Monday, 28 December 2009

The wonders of my mind ...

Learning, that is what I am doing right now. And what is learning? Simply categorising all the new information that entered the realm of my mind, in the immediate past, pigeon-holing it, organising it according to the framework, I have chosen gradually over time.

Haphazard, in a way chaotic, as i prefer to call it. Chaotic in the manner it instantiates, it is brought into existence, right from when it is generated right down to the way it is implemented.

Generation, by the way the accumulated instabilities already in place, deep into my brain, vibrate, responding to tiny flickers of ideas, I come across, and set the neurons in my brain in motion. Neural energy floods my brain, drives my neurons re-arranging actions. Instabilities, ideas ad limbo still seeking closure resurrect. Synapses ad necessito break apart, the room they leave, a void to be filled by new synapses, eagerly absorbing the new ideas, while an excited state overwhelms my being. New synapses, unforeseen, rigorously form.

Implementation chaotic, by way it is organised and by that I mean, without being sought after, specifically. Without seeking the particulars of any specific information, but letting information come in, seemingly haphazardly, without any plan, any conscious plan for that matter, without a consciously implemented plan.

Brought along, another attribute of chaos. In the way it manifests itself, a radical overhaul of sectors of ideas fostered by minute inconspicuous details of information. Little ideas with overwhelming potential, as by changing them, enable my mind compelling insights.

Out of the blue, of no-where, of seemingly incoherent information, the attractors of my thoughts, the framework set forth, is hidden from my conscious mind, but nevertheless, exists. What is seemingly haphazard, is not haphazard at all. It guides the essence of my thoughts, without me knowing and puts them together.

Learning, a process which incorporates all the seemingly disparate ideas, into a coherent whole. Its limitation, its necessity of a clear, un-troubled mind state, required. Clarity of mind available, at only suitably selected day's intervals.

Friday, 2 October 2009

Analysing a thought from its inception to its conclusion.

Analysing a thought from its inception to its conclusion. It is a process and as such it will be dealt with. For the thought to materialise, to instantiate it has to be embedded in two levels, the brain and the mind. The brain refers to the neural structures that carry the mental structures, the neural structures being the vehicles for the mental structures.

It relies upon the existence of a certain number of intermediate, pre-existing thoughts in the form of ideas, concepts, notions namely pre-existing mental structures despite their validity, as such the only pre-requisite is that they are secure in a psychological sense in the mental level and more significantly, for the thought process to occur their existence in the neural level. A necessary condition to be satisfied otherwise the thought process would not occur.

The thought process would undergo with whatever is available at the neural level. The mental structures are composite exist as free-standing units and they are accomplished via connections associations between neural structures by synaptic pathways. Synaptic pathways traverse disparate regions of the brain? Proximity matters?

Confusion matters? Confusion dissolved? Cleared? Confusion a hindrance for a thought to occur? A thought can be thought as a novel way of looking at things, something new created despite its magnitude or its significance. It differs from other mental processes that involve a simple recall of stored ideas, concepts, notions, or even plain memories.

Thinking is a process where new associations are performed and is triggered when individuals are confronted with tasks which there is not a ready made solution. They have to invent the solution.

Wednesday, 30 September 2009

"make sense"

Peeve of the day

Kevin LeBleu said...

Tom: I don't think "make sense" is a very good measure. Our brains are only built to make sense of what they'd encounter in a natural/wild environment, without the aid of technology much more advanced than stone tools. Even then they only had to make enough sense of stuff to out-survive the other guy.

Perhaps "have supporting evidence" would be a better measure?

A few examples of things that don't make sense, but are well supported by evidence are General Relativity, Special relativity and Quantum Electro Dynamics.

Another problem with the "make sense" approach is that deity "makes sense" to a lot of people, because our brain is built for understanding how other people think and finding patterns. Unfortunately, it makes it easy for our brain to try and interpret naturally occurring events as having a human-like intelligence behind them.
May 4, 2009 10:43 AM

... "I don't think "make sense" is a very good measure" ...

What does make sense ... actually means.

Certainly there is a valid point ... in what Kevin LeBleu mentions that ...

"Our brains are only built to make sense of what they'd encounter in a natural/wild environment, without the aid of technology much more advanced than stone tools."

Our brains, and not even our minds, are built to make sense and by that I take it, as our senses, our sense organs, all of them, will confer to what it makes sense. Implicates our sense organs. The sense we make, is what our sense organs, allows us to.

It brings into my mind the thoughts I had contemplated upon the range of stimuli our sense organs can detect, upon which, our brains and our minds will make sense out of. Our brains will only see the narrow range of what is going on around us, that our own human resolving time allow us to detect and from them to pick the stimuli and use to make sense. Anything else is obscured, it is not there, practically equivalent to, it does not exist, as our brains and the minds we make sense with, do not take it into consideration.

The thought Kevin LeBleu expressed

"... without the aid of technology much more advanced than stone tools"

it reminded me what I read about our human resolving times compared with the resolving time of a fast electronic device

"For the human eye and ear, resolving time is about 0.1 s, while a fast electronic device might have a resolving time of 10 billionths of a sec (10^-10 s)."

This idea alone made me think how many events are taking place around us, that our senses can not distinguish and built experience, as our resolving time is not small enough to separate them into the distinct entities they are. How much information is lost. Technology makes it possible to overcome this limitation, as the recent scientific breakthrough about the world's fastest camera.

To what extent people are taking on board these fundamental limitations of our brains, when they try to make sense out of any new ideas they come across.

Is it not an overindulgence, being over-optimistically proud of what we consciously know, and with such unfounded fervour, try to pass along what sense we make?

That kind of attitude is not different, from the ridicule (I can certainly imagine so) suffered by the individual who invented the wheel, by his fellow stone-age contemporaries, or any other innovation that run counter to what individuals made sense of.

for me ... this is not, in any way different, for any idea that comes along.

What if our human resolving time was on a par with the resolving time of a fast electronic device?

Though, the thought above it would require drastic human alterations, not feasible, however it raises the question of how much more there is around the matter of our experience, the information we take in, that there is experience still to be had.

Would it not then our brains, with our senses, equipped with the resolving times of fast electronic devices, be able to resolve between events, that now we experience as taking place simultaneously, as been distinct from one another? How would this alter our perception? The sense we make out of things around us?

Do we rely too much in what we consciously know and make sense out of. There is loads of information out there, from which we have only the knowledge of the tip of the iceberg.

Is it wise to dismiss any new ideas that are coming forth on the grounds of what it makes sense, for us right now?

Questions seeking to resolve ensuing chaos


.. chaos ensues as there is something still unresolved ... seeking its resolution .. as in everything there are variables and parameters .. that define the processes underlying a system's state .. the paths taken .. a change in one of the values in the variables or parameters perturbs the processes under way ... myriad alternatives are revealed .. with each one a potential solution to the problem at bay .. that offers the resolution needed

individual seeks order? .. the drive, the motive .. to resolve chaos .. by looking at the internet with the keyword chaos .. we probably will amass a great number of cases daily .. which refer to chaos .. and find what was still unresolved .. and what change .. in what specific variables or parameters perturbed the processes .. what alternatives have been unravelled .. and whether there was any of alternatives picked out .. as the solution to the problem

Changes in variable or parameters? .. either change .. or change in only variable or parameter? .. anyway, my thought developed that .. the changes which will bring forth temporary(?) chaos .. would be on parameters .. as first the range parameters vary is small .. whereas variables can accommodate a larger range .. variables expected to change freely .. without a big effect on the state of a system .. a linear effect .. whereas parameters are restricted, not as free as variables .. and their change .. might alter completely the state of the system .. potentially(?) nonlinear effect

might alter completely the state of the system? .. as a system is defined by the variables and parameters that brings it forth .. is relying upon a specific set of variables and parameters ... new variables are expected to appear, to emerge .. and they are responsible to the system's new state .. 'old' variables might either disappear completely or their presence might be reduced .. second-rated .. their significance diminished .. a set of other variables at bay .. variables hidden .. underlying .. non-observed .. unobserved .. the system changed non-linearly

Monday, 15 June 2009

Rejecting objectivity, embracing subjectivity.

It is mentioned in the article, "Quantum Mysticism: Gone but Not Forgotten", that

"... the mathematician John Von Neumann intentionally used ambiguous terms when discussing the philosophy of quantum equations, meaning he could fit on either side."

Either sides of, mysticism in science, as different aspects are explored, what the article is about. But beyond that, this phrase reveals the extraordinary significance that language plays in the efforts of human individuals to probe reality.

Ambiguity intended, not an accident, conferring meaning for either side. Individuals in either side found meaning in John Von Neumann's terms, each for their own sake. Revealed by the individual John Von Neumann, the extreme flexibility of language, assisting in meaning creation by individuals.

As it is further mentioned

He was a genius at linguistic innovation and came up with German terms that could support many different interpretations,

Linguistic innovation, terms to support, many different interpretations. The essence of language in the human individual's attempts to grab a firm hold on reality. Von Neumann's genius reveals language's in-exhaustive potential. Dynamic, hand-in-hand with the mind's ingenious ability to probe reality. Always in flux. By its use the individual is able to, acquires the ability to discern the minutest details of physical processes.

Stop seeing language as the rigid body, riddled with rules, queen's english and so on, a tool to separate the pleb from the patrician. Rules that are flexible, that bent but do not crack, do not give in. Rules that are as many as the individuals, that use the language, rules that their only purpose being, to assist the individual's effort to achieve meaning. Instead of a set of rules that render language, a tool for the privileged, the supposedly educated lot in the world, that intimidate individuals, spurn them from expressing themselves and bring forth the contents of their minds. Sprawl for others to see, increase the subjectiveness in the world. Use their consciousness to a massive collective effort to probe reality.

Mentioned in the article

"In 1958, Schrödinger, inspired by Schopenhauer from youth, published his lectures Mind and Matter. Here he argued that there is a difference between measuring instruments and human observation: a thermometer’s registration cannot be considered an act of observation, as it contains no meaning in itself."

as meaning is created and can only exist in the human individual's mind

"Thus, consciousness is needed to make physical reality meaningful."

Language the only tool the individual possess, to grab a hold, a firm foot for the mind to understand, as processes undergo, the outcomes created. Point at them, define them, symbolise them. Build equivalent neural structures, nodes to expand mind networks. Always engaged, ready to respond. Built from scratch, ever extending, plastic.

The objective being, but a mix-up of subjective views struggling against each other to arrive at the so-called objectivity. Objectivity which to a great extent is defined by factors other than the subjective views that have risen from, in the first place. Exercising our subjectivity continuously and by as many individuals as possible will lead to views more widely acceptable, consolidating a common ground for the next leap ahead.

Objectivity, intrinsic in the object, a goal unattainable whereas subjectivity, the look at the object from the viewpoint of the subject, what is only left for us to do, attainable. Probably imperfect and as such, it carries within the tendency for change, constantly striving to perfection. Regardless of any improvements that science or other discipline bestows upon any views that human individuals offer, do not change the fact that they are still subjective views. Assuming any of these views as objective is pointless.

Rejecting objectivity, embracing subjectivity.

Friday, 24 April 2009

Consciousness fractal multi-level approach, explanation?

The abstract from the article MODELLING PROCESSES IN A FRACTAL NETWORK: A POSSIBLE SUBSTRUCTURE FOR CONSCIOUSNESS which is intriguing and should be passed through the grind of my cognitive apparatus

"Abstract: It is proposed that consciousness does not emerge from a single level of biological organization (for example: from computational activity at the synaptic level in networks of neurons), but is a consequence of interdependent modelling activities by networks at different levels of organization including the molecular, organelle, and cellular levels, in some way entrained to produce consciousness. Fractal stacking and intercommunication of networks at different levels is proposed as a substrate that may be required for consciousness, either natural or machine-based. Adoption of this conceptual starting point may overcome some of the difficulties encountered when reductionist strategies are applied to the study of consciousness."

Going along the same lines is the cognitive chaos website

Thursday, 23 April 2009

Consciousness, a variable quantity that can be derived mathematically?

The concept of quantity is defined as

"the measurable, countable, or comparable property or aspect of a thing",


"something that has a magnitude and can be represented in mathematical expressions by a constant or a variable",

and as

"something that serves as the object of an operation".

Thing being

"a separate and self-contained entity".

And in logic, quantity is defined as

"the exact character of a proposition in reference to its universality, singularity, or particularity",

borrowing the extensions of universality, singularity and particularity for potential applications for the concept of physical quantity.

The concept of variable is defined as

"a quantity that can assume any of a set of values"

Constructing a wireless receiver/broadcaster you would expect to tune in, to a broadcasting/receiving radio source and receive/broadcast an output which can be measured.

Consciousness, is constructed gradually since childhood and it can be thought as a wireless receiver/broadcaster as it receives/broadcasts signals. And it is variable within each individual, as it is surmised by its content, that make up its volume, volume thought as a physical as well as a mental quantity. Physical pertaining to the brain, neurons and neural networks organised in reverberated cell assemblies, and mental volume, taken in respect of concepts, thoughts, ideas that make up its content. The physical/mental volume of consciousness changes as the time passes along. It is a time-dependent quantity. The physical/mental volume of consciousness is variable from individual to individual, as well.

By the analogy of the wireless receiver/broadcaster, consciousness is quantified, by its receiving aptitude, by the quantity of the signals received. In broad terms it can be defined as how many signals are taken in, out of all the signals that exist at a particular time and space. Space refers to physical and mental space alike, whereas time is assumed to be the same, for either notion of space. The variable, in this case, can be expressed in the form of percentage, although regarding the measurement against signals existing, can be measured instead against an accepted standard, like an average constructed out of a population of individuals.

As far as the broadcasting aptitude, it is expected that, it would be dependent upon the signals broadcasted, expressed as a percentage out of the total of the signals received.

Any mathematical formula to measure consciousness, should be based on the process of learning, as is accomplished in its various ways. Any way, learning is effected, it is expected to change the physical/mental volume of consciousness, as by learning acquire and elaborate on concepts, thoughts and ideas and by that the number of signals taken in.

The more the learning, the more the concepts the individual possess, the more the signals the individual takes in, the greater its consciousness

Sunday, 19 April 2009

Defining the unconscious and subconscious levels of the mind

I did start some thoughts that dealt with the unconscious and subconscious defining lines which should further clarified.

"Subconscious mind is the sum total of our past experiences." It is proclaimed in this website.

Confusing the unconscious with the subconscious as they use interchangeably without attempting to draw the boundaries between the two states.

Whereas, in another website feign ignorance about the whole matter.

Saturday, 18 April 2009

Another aspect of anger in the minds we make.

The resistance is heightened. The already established mental structures ridden with cobwebs solidified, rigid, inflexible and stubborn, do not give up. Inertia proper. The high degree of its inertia, require enormous amounts of energy to shift it.

Copious quantities, that only anger can provide. Should not fret to express the anger, should let it be the force that will break up the mold, shift the mental structures. Anger, the outburst unleashed with the energy carried by the force ...

.. 'energy carried by the force',

... what are the implications of that phrase, taking it as far as universe creating energy. Energy by itself inert, the outburst being the big bang? Anger? Energy gathered up, reaching a critical point, in need to get unleashed, and it is unleashed via the forces? And the forces? Channel energy into paths that create forms? All kinds of forms?

And chaos's initial conditions, and its sensitive dependence due to the fact(?) that these initial conditions represent trajectories, or are connected with paths that the forces carrying the energy unleashed, attain the maximum levels possible?

The forces, the corridors for the energy to burst out?

Saturday, 14 March 2009

Why making the familiar strange brings pain in your head


.. the pain in somebody's head when it is contemplating the strange ..

.. the drastic re-arrangement of the synapses in the brain? .. brings pain? ..

.. only minor adjustments are allowed

.. small ideas .. single .. simple ..

.. which require the change in a few synapses .. or even leave the existing synapses intact .. only create new synapses

.. a pain threshold of breaking a synapse? .. is it measurable .. just for a single synapse?

.. should be more as ideas or concepts must engage, include a lot more synapses, certainly more than one

.. ideas despite being simple they are nevertheless complex .. ideas emergent .. entities .. emergent systems .. lying upon vast networks .. of neurons .. underlying superstructure ..

.. larger ideas would involve a much bigger network of neurons with a lot more synapses

.. personal experiences .. testimonies

ideas? .. they come by themselves? Why? Because they come, from out of the system boundaries, the supersystem .. the inclusive system, the system including

the previous paths, the paths within the system are circumvented, they are not visited any more, they are not included in the paths taken, the new paths.

As the paths do not include the ideas, whose extent is confined within the system, that avoids clashes inherent in the system, only. The feeling of helplessness and loss disappears, it does not materialise.

Clashes ensue following the paradigm of Gödel, as they develop out of contradicting rules that nullify each other, as a result there is loss of consistency

"Gödel proved fundamental results about axiomatic systems showing in any axiomatic mathematical system there are propositions that cannot be proved or disproved within the axioms of the system."

To get away from the idea, that using Godel's theorems, outside what is meant to be in the first place, namely mathematical systems, or even the volumes of Principiae Mathematica, is wrong.

In the particular case, of states, governments and societies, they are all axiomatic. Being systems based on axioms, values that are evident, without further arguments. And they are axiomatic, as it is widely based on values that they are regarded as evident without proof or argument.

.. societies .. are based upon axioms

Thursday, 12 March 2009

A chaotic mind's, Q & A session on unconscious learning.

thoughts I thought off in the past

these thoughts remain

they have accommodated themselves, they have built mental structures, no matter how solid and how clear and concise they might be

neural networks or better cell assemblies, John Holland's reverberated cell assemblies

the always on, the exclusive-or circuit, and their indefinite nature

and they are the structures that my unconscious mind is using

a well as my conscious mind

but my unconscious mind is faster (a quantum computer analogy?!)

unconscious learning? How? ....

since learning is directed focused attention driven

attributes of the conscious mind

or so we think it is only

but nevertheless, starting by accepting that this is the case, conscius directed learning,

How can we imagine unconscious learning to be?

Define the unconscious?

Delimiting conscious from unconscious?

Properties, attributes that apply to one but not the other?

for example attention, by virtue of the use of sense organs, vision, hearing, smell, only attributed to conscious processes. Only?

conscious awareness

conscious applying to the surface, unconscious deeper

hidden, buried deep into our brain.

The unconscious mind determines our actions, short-term acts, our reflexes.

the automated responses that we use to get by in life events

life events that require a quick response

not time to spent contemplating on our response

how to react to a given setup or situation

no-thinking involved or better thinking as a matter of contemplation, is not involved

which is slow very slow (ref)

modes of thinking, a matter of choice ... informed choice?!

chaotic mind engages the unconscious mind

because it's fast

synchronization? (another day)

may be unconscious learning, it is not learning, as it is not in the surface of my consciousness, it does not have direct access to the outside world, can not 'see' the objects that are necessary for learning to occur

for stimuli to engage upon, which without them the process of learning can not take pace

it is an indirect means for our consciousness to access the external environment

it requires our conscious mind to come in contact with the outside world

indirect learning?

our conscious mind offers the syllabus of what to be learned

that's another thought how are conscious mind is prone to manipulation

by societies, governments, states ... by companies, schools, pressure groups, peer pressure, (public opinion?), (common sense?), or other institutions tangible or not

our unconscious an agent of free will?

conscious mind the jailer?

conscious mind directs learning

limiting learning

our unconscious mind eager to learn more

it is restricted by the conscious mind, the conscious mind itself is under the influence of external pressures

unconscious mind might not exercise learning or exercise limited learning (as far as this session goes)

but it makes a more ( I would say even extremely) effective use of what has been leaned (let say in whatever way it has been learned)

because it is fast and because, everything (I would call it that) that has been leaned is retained

thanks to the always on, indefinite time stored, information, knowledge

the more the knowledge taken in

(another idea just struck me while thinking .....)

refusing to taken in knowledge, our conscious mind deems as unimportant, limits the layer(s) of knowledge our unconscious mind draws for the stuff to guide our reflexes

(oh, it would never stop. another idea just arrived)

synapses determine the availability of memories of information

the synapse directs towards the memories stored

synapse not in use is dismantled, paths to connected memories severed

memories are not lost, just they are not on, online

memories survive the severed channel event, they are just offline

unconscious mind have access to offline memories

The unconscious mind is a good learner and practices efficiently has been learned

Saturday, 28 February 2009

Thinking and social engineering

.. thinking and social engineering

.. the website that claimed that the British state uses social engineering to pass into individuals the ways of thinking they find that it is worth of following

.. what I read in another website about thinking harms the health of individual

.. as far as I can remember it was not from a state website but one of the newspapers, the Telegraph I think

.. that means that the paper is into social engineering

.. or the paper played the role of spreading the doctrine of another group who had in their mind to influence, or stir away individuals from thinking

.. and why you find this contemptible?

.. it is down to an attempt to subdue individuals for the purpose of rendering them easy prey for the goals states and societies were built for, monetizing

.. if individuals stirred away, or stop thinking it makes it easier for the exploitation of the other individuals which their only purpose is to milk profits out of their societies

.. the source of the research, put it that way, is America.

.. these thoughts followed a feeling of disbelief, as why would anybody would want to do anything like that

.. meaning to want to influence the very deep function of any individual, the fundamental principle of the individual which is thinking. Thinking which leads or is instantiated by learning. Enhanced by learning.

.. so subtle the intervention that is barely noticed

.. it introduces elements of conspiracy

nothing is wasted?

Monday, 23 February 2009

Chaotic dynamics on a par with the genetic code, in evolutionary terms?

A claim is put forward in "Fractal Neurodynamics and Quantum Chaos: Resolving the Mind-Brain Paradox Through Novel Biophysics", in Chapter 6.2, Chaotic Excitability as a founding Eukaryote Characteristic,

"It is thus possible that chaotic excitation dates from as early a period as the genetic code itself and that the first eukaryote cells may have been excitable via direct electrochemical transfer from light energy, before enzyme-based metabolic pathways had developed."

Chaotic excitations preceding the evolution of enzyme-based metabolic pathways? Why not? Nowadays, sustaining complex life can not be imagined without the enzymes. Could life forms, before the advent of enzymes, have utilised the creative potential, inherent in chaotic dynamics?

It is mentioned further, that

"We have seen how chaotic excitation provides for exploration of phase space and sensitivity to internal and external fluctuations. "

Chaotic excitation provide the means to explore phase space. Phase space comprised by the vast range of existent states in the surrounding environment and chaotic excitation enabled early life forms to sense their surroundings, learn and adapt.

Chaotic processes created attractors, what materialised as stable physical structures. The features of life forms as they have developed by constant evolutionary transformations. Evolution processes materialised as permanent structures, the attractors, as the code written in genetic blueprints was instantiated?

Phase space comprised by the vast range of existing states, both in life forms and in the environment. Surrounding environment that a life form senses by electrochemical excitation. It is mentioned in the Electrochemistry Encyclopedia, that

"The conduction of electrochemical excitation must be regarded as one of the most universal properties of living organisms. It arose in connection with the need for the transmission of a signal about an external influence from one part of a biological system to another."

External influences as they are exerted by processes, constantly at play and simultaneously define the states that make up the chaotically explored phase space.

The surrounding environment, the atmospheric electrohemistry mentioned as:

"The existence of ions in the atmosphere is the fundamental reason for atmospheric electricity. The voltage between the earth's surface and the ionosphere is approximately 40 kV, which induces an electrical current of approximately 2000 A with a current density around 5 pA/m2 (1 picoampere = 10-12 ampere, one trillionth of an ampere per square metre)."

graphically describing

"The Earth is an "electrode" immersed in a weak gaseous "electrolyte," the naturally ionized atmosphere."

provide the context of the processes as well as the message carrier, electrical currents, which are detected, as

"The high sensitivity of the protoplasm and all cell organelles to any natural and chemical effect is the basis for excitability."

The high sensitivity, reminiscent of chaotic sensitivity as it responds to minimal changes with tantamount effects, triggers cell membranes, the boundaries of all life forms in all their evolutionary transformations, as a

"... change in trans membrane potential create a wave of depolarization, or action potential, that affects the adjoining, resting membrane."

Excitable membranes are ubiquitous in all evolved life forms, as it is further mentioned

"Nerve cells in animals and phloem cells in plants share one fundamental property: they possess excitable membranes through which electrical excitations, in the form of action potentials, can propagate. These propagating excitations are modelled theoretically as travelling wave solutions of certain parameter dependant nonlinear reaction-diffusion equations coupled with some nonlinear ordinary differential equations. These travelling wave solutions can be classified as single loop pulse, multiple loop pulses, fronts and backs, or periodic waves of different wave speed."

Chaotic dynamics created, brought life into existence and continue to guide life forms in their evolutionary journey.

"excitability: the disposition of a tissue or living cell to respond to a stimulus or change in the environment.
excitation: the act of producing or increasing stimulation; the immediate response of a cell or a tissue to a stimulus or change in the environment."

" subthreshold: (usually a stimulus that is) not strong enough to be perceived or to produce a response."

"At the cellular level, electrical potentials exist across membranes, and thus between cellular and specific compartments. Electrolytic species such as potassium, calcium, hydrogen, and chloride ions are actively involved in the establishment and modulation of electrical potentials."

Friday, 30 January 2009

The physical basis of meaning and paradigm shifts.

Mathematical neuron?

Or, a function, or even a group of functions in a neuron, or neurons, that perform mathematical processing?

The thought just came to me, as I was grappling with a task, a mathematical task, and found myself unable to comprehend the meaning contained within.

I further connected my inability, with a lack in my mind, of the necessary mental structures to employ and derive appropriate responses to this kind of stimuli. I did not have the appropriate mental tools in order to elucidate and achieve meaning pointed by the particular stimulus. Therefore these stimuli, despite being present were either totally ignored or not being given appropriate attention, or even being given an incorrect treatment, resulting in incorrect responses.

Stimuli, that represent every minute detail in our environment, are taken in and processed accordingly, only if there are appropriate mental structures built, in our minds. Mental structures amassed by learning. The enormous amount of information around us precipitates the necessity for continuous lifelong learning.

For each minute detail, the individual should have its very own way of approaching it, of dealing with it. It even points towards the notion of the human individual being a blank slate, a tabula rasa, since its birth and constantly inscribing, all through its lifetime records of its life events and ways to deal with them.

Which in the neuron level of our brains is translated into having the necessary synapses between the relevant neurons. Neural pathways created by synapses, and by being activated via synapses hence synaptic pathways.

These thoughts give 'meaning', as it is sought by individuals, a physical basis, which might be the only basis there is, none other. Based on brain states achieved as synaptic pathways are continuously created, a thought pointing towards constant learning, as the human individual never ceases to learn. A deeply felt process that leads to a state of fulfillment that invigorates the individual.

A human attribute epitomized in the phrase

'Γηράσκω αεί Διδασκόμενος'

attributed to the Athenian statesman and lawmaker, Solon (ancient Greek: Σόλων, c. 638 BC–558 BC), often credited with having laid the foundations for Athenian democracy, which literally means 'I constantly learn as I grow old', nullifying any notions of an individual going through its life time without searching the reasons for just 'being'.

Certainly that what is supposed to be regardless whether individuals adhere to it or not, for whatever reason this might be.

Which by itself, it might give rise to a deeper understanding of what a paradigm shift represents, in the context of the human mind, and by that analogy in all cases that paradigm shifts apply. As the old thought patterns instantiated as habits and guide the behaviour of a human individual, are abandoned. The processes employed to deal with stuff encountered in life, drastically change.

In the same way, (chaos self-similarity principle(?)) while an individual learns new knowledge, it means that the brain creates new synapses, new synaptic pathways. the old synaptic pathways which were used to deal with a particular situation are destroyed. As such it cuts off the synaptic pathway, there is no synaptic pathway to instantiate the particular train of thoughts any longer and all the previous modes of thinking cease to exist, which amounts to, completely forgotten.

around in itself points towards the necessity for each individual to amass an enormous amount of information to deal with each and every step of the mental processes it employs to deal with stuff in life.

Friday, 23 January 2009

Consciousness reassures us that the world is, as is.

It has been said over and over again(?), that the role consciousness can play, is in sorting out states the individual finds itself amidst. States being either world, or inner self, or states out of the interaction with other individuals. All that we have amassed as we delve deep, with our minds chaotic processes, into them states.

Checking out the things around us, reminding us what each thing is. That a tree is a tree, or a cat is cat. A reassurance of the content of concepts, the stuff they are made up of. Along with, that we put keys in such and such place and that when we need them, we will find them in such and such place. To preserve the continuity in our daily lives. Contiguity? Congruency?

Consciousness reassures us that the world is, as is. Checking up on the contents of the concepts we have learned at some point in time, along with all the properties and attributes each concept is associated with.