On Tue, 11 Mar 1997, G K GRAY wrote:
> To ask the question expecting an answer expressed in Megabytes &c is
> barking up the wrong tree since the term refers to
w00f! w00f!
> quantities/magnitudes expressed by a *digital* number system. As
You probably mean a boolean value. A bit has no meaning outside of its
context.
> most information reaching the brain is expressing quantitative
> information - intensity of light falling on optic receptors &c, in
Consider quanta. Consider a single spike. Consider neurotransmitter
vesicle packets.
> terms of continuously variable *frequencies* of pulse recurrence,
> "megabytes" are irrelevant. To achieve this in the way computers
> do would require an infinite number of Gigabytes in the RAM!
Sorry, but you are somewhat misguided. Go ask Marquis de Alta Vista for
Claude Shannon, and information thery. Then consider the
indistinguishability of random and pseudorandom noise, and sampling
quantization vs. number of bits. If this still does not help, look up
Bekenstein's limit. So there.
> Cheers! Gord
later,
'gene
>>>>
______________________________________________________________________________
|mailto:ui22204 at sunmail.lrz-muenchen.de |transhumanism >H, cryonics, |
|mailto:Eugene.Leitl at uni-muenchen.de |nanotechnology, etc. etc. |
|mailto:c438 at org.chemie.uni-muenchen.de |"deus ex machina, v.0.0.alpha" |
|icbmto:N 48 10'07'' E 011 33'53'' |http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~ui22204 |
