Cybernetics tells us Conscious Energy must exist

page: 7
18
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ZetaRediculian
 


Now you're mixing a bunch of different things that have nothing to do with specific memory recall at will.

First, you talk about random noise. Your quotes actually agree with what I've been saying. Here's one:


But there is no problem imagining a role for randomness in the brain in the form of quantum level noise that affects the communication of knowledge. Noise can introduce random errors into stored memories. Noise can create random associations of ideas during memory recall.


Yes, memories are stored in the brain because the brain processes information. Of course can produce random errors or make it harder to recall certain memories. This could be why people could be trying to recall the title of a movie they saw five years ago and you have to tune out the noise to get to the specific memory.

My point is, this has nothing to do with the recall of specific memories. This just says that recall of memories can produce errors because of random noise. Nobody disputed random noise which is a key component in information theory.

What you seem to be saying is that random events occur in ones environment but that's not in dispute.

How does any of this relate to the recall of specific memories at will?

When I want to recall a specific memory that's stored in the brain, random noise may make some memories harder to recall, but what does random noise have to do with the recall of the specific memory?

Again, you keep looking for a random explanation to explain how we can deliberately and with intention recall specific memories or what science calls voluntary memories.

I ask again, how does random noise know I want to recall Michael Jackson's Beat It Video and then tunes out Thriller, Rock Wit You and all of the other Michael Jackson videos I have seen?

If random activity or random noise can do this, let's here how this is accomplished. Is there scientific papers and experiments to support random noise recalling specific memories? I don't understand the point you're trying to make. It's like you read the word random but fail to look at what was said.

Here's part of your post that agrees with everything I have said. Did you read the paper you quoted?


The "free" stage of the Cogito Model depends on thermal and quantal noise in the neural circuitry of the brain. This noise introduces errors in the storage and retrieval of information, noise that may be helpful in generating alternative possibilities for action.

The "will" stage of the Cogito Model suppresses this noise for the adequately determined process of evaluation and decision, unless the will is satisfied with a random choice in special cases of the liberty of indifference.


What this paper is saying is there's a Micro Mind or Quantum Mind of uncertainty. Then there's a Classical Mind of decision.

The "will" stage can suppress noise, evaluate, make decisions and it's what I said can recall specific memories.

What your paper doesn't say is how this is possible for the material brain.

How can the material brain suppress the noise?

How does the material brain know which noise to suppress and which specific information you want? ex, Beat It video or Thriller video.

How does the material brain conduct an evaluation of the information?

How does this "will" recall specific memories?

Again, the paper you quoted from supports what I'm saying. "Will" does these things.

The paper also talks about random noise in terms of thoughts not stored memories. The article you quoted specifically says random noise can produce errors in stored memories, not that random noise can produce these memories.

In terms of thoughts, it's just saying quantum uncertainty gives us a sea of probabilities. I don't disagree with that.




posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 



Your quotes actually agree with what I've been saying. Here's one:


random memories don't exist


I love it. You are very predictable. Why is it so important for you to be right and the other guy wrong? It's very funny.

In your quest to prove yourself right, you proved yourself confused.

I have no idea if it proves or disproves anything you say because I don't know what you are saying at all. You have contradicted yourself so many times, I can't keep track. Some things you say aren't contradictions, they are just flat out wrong.

I just pointed out how "random memory" fits in with free will or just will. still can't figure that one out. I said I don't have a position on this topic other than there is no "user". There could be a user but not the blind silly user you are talking about.

How can you have a theory of mind that deals explicitly with "the brains ability to randomly choose" and say at the same time random memory doesn't exist? Your answer?
Different randomness of course!

There is no scientific proof that consciousness is emergent property of the brain, therefore we have a undefinable "user"

Oh memories can randomly pop up But that's not random memory!

Someone can will to walk to the store BUT
"other" factors like the user can influence this.

We aren't talking about free will, we are talking about will!

Materialists are stuck in randomly!

Neurologists are silly materialists that think areas of the brain correspond to brain function.
But
Neurologists have pinpointed specific neurons that corresponds to specific memories therefore proving random memory does not exist but supports materialistic determinism which you are against.

Roger Penrose supports everything you say to I guess. He is a materialist by just about every measure and an atheist too!


Roger Penrose:

In my own opinion, it is not very helpful, from the scientific point of view, to "think of a dualistic 'mind' that is (logically) external to the body, somehow influencing the choices that seem to arise in the action of R. If the 'will' could somehow influence Nature's choice of alternative that occurs with R, then why is an experimenter not able, by the action of 'will power', to influence the result of a quantum experiment? If this were possible, then violations of the quantum probabilities would surely be rife! For myself, I cannot believe that such a picture can be close to the truth. To have an external 'mind-stuff' that is not itself subject to physical laws is taking us outside anything that could be reasonably called a scientific explanation, and is resorting to the viewpoint

You have Interprited Penrose so utterly wrong, it's unbelievable. I can honestly say with 100% certainty that that you have no idea what you are talking about.

I didn't get past your first comment. You can have the last word and how Penrose supports what you are saying. I'm out.

I will just let this thread die now.


edit on 17-10-2013 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ZetaRediculian
 


That is true they are both external triggers but in the case of the later you decided to look into it. While in the case of the former no real effort was made by your desire to remember.



Artificial intelligence (AI) is technology and a branch of computer science that studies and develops intelligent machines and software. Major AI researchers and textbooks define the field as "the study and design of intelligent agents",[1] where an intelligent agent is a system that perceives its environment and takes actions that maximize its chances of success.[2] John McCarthy, who coined the term in 1955,[3] defines it as "the science and engineering of making intelligent machines".[4]


Source

In about 10 years Cadillac has claimed that there new cars will be able to drive themselves.



The scientists and engineers at the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition conference are creating a world in which cars drive themselves, machines recognize people and “understand” their emotions, and humanoid robots travel unattended, performing everything from mundane factory tasks to emergency rescues.


Source

With respect to Penrose and with respect to several of his works.

He clearly is pointing to the development of Quantum Biology.

At the time I was typing that response I was watching the most recent Star Trek movie.



posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ZetaRediculian
 


Generally speaking we speak of quantum processes as random but in relation to scope. The idea is not much different that claiming the Universe is flat. Perhaps it is flat or perhaps the degree of curvature is beyond our capacity to perceive because of how massive the Universe is.

Perhaps quantum activity is random. But perhaps, it is simply beyond our technology, knowledge base (this in relation to what is know in modern science) and scope to comprehend, that it is not random.



posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ZetaRediculian
 


Again, you don't understand what I simply explained. This is because you can't get past the paradigm of randomly.

What are random memories? You said:


I just pointed out how "random memory" fits in with free will or just will.


Where???

These memories are stored in the brain. They're processed by the brain. There's involuntary and voluntary memories but what are random memories? How does a person produce a random memory that's not processed by the brain? How does a person recall a random memory that's not recalled in the specific way that a voluntary or involuntary memory is recalled?

You keep saying a random memory but there's no such thing.

If I'm sitting here and I have a involuntary memory of my Prom Night, it doesn't mean that's a random memory. That's a specific memory that was processed and stored by the brain. That's not a random memory. It's an involuntary memory that that's recalled by the same specific neurons that are used when voluntary recall occurs.

You're confusing involuntary memory with a random thought. Even the article you posted made this distinction between random thoughts that arise through quantum uncertainty and willed recall of specific events.

Can you understand the simple difference?

Here's what a scientific experiment concluded about mind pops.


MENTAL HICCUPS: Sometimes memories pop into consciousness on their own. Although they may seem random, they are often related to recent experiences and thoughts.


Again, you're confusing involuntary memory with random thoughts. Let me explain the difference.

A random thought is you could be watching TV and have a random thought about life on Mars. Maybe this thought popped into your head because of something you saw. Maybe you didn't see it on a conscious level but your subconscious picked it up. Maybe the cause is quantum uncertainty and the thought just popped into your head. This is a random thought.

There's no such thing as a random memory because all memories are processed by the brain and voluntary and involuntary memories are recalled the same way.

If a memory pops into my head of the first time I went swimming. That's not a random memory. It's a specific memory. It's just a involuntary memory.

Again, you're confusing involuntary memory with random thoughts. The philosophy article you posted says the same thing.

Here's what the article you quoted said:


The "free" stage of the Cogito Model depends on thermal and quantal noise in the neural circuitry of the brain. This noise introduces errors in the storage and retrieval of information, noise that may be helpful in generating alternative possibilities for action.

The "will" stage of the Cogito Model suppresses this noise for the adequately determined process of evaluation and decision, unless the will is satisfied with a random choice in special cases of the liberty of indifference.


This theory you posted goes even further. This theory basically says there's no room for randomness. Your brain stores information and the quantal noise chops these stored memories up and creates alternative possibilities.

In this case, there isn't even random thoughts because your thoughts are just chopped up memories that's produced by the random noise. Do you even read what you post? It also says this:


Chance can only generate random (unpredictable) alternative possibilities for action or thought. The choice or selection of one action must be adequately determined, so that we can take responsibility. And once we choose, the connection between mind/brain and motor control must be adequately determined to see that "our will be done."


How does chance generate these alternative possibilities? Through noise that scrambles the specific memories that the brain has processed. This is the article you quoted. Let's see where it says the micro mind generates these random thoughts from.


Imagine a Micro Mind with a randomly assembled "agenda" of possible things to say or to do. These are drawn from our memory of past thoughts and actions, but randomly varied by unpredictable negations, associations of a part of one idea with a part or all of another, and by substitutions of words, images, feelings, and actions drawn from our experience. In information communication terms, there is cross-talk and noise in our neural circuitry.

Nothing physically localized is likely to be found. The randomness of the Micro Mind is simply the result of ever-present noise, both thermal and quantum noise, that is inherent in any information storage and communication system.


So random noise generates random thoughts from the information stored in the material brain. So random thoughts are not even random according to the paper you quoted. They come from specific experiences processed by the brain and we have the WILL to choose between these alternative possibilities.

THIS COMES FROM THE ARTICLE YOU QUOTED.

This just shows you don't even try to read and understand an article you're quoting from.

Now to Penrose:

Penrose and Hameroff talk about the Quantum Soul and how the emergent field of Quantum Biology correlates to their Orch Or model.


A PAIR of world-renowned quantum scientists say they can prove the existence of the soul.

American Dr Stuart Hameroff and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose developed a quantum theory of consciousness asserting that our souls are contained inside structures called microtubules which live within our brain cells.

Their idea stems from the notion of the brain as a biological computer, "with 100 billion neurons and their axonal firings and synaptic connections acting as information networks".

Dr Hameroff, Professor Emeritus at the Departments of Anesthesiology and Psychology and Director of the Centre of Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona, and Sir Roger have been working on the theory since 1996.

They argue that our experience of consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects inside these microtubules - a process they call orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR).

In a near-death experience the microtubules lose their quantum state, but the information within them is not destroyed. Or in layman's terms, the soul does not die but returns to the universe.


www.news.com.au...

It goes on to say:


In the event of the patient's death, it was "possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body indefinitely - as a soul".

Dr Hameroff believes new findings about the role quantum physics plays in biological processes, such as the navigation of birds, adds weight to the theory.


This is also why I think the emerging field of Quantum Biology is so exciting. Penrose is saying he doesn't believe in a dualistic mind made up of other stuff outside of physics. I said the same thing. I never spoke of supernatural stuff outside of the material brain. I said immaterial aspects of the universe not supernatural.



posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


One good explanation as to why people see people in there dreams that they do not recognize. Is because there images are stored in the Unconscious, do to the fact that through the senses. You did observe them but they were observed by your peripheral vision and were not in frame to what you were actually looking at.

This being a theory in response to the matter.

I have often presented the idea that the Prophets could actually be the result of favorable mutations.

The term "supernatural" being then, what we do not understand about nature.



posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


Exactly,

If you were to go back in time say 2,000 years ago with a cell phone or flashlight, they would be seen as supernatural. The supernatural is just natural events that we don't fully understand.

It's like Psychic Ability. I think Psychic Ability is real and it's something that can be explained through the Quantum Mind, Quantum Biology or maybe there's a mundane scientific explanation.

The problem is, materialist want everything to fit into their world view. They're what I call material fundamentalist. So anything that challenges their world view is labeled supernatural. So it's not that psychic ability or twin telepathy is real. There isn't even a question. These things can't be real in the context of materialism so the fundamentalist will always label these things supernatural.



posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 


When it comes to todays fundamental laws of physics. That psychic ability is actually possible, would definitely mean a complete revision to those laws. To be clear what I mentioned before related to the failure of materialist modeling in relation to consciousness, in contemporary clinical, is care quite serious.

These models are actually treated more with disdain in relation by what is modern psychiatry. In relating this I mentioned that the last such facility that practiced materialist modeling was closed in disgrace.

The reason for what was, they gave an autistic child 3 sessions of electro-shock every day for a week.

This was so during his next weekend home visit he would be calm and non-reactive to stimuli that could cause aberrant behavior . Materialist assume that a person can be trained in no different a way as a domesticated animal is trained.

What is really crazy about it is that wild animals also can react outside expectations. despite training. But in respect to human responses. The degree of responses outside expectations is well beyond how a wild animal would respond is raised in captivity.

A good example of this is in relation to the Stanford Prison experiments. Human consciousness does not conform to conclusions offered in materialist modeling. Therefore consciousness is actually beyond what materialism acknowledges as possible.

To be succinct this is where historically the whole issue of Qualia comes into play.



edit on 17-10-2013 by Kashai because: Added content



posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Music break....






edit on 17-10-2013 by Kashai because: added content



posted on Oct, 18 2013 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


I will join the music break. Kanye West "Amazing" dedicated to our true nature and the true nature of reality that materialist has tried to imprison our immaterial nature.

The Ancients understood this and they began to personify both sides of our nature which was spirit/matter. This continued through to Descartes.


the French philosopher 'René Descartes (1596–1650) developed Cartesian dualism, which posits that there is a divisible, mechanical body and an indivisible, immaterial mind which interact with one another. The body perceives external inputs and the awareness of them comes from the soul. The point of interaction between the two is at the pineal gland in the brain.

During the 19th and 20th centuries, materialistic monism has became the norm.


Notice how similar Descartes is to Penrose/Hameroff and the Quantum Mind. Replace Pineal Gland with Microtubles and you have the same thing.

Quantum uncertainty and probability goes from the immaterial to the material(measured state). The mediator between the two sides of our nature is consciousness which according to Penrose/Hameroff is the threshold between the quantum and the classical worlds which are two aspects of the same reality.

Darwin and others came along and said we don't need are immaterial nature. We can explain everything with just the material. So many have lived in the fantasy world that says the material is all there is.

Then Quantum Mechanics came along and threw a monkey wrench at materialism. The fact that Quantum Biology is an emerging field that shows classical biological systems use Quantum effects is just HUGE. If classical biological systems can use things like entanglement, non locality and superposition how can you deny life after death, near death experiences, twin telepathy, psychic ability, remote viewing and more? These things will easily be explained in the context of these quantum effects. I recently read an article in Nature that said everything is Quantum. So the classical world emerges from the quantum world which makes them two sides of the same thing.

I think a paradigm shift is coming and we will reunite spirit/matter and it will be......AMAZING!






new topics
top topics
 
18
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum