The Brain as a Computer

[Jamjai]

sounds like he's talking about a time vortex and how a brain visuals it

...im just guessing

[Atomic Utopia]

A very... Interesting post Mineness.

And after reading sevral translations and feeling like I was attempting read ancient Etruscan for a while I must say your Ideas are terribly unoriginal. First and foremost you state that the brain can precise things in what appears to be a varient of one of zenos paradoxes (the arrow paradox to be precise) and therefore determine that the concept of time is merely a creation of our imaginations to describe the changes in the universe, however we have found the fundamental unit of time (correct me if I am wrong), and it is called the planck time, nothing can changer faster than once a planck time. Therefore time is not a construct of our imagination.

Also, please use language that is more comprehensible than ancient Etruscan as your writing made attempting to understand wave functions easy.

[Risottia]

Ok, but how are we going to map a Cauchy surface onto a field defined in the Minkowski space?

There are modal formulations of the Kuratowski closure axioms,

Care to show one? I'm not an expert about field topology, but this is getting interesting.

which when repeated in a culturally paradigmatic recursive process,

...I'm not sure about the mathematics behind a cultural paradigm.

[L Ron Cupboard]

... but this is getting interesting.

I'm betting you don't get a clear reply from the OP.

[Ethel mermania]

... but this is getting interesting.

I'm betting you don't get a clear reply from the OP.

a leopard in the home of the op, only answer.

your old enough to know, wanna tell me about the ops claim about satre's seminal works on time?

[L Ron Cupboard]

I'm betting you don't get a clear reply from the OP.

a leopard in the home of the op, only answer.

your old enough to know, wanna tell me about the ops claim about satre's seminal works on time?

I've only read one of Sartre's novels, and didn't think much of it. So I haven't a clue which book the OP is referencing - maybe Risottia knows?

[Ethel mermania]

a leopard in the home of the op, only answer.

your old enough to know, wanna tell me about the ops claim about satre's seminal works on time?

I've only read one of Sartre's novels, and didn't think much of it. So I haven't a clue which book the OP is referencing - maybe Risottia knows?

i would be surprised if the OP knows.

[L Ron Cupboard]

I've only read one of Sartre's novels, and didn't think much of it. So I haven't a clue which book the OP is referencing - maybe Risottia knows?

i would be surprised if the OP knows.

I think you are right. All a bit self-consciously impenetrable.

[Ethel mermania]

i would be surprised if the OP knows.

I think you are right. All a bit self-consciously impenetrable.

that's one way to describe it.

[Risottia]

a leopard in the home of the op, only answer.

your old enough to know, wanna tell me about the ops claim about satre's seminal works on time?

I've only read one of Sartre's novels, and didn't think much of it. So I haven't a clue which book the OP is referencing - maybe Risottia knows?

Personally I found Sartre to be pretentious and shallow as philosopher, and boring as writer (not to mention individualist and petty-bourgeoise ). So I forgot all of his works.

[Jute]

I disagree with the computer metapher. It's outdated and ind inaccurate. See here: Link A car or an ant colony works much better as a metaphor, and maybe we could do without one altogether.

[Ethel mermania]

I've only read one of Sartre's novels, and didn't think much of it. So I haven't a clue which book the OP is referencing - maybe Risottia knows?

Personally I found Sartre to be pretentious and shallow as philosopher, and boring as writer (not to mention individualist and petty-bourgeoise ). So I forgot all of his works.

petty-boureoise mon ami, those would be fighting words to jp

[CTALNH]

I have two things to say; tl;dr and are you high?

No his just trolling hard.

[Sociobiology]

the brain is a multistate computer as opposed to a binary one.

[Sociobiology]

I disagree with the computer metapher. It's outdated and ind inaccurate. See here: Link A car or an ant colony works much better as a metaphor, and maybe we could do without one altogether.

actually the computer works just fine as long as you understand it behaves like a multistate computer (as does an ant colony) and not a binary one.
and for a sufficiently broad definition of "like" it is like a binary computer as well.

[Herargon]

Time is inextricably linked with the conceptual notion of physical configuration. Indeed, as Sartre made note of in his seminal works, time is merely the subjective quantification of changes in the physical configuration of an arbitrarily selected object. Therefore, it is necessary given the fifth axiom of model-epistemic logic that time is physical. As a physical entity, we can conclude from a backwards-definitional analysis that it must also be corporeal. According to Einstein's field equations, which follow topologically from a Riemann analysis of Cauchy surfaces, where surface S is the efficient cause of S2, and both surfaces are homemorphic to the Euclidean field metric, the only physically coherent epistemology for the utilization of so-called "time units" is through informational processing in computational science. Therefore, the existence of sufficiently sophisticated computers, each with its own internal syntax processing and self-defined reflexive axiomatic propositions, is physically necessary for the utilization of time units

The existential analytic of time units leads one to a path that requires a working understanding of sophisticated tensor calculus and computational neuroscience. To summarize the work that has been done in this area, empirical observations have concluded that time units are the a priori structure of reality itself, and we interpret reality through a set of physical structures which is responsible for the syntaxical and meta-syntaxical coherency of the informational transmission. Since our mind is the physical structure identified with the syntaxical and meta-syntaxical coherency of the informational transmission (defined as the decrease in Channon uncertainty as the time limits approaches zero), our mind is necessarily a sophisticated computer with own internal syntax processing and self-defined reflexive axiomatic propositions that are physically necessary for the utilization of time units given a Riemann analysis of Cauchy surfaces, the truth of which follow topologically from Einstein's field equations.

Maybe the brain is different in it's structure of neurons from chips of a computer; the brain could be uploaded to a computer, however; the fact that we need to reach the technological singularity for this means that we won't be able to make it so. However, time is not a physical being; to be physical it must take space, and time does not take space, but happens in the space.

[Arkolon]

The brain as a computer is but one interpretation of consciousness.

The joke

my head.

[Arkolon]

Well, that was a pretty quick Google research session.

[Herargon]

The joke

my head.

Do you mean you didn't use the dictionary to understand some of his words on page 1? No offense, but I'm wondering that seiously. Why don't people take the time to read dictionaries and search it up?

[Bythyrona]

The joke

my head.

Yeah, it's this. lol.

[Arkolon]

The joke

my head.

Yeah, it's this. lol.

Never seen that meme before.

[Arkolon]

The joke

my head.

Do you mean you didn't use the dictionary to understand some of his words on page 1? No offense, but I'm wondering that seiously. Why don't people take the time to read dictionaries and search it up?

I know Cartesian dualism better than I know Internet slang, sorry.

[Herargon]

Do you mean you didn't use the dictionary to understand some of his words on page 1? No offense, but I'm wondering that seiously. Why don't people take the time to read dictionaries and search it up?

I know Cartesian dualism better than I know Internet slang, sorry.

No, I was talking about the OP.

[Arkolon]

I know Cartesian dualism better than I know Internet slang, sorry.

No, I was talking about the OP.

I wasn't.

Why did you quote me?

[Sociobiology]

Well, that was a pretty quick Google research session.

1. multistate computers are also analog.
2. most computers are byte-addressable, because that works better in binary, computers can and are built other ways.
3. see neural net computers for how to build computers that use distributed processing.
4. there is a system clock in the brain, one in each cell in fact. we can build computers that do that as well, http://www.ece.umd.edu/~blj/papers/em26-1.pdf.
5. short term memory has an upper limit and does store things that are not in long term memory.
6. you can build a computer that does not have software, we don't because software works better most of the time.
7. As I have said before multistate instead of digital.
8.we don't have to build computers with hard drives, if anything we are moving away from it.
9. we can build self organizing computers, they just aren't a good way to make one, especially if you want to install software.
10. we build computers with bodies all the time, we call them robots.
bonus. comparing a human brain to a modern computer is like comparing a flash card to a punch card. Google would be just as magically different (perceived qualitative that is actually quantitative) to someone using a babbage engine.

in short
"like" is not the same thing as "exactly analogous".