tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6995489402588479850.post7707253018722515494..comments2024-03-22T08:22:04.315+00:00Comments on a memory less ephemeral: When does a physical system compute?Susan Stepneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06533629704705591866noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6995489402588479850.post-34524747442856606672014-07-03T09:27:39.786+01:002014-07-03T09:27:39.786+01:00Or there are four options.
An abstraction is a mo...Or there are four options.<br /><br />An abstraction is a model of something else (or somethings else), and "all models are wrong".<br /><br />And your brain is predicting the result of an abstraction when you look at a wall: it is predicting things like "the wall will stay as it is and not collapse, or turn into a pink elephant and fly away". If you think you are not predicting such things, would you be surprised if it did collapse? Would you be as surprised if you were looking at a cloud and it moved?Susan Stepneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06533629704705591866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6995489402588479850.post-39019076064728553722014-06-27T10:44:31.133+01:002014-06-27T10:44:31.133+01:00"Computing goes the other way. We instead us..."Computing goes the other way. We instead use a physical system to predict the result of an abstract inference or calculation."<br /><br />I disagree with this statement.<br /><br />To abstract, is to accurately represent something, as something else.<br /><br />My brain, is an abstraction machine.<br /><br />What I mean, is that when I look at the wall in front of me right now.<br /><br />I perceive that wall as an abstraction of its true self.<br /><br />My brain is just a collection of neurons.<br />The wall is represented as the activity of the photoreceptors in my eye, and represented as the neural activity in my brain.<br /><br />"Computing goes the other way. We instead use a physical system to predict the result of an abstract inference or calculation."<br /><br />The brain is a computer, it is a physical system, yet it does not predict the result of an abstraction.<br /><br />So there are three options, either you are wrong, the brain is not a computer, or this statement is not the full story.Roshawn Terrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03575030242761754543noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6995489402588479850.post-12582960177106940302014-06-20T11:44:09.693+01:002014-06-20T11:44:09.693+01:00Thanks for your comments.
I have seen some of t...Thanks for your comments. <br /><br />I have seen some of the Constructor Theory work, but I haven't read the latest (May 2014) paper -- I will put it on my reading list!Susan Stepneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06533629704705591866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6995489402588479850.post-31035180228413735022014-06-20T09:29:31.866+01:002014-06-20T09:29:31.866+01:00Excellent post, we (scientist of the fringe ;)) sh...Excellent post, we (scientist of the fringe ;)) should really get use to this: summarize your paper in layman's term. I will definitely read your paper. I assume you are aware of the latest paper in the arxiv by David Deutsch (Constructor theory).<br />From your post here I feel like arguing the "representation post hoc" thingy, but I need to read the paper first. I hope your paper does define what you mean by "prediction" since it seems to be the deciding attribute for the definition of computing.<br />Congratulations on your publication and thanks for the post!JuanPi Carbajalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04710943376399349416noreply@blogger.com