built-right-into nervous sys-
| tems.
|
| =Beautiful-True-Wonder-Stuff=!

The ability to so "Recognize" is =in=
the neural Topology of the "special
topological homeomorphism".

It's in the "multi-Mobius-ed-Klein
bottle.

But where's the =information=?

| Anyway, why I wanted to write, and
| post, this discussion is because I
| wanted to discuss another thing.
|
| But I've gotta go to Church, 'now',
| so I'll pick-up this discussion later.

That was a "Break", See?

When you're working a problem,
get it set-up, then take a "break".

When you do this, your nervous
system works on the problem in-
the-background, at this 'stage' of
problem-solving, "whittling" [AoK,
Ap5] away anything that can be
trimmed without occurrences of
TD E/I(up, up) [TD E/I-accelera-
tion, which occurs as a function of
your existing "experiential total"
[AoK, Ap8] -- that is, TD E/I-
acceleration occurs at relatively-
low TD E/I when "experiential
total" is relatively-small, and at
relatively-high TD E/I when ex-
periential total" is relatively-large].

So, when you set-up a problem
for solving, and take a "break",
your brain 'blindly'-and-automatic-
ally "cleans" the problem for you.

There's a "trick" in doing this op-
timally. You have to "go for a walk
in the park" -- you know -- =Re-
lease= from the problem, and de-
liberately give yourself over to
just enjoying all the good-stuff
around you. If the 'day' is nice,
actually go for a walk, if not,
listen to an old album that you've
not played for a while, or play with
your little "Payloader". Whatever,
just =Release=. [This "releasing"
stuff, itself, becomes more-efficient,
and more-robust, the more that you
do it -- your nervous system becomes
'familiar' with it. It's "meta-phase" TD
E/I-minimization [AoK, Ap7]].

But, in the nervous-system case.
where's the =information=?

It's in the =Directionality= that's
dynamically in the TD E/I.

We "know" stuff from its "nonlinear-
perspective [NL-P] signature" [AoK,
Ap6], and these are all 'just' Dir-
ectionalities embedded within the
on-going TD E/I. [Folks who recall
the fuss I reiteratively made about
the fact that "synchronization" is not
the information, I did so be-cause
the NL-Ps are extremely-dynamic,
"sliding" amongst one another, so
"synchronization" is just an artifact
of on-going TD E/I-minimization
with respect to the NL-P Direction-
alities -- because, if "synchronization"
was anything, then the NL-P "signa-
tures" would "disappear", and there
wouldn't be anything with respect
to achieve TD E/I-minimization.]

Anyway, because everything re-
duces to Directionality that's em-
bedded within TD E/I is why I'm
always emphasizing 'moving', as
in 'moving toward' and 'moving
away from'.

Every little thing in-there is cross-
correlated in terms of its NL-P
Directionalities, and these are
simultaneously mapped within
both the "internal" and "external"
environments.

If a Directionality occurs within
the "internal environment" that's
contrary to "sensory templates"
that have been converged upon
via TD E/I-minimization that's
occurred during prior experience,
a "sensory-motor mismatch" TD
E/I(up) occurs [AoK, Ap5], and
the nervous system 'recognizes'
the "internal" Directionality as be-
ing "mis-taken", and TD E/I-min-
imization occurs that eliminates
the "mis-taken" "internal" Direc-
tionality. This continues until no
further TD E/I-minimization can
occur 'between' the internal and
external maps. The external stuff
has been "captured", and it's in-
ternally-mapped NL-P Direction-
alities can, and are, literally op-
erated-upon as if they literally
are the external stuff.

And this stuff compounds awe-
somely, which allows g'zillions
of NL-P "signatures" to be op-
erated-upon in-parallel, be-
cause each NL-P "signature"
was TD E/I-minimized during
prior experience with its ex-
ternal-environment correlate.
So the NL-P Directionalities
"slide" amongst each other, and,
when TD E/I-minimization oc-
curs with respect to their "con-
junctions", a new "idea" is
Created. This TD E/I-minimiza-
tion focuses the brain's "atten-
tion" upon it [the brain literally
'moves toward' it, cognitively,
and 'looks at it', "sliding" its
"components" amongst each
other, "looking for" more TD
E/I-minimization, and cross-
checking it against both prior
experience and, if the problem
has physical correlates within
the external environment, op-
erating upon those external
correlates.

The net thing constitutes "pre-
frontal constellation" stuff [AoK,
Ap7].

The NL-P "signatures" are con-
figured via "loop circuits" ["Super-
system configuration", AoK, Ap5],
that are stochastically-excited, and
then 'blindly'-and-automatically
TD E/I-minimized within "dynamic
subordinate coupling" [AoK, Ap5].

All of this occurs sans-"language".

"Language", which, itself, reduces
to analogous dynamics [in dedicated
neural Topology], is 'just' a com-
munications-interface that is
configured both with respect to
prior "language" experience and
with respect to the stuff, above,
when TD E/I-minimization with
respect to the stuff above has oc-
curred sufficiently.

But "language" is only "configured"
into the overall dynamics when
there's an external reason to com-
municate the TD E/I-minimized
Directionality-within-neural-Top-
ology-embodied "information".

Folks who don't spend much
'time' alone will have to Trust me
on this, because it will seem, to
them, that "language" is "always
active". But, when I'm deep-into
a Problem, I go for 'days' without
resort to "language", instead, lit-
erally Seeing the internal stuff
that I discussed above. When TD
E/I-minimization occurs robustly,
I might take a "reminder" note -- 
kind of like an Experimenter tak-
ing a note during an experimental
trial, but I usually just say a little
Prayer of Thanks, and that's it
as far as "language" goes, until
I come online to share stuff with
folks. [My most-common use
of "language" is in check-out
lines, and, in 'fawning' over In-
fants, and, every once in a while,
I visit a Friend, and talk, pretty-
'normally' :-]

Calling "language" "everything"
is a =Huge= False-finitization.

"Language" is =just= a commun-
ications-interface. ['Course,
folks commonly give themselves
over to it -- "conversation" is a
Primary "pastime" [AoK, Ap5],
which takes a toll on quantity of
"thought".

Anyway, "information" is [extreme-
ly-robustly] 'encoded' as Direction-
ality that's embedded within global
TD E/I -- which is why the rigorous-
mapping of the "special topolog-
ical homeomorphism" is so Im-
portant, and why everything re-
duces to 1. 'moving toward' and
2. 'moving away from'.

'Course, there's a lot of internal
"abstraction" -- the nervous sys-
tem can do some =really= fancy
Directionality stuff. For instance,
any "thought" is just so much Dir-
ectionality within on-going TD E/I,
and, yet, that "thought" can be
'moved toward' and/or 'moved
away from', and can, itself, be
'moved', 'joined', 'separated-from',
etc.,  with respect to other
"thoughts" and their sub-parts,
all without limit [but within an
individual nervous system's
'speed-of-thought' limit, which is
determined by the "volitional dim-
inishing-returns decision" threshold
[AoK, Ap7].]

Nervous systems can 'consider'
[operate-upon] =any-thing= in
=any= "light", at will [in accord
with the stuff discussed in AoK,
Ap1; "the infinite-scope of prob-
lems confronting nervous systems"].

One more thing -- the "special top-
ological homeomorphism" embod-
ies a =single= 'surface. The inter-
mapped "Mobius"-strip-like stuff
is tuned in 3-D from the global
scale all the way down to sub-ion-
ic scale, which is what "loop-circuit-
tuning" is.

It's =DIRECTIONALITY= that
'contains' "meaning" [that con-
tains "information"], and which
couples internal and external en-
vironments. It's 'blindly'-auto-
mated TD E/I-minimization that
converges-upon Directionality.

The "automation of knowing" is
'knowing' how to 'move'.

"Language" 'reports-on' this 'know-
ing', conveying Directionality to
other nervous systems, and receiv-
ing it from them [reciprocally ["of
course"]]. But "language" is =just=
an inter-nervous-system interface.

I'd like to go over this stuff with
folks, in-person, if there's any-
one who'd like it to be discussed
in more detail. I'm sure I'll Learn
as much as anyone present, be-
cause I've not read in Neurosci-
ence for more than a 'decade'
[except for here in b.n and stuff
to which folks here in b.n have
referred me, and several trips
to the Library, looking for articles
to discuss [which I've never dis-
cussed :-]]

ken [k. p. collins]






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list