========
20060428
I am listening to a Science Friday podcast about quantum computing. The guest says that when particles collide they flip bits. Molecular vibration is a storm of calculations. And entropy is a spreading out of calculatory pressure.
That means that matter can be thought of as a dense cloud of calculation objects.
In moving something through space, you are only moving the outer layer of particles (calc. obj.). It is then those particles that push on their neighbors, who push on their neighbors, etc. Think of a 50-gallon trashbag filled with gelatin floating in space. If you pushed ever-so-gently, you could cause the bag of gelatin to drift slowly away. But if you pushed very quickly, your hand would drive the plastic into the mass of gelatin leaving a deep dent, and not causing as much motion as you expected. The inertia of the whole mass was greater than its cohesion.
To relate to the quantum computing thing... by pushing on one side, you cause calculations to be carried out through the entire cloud. So, does this mean that inertia is an expression of the processing power consumed by the entire cloud as it responds to a change in velocity?
--
Check out Science Friday's podcasts
http://www.sciencefriday.com/feed/
Friday, April 28, 2006
Friday, April 14, 2006
Are you an invariant representation?
===
20060414
Who am I? Am I my brain? Am I my spirit?
The brain is an information organ. It passes information "up" and "down" a hierarchy which is defined in our cerebral cortex. Patterns are recognized, decisions are made, and new patterns are learned in hierarchical levels above the current one. Lets call these pattern objects for now. Then at each level of the hierarchy, there are collections of pattern objects. It is the job of a pattern object in the current level to choose from the collection of pattern objects from the level below.
At the top level there are patterns which Jeff Hawkins refers to as invariant representations (as opposed to "auto-associative memory"). These are top-level pattern objects. At the top level, these objects have the advantage of input that has been refined as it was passed up the hierarchy.
What then is our sense of consciousness? If at each level there are only collections of pattern objects, then our "self" is either, as Jeff says, just the hum of the top-level hierarchy, or our "self" is like a single pattern object in a non-physical level one more up the hierarchy. In the first case, we can use our sense of consciousness to understand how a particular hierarchical level experiences the level below it. In the second case, it would be understanding how a particular pattern object (a cortical column) experiences the level below it.
My hunch is that the "we" that is "self" is a little of both. There are times we are "listening" to the various "voices" which guide our thoughts. But we are also able to asert a single, "self", an "I", that can take control and make top-level decisions that override all. ... or do we?
Is there an "I" which floats above ready to pass judgement? When we make a decision, is it the action of a "supreme judge" (a meta-parent) or is it simply the loudest voice (siblings) drowning out the others?
This is nearly a theological question, or at least a spiritual one. If our self is meerly the collection of siblings duking it out for the podium, then the existance of a "higher power" seems unlikely. If our self is (at least occasionally) the result of a meta-parent, then our self is like a pattern object (child) of a non-physical level above us.
20060414
Who am I? Am I my brain? Am I my spirit?
The brain is an information organ. It passes information "up" and "down" a hierarchy which is defined in our cerebral cortex. Patterns are recognized, decisions are made, and new patterns are learned in hierarchical levels above the current one. Lets call these pattern objects for now. Then at each level of the hierarchy, there are collections of pattern objects. It is the job of a pattern object in the current level to choose from the collection of pattern objects from the level below.
At the top level there are patterns which Jeff Hawkins refers to as invariant representations (as opposed to "auto-associative memory"). These are top-level pattern objects. At the top level, these objects have the advantage of input that has been refined as it was passed up the hierarchy.
What then is our sense of consciousness? If at each level there are only collections of pattern objects, then our "self" is either, as Jeff says, just the hum of the top-level hierarchy, or our "self" is like a single pattern object in a non-physical level one more up the hierarchy. In the first case, we can use our sense of consciousness to understand how a particular hierarchical level experiences the level below it. In the second case, it would be understanding how a particular pattern object (a cortical column) experiences the level below it.
My hunch is that the "we" that is "self" is a little of both. There are times we are "listening" to the various "voices" which guide our thoughts. But we are also able to asert a single, "self", an "I", that can take control and make top-level decisions that override all. ... or do we?
Is there an "I" which floats above ready to pass judgement? When we make a decision, is it the action of a "supreme judge" (a meta-parent) or is it simply the loudest voice (siblings) drowning out the others?
This is nearly a theological question, or at least a spiritual one. If our self is meerly the collection of siblings duking it out for the podium, then the existance of a "higher power" seems unlikely. If our self is (at least occasionally) the result of a meta-parent, then our self is like a pattern object (child) of a non-physical level above us.
Wealth Entropy
Choosing not to support the largest company is a choice to support wealth entropy (which furthers socio-economic equality).
---
this came out of a response I had to an email sent to me by my friend Courtney Geetter about waging a "gas war" against Exxon/Mobil.
---
this came out of a response I had to an email sent to me by my friend Courtney Geetter about waging a "gas war" against Exxon/Mobil.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Are you seeking any help?
Last Thursday (20060406), I became aware of the connection between specialization, hierarchy, and the disconnect between individuals (people).
In Political Science class, there was a class discussion about a recent on-campus rape. The teacher, Dan Faulk, removed himself from the discussion to see how the class would handle directing a discussion on their own. Overall, a very successful experiment. As Dan later said, the class conducted a repectul, productive, democratec, and gender balanced discussion about a potentially volitile topic.
Many things were discussed. I said that I felt that this "problem" of "what to do" was mostly one of disconnect between people. You see, one of the methods discussed was a small community's (tribal?) ability to ostracize the individual that commited the crime. This led me to my line of thought about seperation. I brought up that we in this current age, in the large, complex, disconnected system we live in -- we cannot use the method of direct ostracization that is available to the small tribe. We don't even know what's going on in the apartemnt next door.
After class, Dan Faulk and I talked about hierarchy and specialization and I realized that they go hand in hand. You cannot have a hierarchy without specialization -- duh!
And specialization is a beautiful, double-edged blade. Specialization is good for the overall system as an organism -- it allows the organism to function well as a whole. But specialization implies a hierarchy. By nature of their design, specialized units cannot be free of dependencies. To be a specialized unit menas to be dependent and to be depended upon. To be specialized means to exist within a hierarchy.
So now... thinking about all this, I'm riding home on my bike... when I ride past this lady catching her balance on the back of a truck. I turn around to see if she's alright. She asks if I can help her walk home -- "just around the corner". I say sure and as she takes off her backpack, I hear heavy bottles clank together, and... then I smell the friggin distillery. Well, I start walking and thinking "what am I doing? How am I gonna get out of this? I'm being an 'enabler'!" And then she starts stumbling out into the treet! I call her back over the the sidewalk and ger her to sit down on the curb. She says how come ya always have to go for the booze? I say it's 'cause life hurts. She says yea, but how come... and she holds up her hand and "drinks" out of her thumb-bottle-neck. And I say it's cause life hurts too much and you need to run away -- you need to bury the pain and alcohol makes the pain go away... for a little while at least.
Just then, a cop pulls up.
She says to me "oh shit! uh... what's your name?"
"Andrew"
"okay... uh, Andrew you're my friend and you are just walking me home and you are gonna take me home now okay?"
"... no, I can't do that. I can't lie for you"
"but please! come on, please!"
"no. You have to deal with this. You have to deal with the cop and I can't lie for you."
After the expected cop/drunk skit, I became aware that life was just putting me through a situation to make me understad the true scope of the disconnect problem.
You see before he arrested her, cuffed her, and took her away -- while he was still doing his cop-lecture shtick -- something he said really stuck with me.
He said to her "are you seeking any help yet?"
Notice the disconnect. In the theoretical small tribe -- the person with a problem like alcoholism would not have to "seek help" because the tight-knit (and largely parrallel) community would be the help. But in our large, complex, disconnected system, we say
"are you seeking any help?"
In Political Science class, there was a class discussion about a recent on-campus rape. The teacher, Dan Faulk, removed himself from the discussion to see how the class would handle directing a discussion on their own. Overall, a very successful experiment. As Dan later said, the class conducted a repectul, productive, democratec, and gender balanced discussion about a potentially volitile topic.
Many things were discussed. I said that I felt that this "problem" of "what to do" was mostly one of disconnect between people. You see, one of the methods discussed was a small community's (tribal?) ability to ostracize the individual that commited the crime. This led me to my line of thought about seperation. I brought up that we in this current age, in the large, complex, disconnected system we live in -- we cannot use the method of direct ostracization that is available to the small tribe. We don't even know what's going on in the apartemnt next door.
After class, Dan Faulk and I talked about hierarchy and specialization and I realized that they go hand in hand. You cannot have a hierarchy without specialization -- duh!
And specialization is a beautiful, double-edged blade. Specialization is good for the overall system as an organism -- it allows the organism to function well as a whole. But specialization implies a hierarchy. By nature of their design, specialized units cannot be free of dependencies. To be a specialized unit menas to be dependent and to be depended upon. To be specialized means to exist within a hierarchy.
So now... thinking about all this, I'm riding home on my bike... when I ride past this lady catching her balance on the back of a truck. I turn around to see if she's alright. She asks if I can help her walk home -- "just around the corner". I say sure and as she takes off her backpack, I hear heavy bottles clank together, and... then I smell the friggin distillery. Well, I start walking and thinking "what am I doing? How am I gonna get out of this? I'm being an 'enabler'!" And then she starts stumbling out into the treet! I call her back over the the sidewalk and ger her to sit down on the curb. She says how come ya always have to go for the booze? I say it's 'cause life hurts. She says yea, but how come... and she holds up her hand and "drinks" out of her thumb-bottle-neck. And I say it's cause life hurts too much and you need to run away -- you need to bury the pain and alcohol makes the pain go away... for a little while at least.
Just then, a cop pulls up.
She says to me "oh shit! uh... what's your name?"
"Andrew"
"okay... uh, Andrew you're my friend and you are just walking me home and you are gonna take me home now okay?"
"... no, I can't do that. I can't lie for you"
"but please! come on, please!"
"no. You have to deal with this. You have to deal with the cop and I can't lie for you."
After the expected cop/drunk skit, I became aware that life was just putting me through a situation to make me understad the true scope of the disconnect problem.
You see before he arrested her, cuffed her, and took her away -- while he was still doing his cop-lecture shtick -- something he said really stuck with me.
He said to her "are you seeking any help yet?"
Notice the disconnect. In the theoretical small tribe -- the person with a problem like alcoholism would not have to "seek help" because the tight-knit (and largely parrallel) community would be the help. But in our large, complex, disconnected system, we say
"are you seeking any help?"
Sunday, April 02, 2006
saying "marijuana" makes me uncomfortabe
I don't like thinking of how others will percieve me when reading the below poem. I makes me uncomfortable, and I think "I should take it down... I shouldn't post that...". But then another voice (and aparently a stronger voice) comes up and says "if you think you shouldn't post it because people will judge you for it, then that's exactly the reason you have to post it"
I think that's accurate -- it's poetry, not... i dunno, something else.
I think that's accurate -- it's poetry, not... i dunno, something else.
the poet's lost within me
here I am again
so very high today
but to finish with my schoolwork
I can see no other way
for marijuana gives me focus
allowing me to tredge
through mounds and mounds of homework
till I can see the edge
and, the poet's lost within me
in a cloud of smoke today
but I'm getting high again
for I see no other way
so very high today
but to finish with my schoolwork
I can see no other way
for marijuana gives me focus
allowing me to tredge
through mounds and mounds of homework
till I can see the edge
and, the poet's lost within me
in a cloud of smoke today
but I'm getting high again
for I see no other way
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
