If information has no innate geometric or dimensional extent...

Thread Starter

Jennifer Solomon

Joined Mar 20, 2017
112
Dimensionality is just conceptual scaffolding, an organizational construct within some domain of interest. In the context of quantum physics, we need an infinite-dimensional space of quantum states to adequately describe the RAM chp. In the context of classical physics, we need just three dimensions. In the context of computer programming, a one-dimensional space is sufficient.

All of these models, though contradictory between each other, are nevertheless consistent within their own domains. To me, that's a pretty clear indication that dimensionality reflects our way of thinking more than it reflects the "true nature" of the thing being considered. Anyway, best of luck on the front lines. :)
My latest 2¢: Sure, “informational dimension” is that way. But either one exists apart from information as something in space with spatial dimension, or one doesn’t exist and no one is home. Conscious means “to know”. “Conscious of” implies the capacity to ascribe meaning to information, and therefore reason with knowledge, which is the “term concatenator” in mathematical theorems that give them meaning, the basis of reason (which I’d call different from just computing, which is devoid of meaning to an unconscious machine). We don’t call even the most sophisticated computer or robot conscious for this reason. Because consciousness finds its basis in existence apart from information, which to me is evidence it is not emergent solely due to information-processing complexity.

The basis of consciousness is the treatment of information as being separate from that which it describes, which again, I would call “knowledge” vs. just “information.” A machine may “know,” but consciousness knows that it knows, or “feels” it knows, and a basic quantitative feedback loop doesn’t make the Roomba experience its own existence. As you said, you doubt the most sophisticated machine would be “conscious” once we turn it on. Because it’s an extension of life, and life is itself currently scientifically undefined any more than just another soft discrete state-processing physical machine. The reason I want to start my reasoning from consciousness is because it‘s the only thing that cares whether or not it exists to define it, and is experientially desiring information rather than just “picking it up” via various sensors.

A conscious human can “see” its own spatial thoughts, implying it can “experience a vision” of said data in its mind, and then manipulate it in any internally visual way using its “mind’s eye.“ Where is the internal projection “screen” this thought is “on,” that one is describing internally as being “viewable,“ and why do said thoughts not resemble a CT scan of the brain’s image of the representative synapses during said projection? The “3D” of existence is different than the 3D of information, no different than the 2D array on a screen being different than the discontiguous collection of bits in a RAM chip representing it.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 115935

Joined Dec 31, 1969
0
The number of views is a reflection of the magnitude of interest in a topic in general. If they’re interested in the topic, it’s obviously a statement concerning how many members here find it relevant. (That is, of course, unless 31,000 views is composed of 49 of the same obsessed people clicking on it 1,000 times every 2 weeks for some reason.) Just to clarify, pointing that out wasn’t at all about “my ability” to gain views—it was about the topic’s ability.

My background is quite varied and spans topics from computer science to epistemology and linguistics.
" My background is quite varied and spans topics from computer science to epistemology and linguistics. "

thats quiet a varied background @Jennifer Solomon

What sort of things did you get involved with in these ?
I just asking so we can help you more exactly
 

Deleted member 115935

Joined Dec 31, 1969
0
Not sure what you’re looking for here that would help you in that manner?
Are you a student, are you a professor, are you an engineer in industry
your experience in say epistemology ( philosophical study of the nature, origin, and limits of human knowledge ), have you published papers ,
your experience of computer science, is that with a company , or as a user , or as a teacher, do you have a degree / Phd in it ?

As you say this is a topic that has had a fair few views, even if not that many replies,
I wonder if people do not know what sort of answer you are looking for , your background might help.
 

Thread Starter

Jennifer Solomon

Joined Mar 20, 2017
112
Are you a student, are you a professor, are you an engineer in industry
your experience in say epistemology ( philosophical study of the nature, origin, and limits of human knowledge ), have you published papers ,
your experience of computer science, is that with a company , or as a user , or as a teacher, do you have a degree / Phd in it ?

As you say this is a topic that has had a fair few views, even if not that many replies,
I wonder if people do not know what sort of answer you are looking for , your background might help.
I currently have 2 Ph.D‘s from Hard Knocks U and State Penn starting from 25 years ago, when I co-founded a tech firm which led to working for Google as a researcher and then GE as an analyst and sitting on the boards of other low-falutin-sounding tech firms, and also becoming a concert pianist. I’m 44 now. I have 43,367 matriculated credit hours in the study of things 16 people passionately care about on the globe. I understand “the language of order” that undergirds all academic pursuits, and welcome any reply from any angle of expertise, because I can generally cannibalize it like an African headhunter working at Adecco Technical that hasn’t eaten in a month. Hope that answers your question. :—)
 

Deleted member 115935

Joined Dec 31, 1969
0
Wow , @Jennifer Solomon way outside my intellectual level,
I'm just an engineer, like designing systems,

I could not contemplate starting my Phd at 19 as you have. 23 was early enough.

May be we have some PHd's in philosophy that could chip in.


BTW: "matriculated credit hours" , is this an American thing , sorry Im in the Europe system.
 

Delta Prime

Joined Nov 15, 2019
1,311
I currently have 2 Ph.D‘s from Hard Knocks U and State Penn starting from 25 years ago
Are you telling us that 25 years ago in a state penitentiary you have acquired matriculated credit hours towards the high school diploma? Or do I have this totally wrong. I'm not judging or trying to be funny you seem highly intelligent.
I named my dog Liberace on the count that he was The pianist. That's me being funny.
 
Last edited:

Thread Starter

Jennifer Solomon

Joined Mar 20, 2017
112
Wow , @Jennifer Solomon way outside my intellectual level,
I'm just an engineer, like designing systems,

I could not contemplate starting my Phd at 19 as you have. 23 was early enough.

May be we have some PHd's in philosophy that could chip in.


BTW: "matriculated credit hours" , is this an American thing , sorry Im in the Europe system.
Sorry the American humor might have escaped you. ;--) Hard Knocks means in this context “paved your own way through blood, sweat, and tears” and “State Penn” is a joke on “Penn State.” The credit hours are made up. (I do have university credit hours and have formally studied, but do not have an official university degree, because I was too occupied already as a board member at age 18 in one of the first Internet providers in the nation I helped build from scratch from hardware to UI design pre-web, the name of which was bought by Sprint). Ironically I was in positions to hire masters degreed individuals and my logistics data analyses were used by the CEO of GE while at GE. If you were to count my real world experience as one of those “equivalence degrees” I’d probably have a functional Ph.D in something, but don’t know what. Maybe semantics, epistemology, music and metaphysics? So I inadvertently followed the path of George Boole, who was an elementary school graduate when he wrote the Laws of Thought that was the principal backdrop of the information age.

I’m on this forum to pick the brains of people like yourself who have rigid, academic training in various disciplines. I have in fact spent thousands of hours on the topics I discuss here, however, and am bent on formally proving the mind/brain duality and exposing ideological dogma I have encountered over the years.

I consider myself a lifelong “student of the Elements.”
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 115935

Joined Dec 31, 1969
0
Apologies , Yes seems American and England are separated by the same language.

I am still impressed,
after all , Einstein was a librarian, and he had a few good ideas.

We as engineers tend to deal in the here / now, and I'd say most of us here are proud engineers.
as a "rule" , make that a law !! we are not the best at philosophical discussion
hay , most of us spend a lot of time avoiding doing reports,

I got impression that you are dedicated to the topic Cartesian mind/brain duality and exposing ideological dogma

Me as an engineer / scientist /
I'd say we are not ideologically dogmad, BUT , we do follow the "scientific principle",

a) A theory is correct till its not,
b) The scientific principle tries hard to disprove all we understand by experiment.

by this process, all theories tend to change / be replaced.

BTW: You might want to look at this
https://www.pims.math.ca/files/PreGFT.pdf
 

Delta Prime

Joined Nov 15, 2019
1,311
a) A theory is correct till its not,
b) The scientific principle tries hard to disprove all we understand by experiment.

by this process, all theories tend to change / be replaced
Galileo was placed under house arrest for supporting the Copernican theory that the Earth revolved around the sun. However, the real opposition was from other scientists who held to the view established by Aristotle almost 2000 years before, that the Earth was at the centre of the universe. Today, Galileo is often referred to as the father of modern science.
History has shown all new ideas .
First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
;)
And you thought AAC was all about circuits how times have changed.
 
Last edited:

Thread Starter

Jennifer Solomon

Joined Mar 20, 2017
112
Apologies , Yes seems American and England are separated by the same language.

I am still impressed,
after all , Einstein was a librarian, and he had a few good ideas.

We as engineers tend to deal in the here / now, and I'd say most of us here are proud engineers.
as a "rule" , make that a law !! we are not the best at philosophical discussion
hay , most of us spend a lot of time avoiding doing reports,

I got impression that you are dedicated to the topic Cartesian mind/brain duality and exposing ideological dogma

Me as an engineer / scientist /
I'd say we are not ideologically dogmad, BUT , we do follow the "scientific principle",

a) A theory is correct till its not,
b) The scientific principle tries hard to disprove all we understand by experiment.

by this process, all theories tend to change / be replaced.

BTW: You might want to look at this
https://www.pims.math.ca/files/PreGFT.pdf
That’s just it — I think philosophy is just “uncrystallized, unformalized conjecture about real science.”

One could call Boole’s Laws of Thought, Frege’s or some of Aristotle’s work philosophy, but it really was arguably putting bones on “the hard scientific mechanics of thought” that undergird all circuit fabrication! That’s why I like talking to engineers about these things, because I want to see hard, formal definitions made that go beyond conjecturing and philosophizing.

I think certain scientific experiments can only be carried out in the 5D “thought domain” which is an incarnation of reality where the scientific method and mathematical theorems originate. But we have no “engineering grade” definitions for that internal mind space, which seems way more sophisticated than the “actual reality” we currently inhabit!

Wittgenstein eloquently said: “The limits of my language are the limits of my mind. All I know is what I have words for.” Everything we do in science goes back to words and their relationships to each other. Any theory we have about anything, any formal systems we devise, any proofs we deduce, are but offsprings of a yet-crystallized mother theory of the mechanics of reason, involving consciousness, words, and dimensional organization. While we might not “know” what a dog is in physical space directly, we certainly have some strange tools in this thing called “consciousness” that claims it exists apart from the information describing it!
 
Last edited:

Thread Starter

Jennifer Solomon

Joined Mar 20, 2017
112
Are you telling us that 25 years ago in a state penitentiary you have acquired matriculated credit hours towards the high school diploma? Or do I have this totally wrong. I'm not judging or trying to be funny you seem highly intelligent.
I named my dog Liberace on the count that he was The pianist. That's me being funny.
Haha... no, you’re fine—hope my clarification below answered any question there.
 

Deleted member 115935

Joined Dec 31, 1969
0
Galileo was placed under house arrest for supporting the Copernican theory that the Earth revolved around the sun. However, the real opposition was from other scientists who held to the view established by Aristotle almost 2000 years before, that the Earth was at the centre of the universe. Today, Galileo is often referred to as the father of modern science.
History has shown all new ideas .
First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
;)
And you thought AAC was all about circuits how times have changed.
That's the down side of the scientific principle
the majority will not believe new ideas till demonstrated.

The other down side of the scientific principle
is that scientists talk one language,
When some one comes up with a new theory, the theory has to be explained and discussed in the language that the incumbents have hope of understanding. Its like a Vulcan landing and trying to explain warp drive, or teleportation ( sorry star trek ) , but point is

anything that is to far outside what we understand is near to magic,
 
Top