DearDiary.2003-02-10
David: whadd i mis jimscarver: jimscarver: if any complex change information (more than two dimensions) is encoded in quantum communications we do not see it, and cannot get those thoughts of the universe. jimscarver: was the last thing... David: so. . . someone was listening? . . . jimscarver: you David: yeah David: is it possible for the universe or some part of it to have a thought that is more complex than the thought media David: all of the thoughts that play around in my mind are ultimatly electron exclusion events David: i supose its all on a different scale complex or not David: it is hard to imagine . . . I have no control over my thoughts, my thoughts control me jimscarver: yes, mimple messages can convey compex ideas, but when a photon shoots accross the galaxy and penitrates an atom, which then propgates the change information into the future, the "hidden" info could be a complex as dna jimscarver: your mind and body is slave (robot) of the gods. jimscarver: or we are the spirits we allow in us David: my problem is i have allowed too many spirits in and they are at war David: but then i let them in because i was programed to do so David: i supose i should try and stop looking at my eye with my eye its beginning to give me a mind ache jimscarver: try an antienflamatory David: is it healthy to filter the kinds of information we allow ourselves to take in or should we be open to anything surkumdev1: what do u guys think of the following surkumdev1: > My dad who is a social engineer (socialist?)says the 'why' question > doesn't belong in science. I ask him why and he gets mad. When > scientists have a theory, before anything, dont they want to know why > something is the way it is? I think its disingenous to say scientists > ask 'how', and philosophers ask 'why' - and historians write about it, > hey > I really depends on where you put the 'how' and the 'why'. Science is based on a system of posulate, that do not have mathematical proofs. However, based on empirical observation, are taken for granted. For example, within SR, you may not ask why the speed of light is constant in every frame of reference. This is an underlying posulate of SR. However, taking this granted, you may be abe to explain 'why' travellers, surkumdev1: moving close to light speed, will have their time slowed down. In Newtonian physics, you have to take m dv/dt <code> - d/dx V(x) for granted. You cannot go anywhere by asking why this is true, within Netwonian framework. You could conduct experiments and show this to be consistant, however, you may not be to able to derive it. However, from the schrodinger's equation or hisenberg mechanics, you will be able to derive m d<v> /dt </code> - < d/dx V(x) > I once got into debate witht this person, who got upset because i said if you read David Griffits book, you will be able to understand Quantum Mechanics. He even quoted feyman saying 'nobody understands quantum mechanics.' It's was interesting one of 2 ways. Feyman himself won the Noble Prize in Physics, for QED. So, if he did not understand surkumdev1: did he get a noble prize for plug and chugging? And feyman himself wrote many books on QM. So, it is important to put feyman statement into context. I really think he meant to say, 'nobody understands why quantum mechanics is the way it is.' However, his many books are on 'understanding how quantum mechanics the way it is'. Secondly, it is important to distinguish between 'rationale for things the way they are' and 'reasons for things the way they are.' Philosophers and Religions usually, indluge themselves over rationale for things, not necessalirily reason for things. Physics, and other sciences are more bent on reason for things. Their reason for things have to agree with experiment, which something philsophers rarely do. David: QM seems to have painted itself into a corner . . . Science likes to take the high road and limit itself to that which is observable David: then it constrains the definition of observable so that its domain is quite narrow indeed David: i think if science ever got around to observing itself in a serious way it might find itself to be obsolete David: of course that will not likely happen anytime soon short of a cultural revolution because science has ensured its success by enslaving the minds of most of the western world David: the enslaved minds are told they have too much to loose if they rebel jimscarver: it is not what goes into a man that defiles him, it is what comes out. jimscarver: -- jesus David: dang were did that come from David: i am posesed David: i became posesed by a rebel spirit last night David: sorry koomar did not mean to obscure the question David: it seems if the scientests and the historians and the philosopher/priests all asked themselves why do we keep asking questions within our repective domains we might find they all have the same answer David: Koomar, are you adding your thought to [[WikiWorld]]? jimscarver: we can't answer why binary differentials, but i think we can say why everything else based on binary differentials. jimscarver: i was a rebel much of the weekend.... jimscarver: you could never say why their are strange fields and forses at a distance. because, they do not exist... they are useful figments of scientific imaginations. surkumdev1: sorry, surkumdev1: i wasnt at my computer surkumdev1: now i am back David: science doesnt want to ask the big WHY question it think it is ill equiped bgtallguy joined the room surkumdev1: or be, science acknowledges its own limitations surkumdev1: science is not a religion bgtallguy left the room David: science is a system of thought that seeks to evolve grow and primaraly survive surkumdev1: yes David: religious thought systems are likewise the same jimscarver: Science and Religion will meet. David: the ofspring of science and religion will rebel against both and hopfully overthrow them David: there i go again . . . . jeeesk whats goten into me surkumdev1: well, i dunno David: my mind has been infected with a meme virus . . . surkumdev1: science is bound to change ahmed_amria joined the room surkumdev1: religion is always preached in terms of absolutes surkumdev1: not all, but the most popular ones do ahmed_amria: DAVID David: YES ahmed_amria: WARE ARE Y FROM David: some guy asked if i wanted the blue pill or the Red pill and i think i took both but i dont remember David: it seemed like a dream David: Spokan Washington statE USA David: North America ahmed_amria: GOOD jimscarver: you the one that found the white rabbit? David: lol ahmed_amria: INED YOU TO GO AMERKA David: i used to have that trickster on my website David: then i found another one on another website David: last night . . . my mind has been in a state since ahmed_amria: I NO jimscarver: that was http://www.organelle.org/ David: yes David: not sure what happened if it is significant or not or maybe just related to sleep deprivation or both David: ahmed how can we help you? ahmed_amria: PLES jimscarver: we are listening ahmed jimscarver: please pardon our side discussions... ahmed_amria: IM EGYPT David: you live in egypt and would like to find a way to USA ? ahmed_amria: OKE David: how can we help? jimscarver: Stop the War http://unitedforpeace.org/article.php?list<code>sub&sub</code>30 David: that would be a start for sure ahmed_amria: OKEI DREAM TO TRAVEL TO AMERCAIN BUT I DONT KNOW HOW CAN I GO THERE ahmed_amria: CAN U HELP ME PLZ? jimscarver: turn right when you get to cuba. jimscarver: hum, sorry for that bad joke.... jimscarver: not sure how we can help David: im thinking ahmed_amria: OK I WILL WAIOT U ahmed_amria: BUT PLZ DONT FORGET ME David: some things make it hard surkumdev1: ahmed, become a programmer ahmed_amria: WHAT ITS ? surkumdev1: get a job in a consulting company David: traveling across the ocean costs money usually surkumdev1: and they will bodyshop you to america David: that could work ahmed_amria: NO PROBS IN MONEY David: ok David: you need a sponser of some sort then? ahmed_amria: HOW surkumdev1: yes David David: hmm . . . not sure surkumdev1: the American company has to sponser you surkumdev1: and prove that there nt qualified individual who can do your job David: do you wish to stay more than a week or two surkumdev1: in america ahmed_amria: I WANT TO STAY THERE 4EVER David: ah ahmed_amria: WHAT? David: ok ahmed_amria: HOW? David: then you need to convince US government that you can do something in USA that no one else can do David: it sounds harder than it might be in reality David: do you have specialized work skills jimscarver: something other than blowing up buildings.... ahmed_amria: I TRIED THAT BEFORE BUT I CANT ahmed_amria: NO I DONT David: ok jimscarver: good surkumdev1: ahmed_amria, unless you have a noble prize, your visa will not be cetified if you say that you want to stay there forever ahmed_amria: I DO David: ahmed_amria: BUT ITS CVERY DIFFECLUT HERE surkumdev1: well, once you come here and work for 3-4 years surkumdev1: you can apply for a green card surkumdev1: and that would take another 3 years depending on various factors ahmed_amria: OK BUT HOW? David: what skills do you have surkumdev1: well, what special qualifications do u have? ahmed_amria: NO SKILLS David: im curious . . . what is your native language? David: how do you pay for house and food? ahmed_amria: BUT I WORK AT TOURISTS David: ok David: what are your dreams besides living in USA ahmed_amria: LIVE surkumdev1: my uncle is a bus driver in india David: you speak two languages that is a skill ahmed_amria: AND FAMALE David: ok surkumdev1: actually 2 of my uncles are bus drivers surkumdev1: you are female? ahmed_amria: YOU CAN David: family ahmed_amria: YAS surkumdev1: oh ok ahmed_amria: PLEZ INED YOU surkumdev1: ahmed, taxi cabbing will probably be ur job jimscarver: ok, that's easy, you can marry surkumdev1, next. surkumdev1: ha David: ha surkumdev1: surkumdev1: anyways, i dunno ahmed jimscarver: amria sounds much more feminine ahmed_amria: HOW David: the outlook is not good for you to get here unless you marry a USA citizen surkumdev1: yes surkumdev1: and do not trust americans (on marriage) David: you might have a better chance of living your dream by changing the world you live in surkumdev1: well, that's a hard shot jimscarver: hey, i resent that remark, kum, americans marry more times than anyone. David: either path is very difficult and full of danger jimscarver: how old are you amria? ahmed_amria: 25 surkumdev1: oh surkumdev1: u male/female? ahmed_amria: WAT? ahmed_amria: M surkumdev1: ok ok ahmed_amria: AND........... surkumdev1: then you could probably find ur way thru things ahmed_amria: YEAH surkumdev1: if you are female, you could probably easily marry someone. If you are male, you have to find other not so easy paths. surkumdev1: either way, you would have to suffer to live your dream ahmed_amria: U KNOW GIRL AGREE TO MARRY ME surkumdev1: yes, american girls? David: most girls i know are into love and all that surkumdev1: david, this is a different country surkumdev1: they will probably chop ur arm off for that ahmed_amria: SHE AGREETO MARRY ME ? surkumdev1: i mean, where is that girl from? ahmed_amria: AMER surkumdev1: AMERICA ? ahmed_amria: YA surkumdev1: good luck surkumdev1: is she muslim? ahmed_amria: NO U DONT UNDERSTAND ME ahmed_amria: I WANT ONE surkumdev1: oh ahmed_amria: I DONT KNOW ANY BODY surkumdev1: ok ok ahmed_amria: U KNOW ? surkumdev1: no not really surkumdev1: i have trouble getting american women ahmed_amria: CAN U SENT ME AN INVITION AND I WILL GIVE U WHAT U WANT surkumdev1: anyways, if you do manage to come to america illegally, you will become a permanent resident if you manage to stay here for 10 years surkumdev1: anyways, now is that the time to do that surkumdev1: if you do that, they will put in prison and stuff ahmed_amria: OK ahmed_amria: U WILL SENT IT surkumdev1: what do u mean? i send u what? ahmed_amria: AN INVITION TO TRAVEL THERE surkumdev1: invitation, .... me? I am a broke man surkumdev1: i really have no such powers David: i dont think he is asking for money surkumdev1: no, i know what he meant David: oh surkumdev1: i mean, i wouldnt be able to fund any such thing ahmed_amria: OK ahmed_amria: TY surkumdev1: Anyways, David, i tend to think that [[WikiWorld]] is built-on philosphy that people are naturally good David: yes . . . many would agree surkumdev1: amria, asking people on the internet is not going to help you surkumdev1: really ahmed_amria: BUT PLZ TELL ME IF U KNOW HOW I CAN GO THERE surkumdev1: join the US army ahmed_amria: PLZ MY FATHER IS THERE AND I WZNT TO SEE HIM surkumdev1: my cousin in india is going joined the french army ahmed_amria: I DIDNT SEE HIM SINCE 10 YEARS surkumdev1: he is indian citizen David: i had a friend in the UK that wanted to find a way to live here. I know that it is very difficult. surkumdev1: well, join the french army ahmed_amria: OK surkumdev1: get a french passport and visa surkumdev1: and come over here surkumdev1: you do not have to be french citizen to join a certain program in their army surkumdev1: hey say surkumdev1: hey ahmed, if your dad is here surkumdev1: ask him surkumdev1: he probably knows more than me surkumdev1: if he has been there for more than 10 years, he probably has a green card by now jimscarver: so david, what spirit have you become? David: not sure David: jimscarver: and surkum, put stuff on http://www.wikiworld.com/KooMar/ jimscarver: what happened? David: well I was just playfully half sleepily reading organelle it seemed to harmanize with some things that had been floating around in my mind but i didnt think to much of it David: then today i find myself spouting off stuff that normally wouldnt come from me David: start thinking of thought systems as living entities that changes my perspective slightly surkumdev1: > Do molecules in Brownian Motion take a 100% random > walk, or is their motion just causal, but unpredictable, > deterministic chaos? Chaos is a good word to describe it. Deterministic systems can also behave compeletely chaotically. An example is Windows 98. Since Windows 98 runs a computer, the flow of the program is determinstic. However, it does 'randomly' crash from time to time for 'unknown' reasons. It is possible, that with enough variables, you can figure out when it is going to crash. However, it is easier to model it as a random system surkumdev1: jim, i am trying to get all my USENET posts surkumdev1: and am probably going to put them on [[WikiWorld]] surkumdev1: > George Gamow wrote that liquid and gas molecules do, > in effect, take a random walk and that we can calculate > the probability of all the air in any room suddenly gathering > to some random place in the room, in some arbitrarily > small volume. Do air molecules move contrary to > Newton's First and Second Laws of Motion, ignoring > the repellent electrical forces of their atomic shells? > What am I missing? > Not really, George Gamow, carefully chose his words. Remember that he tell that you can calculate the ''''''probability'''''' that all air molecules suddenly gather in arbitarily small volume. To translate his statement (into some else's statement), giving 1000 monkeys, a 1000 typewriters, for a 1000 000 000 years, there is probability that one of those monkey will ha David: hyberbole in understatements surkumdev1: huh? David: sorry koomar David: pay no mind to the man behind the curtian David: newton observed the very predictable probability of electron exclusion events in the aggragate jimscarver: you believe anything is really random? surkumdev1: man behind the curtain? jimscarver: molecules are like fredkins machine, deterministic. jimscarver: in theory surkumdev1: the schrodinger's equation is a determinstic equation David: random may be at times a usefull metephor for things we dont understand fully jimscarver: yes jimscarver: too much information is noise jimscarver: random.... David: I feel like a 2 year old putting together random word and hopping something makes sense surkumdev1: schrodinger's equation can be understood from the prespective of the many world theory David: like the static on the tv when a chanel is out jimscarver: the all possible world theory.... makes no sence to me. surkumdev1: when the histories branch, you can go into either one jimscarver: duh. surkumdev1: jim, why not? David: each dot of information is meaningfull if you could trace it back to the source but we cant surkumdev1: David, the schrodinger's equation is reversible surkumdev1: however, you have to take all histories into account jimscarver: kalamara show the real, many worlds, everything has one, defined by their light cone, no others exist. David: the only thing i know if schrodinger is from a Star Treck book i read that explained the premise of an alternate universe David: something about a cat in a box surkumdev1: yeah sierra (sam9422) joined the room jimscarver: he came up with equation that exhibits properties of quantum mechanics. David: what about worlds that emerge from the complexity of the universe surkumdev1: oh David: my fantacy is a world unto itself . . . of course it can be reduced to electron exclusion events in my nuron network surkumdev1: huh? surkumdev1: what do u mean? David: Science has created a whole universe in which many differnet thought systems compete for supremecy surkumdev1: oh surkumdev1: what do u mean 'science has created' ? David: these can still be reduced to electron exclusion events of course David: that statment implies science is a living system that is trying to survive surkumdev1: what do u mean by electron exclusion events? jimscarver: that cat died. jimscarver: they are participatory in nature, they have participants, each has a world view that contributes to the collective world view. jimscarver: we each have our own universe jimscarver: electron exclusion events is the simpled way to understand all that we experirnce kum. David: our individual universes is a qaulitativly diferent domain from shrodingers mutliple universes surkumdev1: oh David: for me it is a black box much like the greeks atom David: i dont get it but then i dont need to to use it surkumdev1: ok jimscarver: one 2D electron defines no point in 3D space. 2 of opposite spin define a "quanta" of space" by failing to occupie the same space. Pauli exclusion principle. surkumdev1: huh? no David: hmm. . . maybe i am starting to get it? surkumdev1: pauli's exclusion principle applies because electrons and distinguishable particles with anti symmetric requirements surkumdev1: it's just if 2 electrons have the wave equation, then the composite wave equation becomes 0 jimscarver: in the outside would, each "exclusion" event is a transfer of state change information between electrons which is sometimes called a photon.. surkumdev1: jim. what is an "exclusion" event? surkumdev1: *it's just if 2 electrons have the same wave equation, then the composite wave equation becomes 0 jimscarver: it can include any number of state changes in two dimensions representing multiple exclusions. surkumdev1: why 2 dimensions? jimscarver: electrons have excactly two proporties and can only manifest at most 2 dimensions. surkumdev1: 2 properties? surkumdev1: what are they? David: spin and charge David: no? surkumdev1: how about velocity, mass.... surkumdev1: position David: these are emergent jimscarver: electron and positron can become zero, not two electrons, surkumdev1: yes, when they anhilate each other David: no such thing as mass David: that is cool David: i knew it surkumdev1: what is mass then? jimscarver: those are relative properties, not inherinent to the electron itself. surkumdev1: well, why not inherent? jimscarver: rest mass is the total contributed by charge and spin surkumdev1: how about properties like baryon number, topness, charm, upness? surkumdev1: how? ahmed_amria left the room jimscarver: those get inside the atom, works like hypertetrahedral inside, exclusion events explain ordinary 3D experience. surkumdev1: how? jimscarver: events create space jimscarver: events occure when electrons might occupie the same space, defining space. jimscarver: they are all that we percieve jimscarver: they manifest all the forses David: Jim, does information physics basicly ignore superstring theroy as a red herring? surkumdev1: oh jimscarver left the room David: did i get booted? jimscarver joined the room jimscarver: shucks, i lost everything David: oh no surkumdev1: lost what? jimscarver: just the chat actually... surkumdev1: ok David: too bad that was some cool stuff jimscarver: what's up with [[SevenLambs]]? David: not sure surkumdev1: sevenlambs? David: has something to say though jimscarver: do you [[GetIt]] Kum? surkumdev1: no, i dont [[GetIt]] surkumdev1: what does he mean? jimscarver: [[SevenLambs]] updated [[WikiWorld]] http://www.wikiworld.com/wiki/index.php/AnimalCommunication David: There should be a way to log the chat automatically jimscarver: the gods are not with me in getting those to worklogs disdaine joined the room David: i think he is saying we could communicate with animials but we forgot how because preditory thought systems robbed us of the requisite thought organs jimscarver: Kum, everything we experience is electron exclusions, can you see how that is true? surkumdev1: well... disdaine left the room surkumdev1: if the brain uses electrical impluses for cognition jimscarver: Kum, like http://www.wikiworld.com/wiki/index.php/TheCaseOfTheElectronCollision creates space between our electrons. surkumdev1: then i can see what you are saying David: electron exlusions create everything, light mass, distance, time, space, gravity David: all of these experiences emerge from electron exlusion events jimscarver: David: im just speaking for the theroy jimscarver: train time David: awww David: i was just getting rolling surkumdev1: i am reading jimscarver: you don't need me David: i dont understand any of it jimscarver: lol David: im just spouting off what the theroy is putting in my head surkumdev1: jim, i disagree with parts of ur idea jimscarver: just talk the talk, lol David: exactly jimscarver: talk later. Uload some songs and stuff David: ok jim David: take it easy jimscarver: kum, upload surkumdev1: well, jim, well, i do not have the password surkumdev1: i closed my AIM window surkumdev1: while i was doing the conversion surkumdev1: jim, i disagree with parts of ur idea jimscarver: just talk the talk, lol David: exactly jimscarver: talk later. Uload some songs and stuff David: ok jim David: take it easy jimscarver: kum, upload surkumdev1: well, jim, well, i do not have the password surkumdev1: i closed my AIM window surkumdev1: while i was doing the conversion jimscarver: ftp://wikiworld@wikiworld.com jimscarver: i'll happily answer all your concerns Kum so we can get this shit published. jimscarver: it works. jimscarver: i'm gone... c u jimscarver left the room surkumdev1: see u David: whoa MS Transact SQL has some non deterministic functions . . . I wonder what that is? David: brb surkumdev1: hey dave surkumdev1: http://wikiworld.com/KooMar/ David: cool surkumdev1: my artwork David: I like the artwork David: didnt listen to the music yet but i will when i get home David: I played around with graphic design a few years back David: you have flair for it surkumdev1: i try David: What is JANE in a nutshell surkumdev1: it was my project surkumdev1: it's basically my neural net processor David: is it ready for testing? David: what stage is it in? surkumdev1: well, i made it was a while back surkumdev1: yeah, it works David: cool surkumdev1: only theorectically surkumdev1: within simulation surkumdev1: it's vhdl implementation works David: how could someone set it up? surkumdev1: well, still, computers are bad when its comes to laying out hardware David: do you have an algorithm for it in psudocode? surkumdev1: humans do it manually by hand surkumdev1: yes David: ahh i see surkumdev1: but, the pain is that humans can good at manually laying things out surkumdev1: and optimizing for space surkumdev1: and decreasing the number of gates surkumdev1: this is something computers cannot do, till now David: hmm . . . does it rely on patter recognition then surkumdev1: well, my project? David: your algorithm David: patern^ surkumdev1: well, it's a processor, for a single neuron surkumdev1: you can program it David: I imagine it has a basic set of instructions surkumdev1: yes surkumdev1: simple instructions surkumdev1: you can cascade many janes David: ok surkumdev1: to do real time neural stuff David: i would love to take a look at the algorithm some day David: im wondering if it approaches a concept that I have been thinking about surkumdev1: oh surkumdev1: it's just basic stuff David: that is what i love David: basic componants that could self assemble into larger copies of itself surkumdev1: yes David: the trouble with metadata is you allways have to start somewhere surkumdev1: yeah David: the metadata class itself is an object that needs to be classed surkumdev1: http://wikiworld.com/KooMar/Jane/Jane.jpg surkumdev1: the image is stolen David: i saw it that looks cool David: I wonder what a VM version of JANE would look like David: I wonder how many VM copies of JANE could run on a single modern day workstation surkumdev1: JANE was built to use customizable hardware based neural networks David: could that be simulated or would that defeat the purpose? David: im guessing there already is a platform for simulate neual nets surkumdev1: it can be. but it really defeats the purpose surkumdev1: David, there are neural processors surkumdev1: however, they were expensive to make surkumdev1: nowadays, people are not into neural nets as they used to be David: ok i c . . . you were trying to fill a niche for inexpensive hardware based neural nets surkumdev1: neurons need not be perfect surkumdev1: which is why 4-bit is ok David: simple and scalar surkumdev1: well, it was just a school project surkumdev1: i actually have nueral net implementations in assembly surkumdev1: parallelized for the PIII David: i am barely an infant when it comes to programming David: I know in priciple what a nural net is but wouldnt even have the fogiest idea how to implement one David: that brings me to an interesting thought surkumdev1: oh David: your familier with the general turing princible surkumdev1: i know about turing thesis and stuff surkumdev1: explain, which one David: by definition any general turing machine could simulate any other general turing machine surkumdev1: yes David: ok surkumdev1: and... you were going to say David: I read a fictional story about some hackers surkumdev1: yeah David: who hacked the body as if it were a general turing machine ok surkumdev1: oh surkumdev1: interesting David: one of the hackers ran a simulation of a new 'mod' to the body on a pc surkumdev1: ok David: i supose in princible this would work surkumdev1: not really David: assuming first of all that the body is a general turing machine surkumdev1: you can run windows on top of linux David: all you would need is enough time surkumdev1: because u hack windows, doesnt mean that you have successfully hacked linux in the background surkumdev1: viruses hack the body all the time David: I was more interested in trying to determine what kind of hard ware would be required to pull a simulation of the body in a reasonable amount of time surkumdev1: well, i dunno think such questions can be answered with current technology surkumdev1: the body is so complicated David: the thing is important interactions are being carried out at the molecular level and many are begining to speculate even at the quantam level David: exactly David: the only resonable set of hardware to carry out such an experiemtne would be the body itself surkumdev1: yeah David: even one single cell within one organ is beyond our abbility to grasp surkumdev1: well, human beings can understand things to a level surkumdev1: but evolution is such an excellent designer David: even the process of replicating one small strand of DNA is beyond our ability to model surkumdev1: it's only a matter of time though David: my point is im not sure if we can modle these things without using these things to modle them David: when i read stuff on AI they go on about how the processors of todays computers are faster than the speed of human minds surkumdev1: processors faster than the human mind? David: it seems silly to compare because they do not understand the quantum reactions that may contain significant information surkumdev1: not really David: in terms of cycles per second surkumdev1: well, think of vision surkumdev1: think of how you can look at an object from the side and identify it surkumdev1: think of your vision's resolution. David: pattern recognition David: ? surkumdev1: yes surkumdev1: the human brain does so many computations per second David: well i am not sure how they arrive at the comparision surkumdev1: think of Gary Kasprov and how many moves Deep Blue played before beating him surkumdev1: actually, before tieing with them surkumdev1: tieing with him* David: yeah David: and that is a game with rules that suite the machine processes surkumdev1: yes David: suit^ surkumdev1: so, u can see what i am saying David: i agree David: there is more than meets the eye surkumdev1: the human brain's computation are optimized for a different kind of processes surkumdev1: not mechanical ones David: agreed David: it is interesting to me that the basic cellular systems could be considered mechanic surkumdev1: i would still say that even mechanically one cannot compare man with a computer David: and from this complex machinery David: emerges intelligence surkumdev1: yeah David: qualitatively different David: im just not sure if there is a short cut to intelligence surkumdev1: brb David: if we use the evolutionary model we would need an information system as complex as the earths echo system and the same amount of time as it took to get to us surkumdev1: that's why we need to steal nature's new technology surkumdev1: brb David: hello David: byee mohamed_842004 joined the room surkumdev1: hey surkumdev1: dave David: yeah surkumdev1: so u were saying David: im not sure we as humans could create or engineer true intelligence in machines surkumdev1: oh David: I think they will have to figure it out for themselves David: we can sure create some cool tools though surkumdev1: oh David: ok kumar i must run David: have a fantastic rest of your day
I miss our chats :-) BTW where did Koomar go? --DS
Koomar is at boot camp. He's in the army now. I think he'll be back in about 2 months. -- JimScarver