Robert M. Caudle writes:
>> Since physicists have been dragged into this debate I think it is relevant
> to point out that physics is the study of things that can be measured. If
> a process, such as thought, cannot be measured it exists outside the realm
> of physics, at least until some measure is found. Most likely belonging to
> the field of philosophy. Thus, applying the formulations of physics to
> questions about the nature of thought is inappropriate. In fact, even the
> discussion of how many bits of information are processed by neurons is
> untenable without knowing the code used by the neurons. If the code is
> analog the number of processed bits/neuron is limited only by the noise in
> the transmitter, communication line and receiver. At the other extreme, if
> the code is binary then the limiting factor on the number of processed
> bits/neuron is time.
>> Despite these limitations, it is possible to understand the function of the
> brain. We already know a tremendous amount about the function of the
> brain, what we do not know and may never know, is what constitutes the
> abstract concept commonly refered to as thought.
Every law of physics was, at some time, unknown and certainly unmeasurable. A
thinker, a "philosopher" dared to think differently. Every great physicist
was one of these individuals. Something could not be explained with the
current model and a new paradigm was put forth, often to great criticism.
Goddard was ostricised for thinking that rockets could escape earths
atmosphere and travel to the moon. Gravity was an unmeasurable concept since
ancient Greece but not a physical law until Newton's law of universal gravitation.
Where would science be if we chose to leave as yet unmeasurable paradigms to
"the philosophers"? I think the book Quantum Questions published by Shambhala
should by required reading for all in scientific fields. This book provides
fascinating insight into the thoughts of our greatest modern physicists.
Jim Williams
