"God" and Infinity ?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Quantum just means it comes in discrete bits...

It's basically just saying it's digital rather than analogue...

SO....

WTF is a "quantum cloud"?????

What you are saying here is literally gibberish, it has no meaning.

Don't use 'quantum' unless you actually know what the hell it actually means.

A criticism I can equally level at that idi
The number is probably incredibly large, but still very much countable and finite.

You are being unnecessarily aggressive in discussion. Calm down.

There is a lot more to quantum reality than your statements suggest.
IF they were, as you say, just 'discrete bits', what is a "discrete bit" when it is in superposition?
What is all the unfinished controversy from the start of last century all about?They still are arguing about the nature of quantum reality with numerous theories and takes. I will refer them to you to sort it all out. You have obviously got it covered.

Edit: "It's basically just saying it's digital rather than analogue."

Gee, I guess they overlooked that idea! I expect in the light of quantum experiments from the start they didn't even go there as it was so obviously irrelevant in view of the findings.

The minds that put forth the Holonomic Brain Theory were not sprouting "pseudo-scientific gibberish". If you bothered to check, they are highly respected scientists. One actually a nuerosurgeon, the other an esteemed physicist.

Karl Pribram is an emeritus professor of psychology and psychiatry at Stanford University and Radford University. Board-certified as a neurosurgeon. He has done extensive studies on memory and sensation and the brain.

David Bohm was an American quantum physicist who contributed to theoretical physics, philosophy of mind, and neuropsychology.

I wonder who sprouted the following "psuedo-scientific gibberish":

"The Question is what is the Question?
Is it All a Magic Show?
Is Reality an illusion?
What is the framework of the machine?
Darwin's Puzzle: Natural Selection?
Where does Space-Time come from?
Is there any answer, except it comes from consciousness?
What is Out There?
T'is Ourselves?
Oe is IT all a Magic Show?"

Capitalization was by the author of the quote.

That quote was by John Wheeler He was was an American theoretical physicist who was largely responsible for reviving interest in general relativity in the United States after World War II. Wheeler also worked with Niels Bohr in explaining the basic principles behind nuclear fission.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler
He was speaking at the American Physical Society in 2003 at the time.

Methinks you are a tad too sure. It is not at all decided even now - many theories, in applied science the basis of many modern scientific advances, from lasers to quantum computing but they still don't agree on what is going on at the quantum level with its weirdness. It so weird they either don't discuss it, or keep stating stuff like you have said that simply does not fit the experimental output.

I could go into the current intensive discussion on the possible role of quantum processes in the microtubules of neurons, but the post is long enough. But if you are interested here are a couple of links:
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/penrose-hameroff/quantumcomputation.html
http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/329/1/012026 - a more technical paper from the Journal of Physics, but states in the abstract:
"...even if the environmental decoherence implies short time scales of order of a few hundreds of fs, this is a sufficient time for some kind of quantum computation to take place in (brain) MT (microtubules), so that within these time scales the cell "quantum calculates" the optimal "path" along which energy and signal (information) are transported most efficiently along the MT."

That's just one neuronic cell, When you take into account the established non-local and quantum entanglement, the idea of a quantum "cloud" of information from a myriad of neuronic cells is not as silly as it may sound.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
umm, actually no. I would go far as to state that the minds capacity for learning is
infinite, given the correct environment and stimulus. Its such a great pity that we have
such a fleeting life span with which to explore our world of endless possibilities.

What I was liking was the tendency to use abstractions about 'God' and how that can be used to avoid silly 'rules' of facts, reason and observation.

Your statement, however, is fine by me. Our learning capacity is probably without limit in a physical sense, or more like the mind itself looks after all that, what we no longer need or use it puts aside or replaces with updates. Perhaps the flow through is unlimited, more than an unlimited capacity to accumulate data, although, who knows, if quantum states are involved in consciousness. The greater issue is the gaining of knowledge that beyond reasoning, non-dual in nature, holistic (but not against reason).

Our bodies and mind are incredibly efficient. Apparently a lot of dreaming is about all that sorting out and updating, from dream experiments and observations.

Originally posted by Taoman
You are being unnecessarily aggressive in discussion. Calm down.

There is a lot more to quantum reality than your statements suggest.
IF they were, as you say, just 'discrete bits', what is a "discrete bit" when it is in superposition?
What is all the unfinished controversy from the start of last century all about?They still are arguing about the natu ...[text shortened]... ion from a myriad of neuronic cells is not as silly as it may sound.

Are you saying a brain can hold an unlimited amount of data? Or, more precisely, are you saying that at any particular point in time there is no upper bound on the amount of data that a brain can store?

Originally posted by Taoman
Apparently a lot of dreaming is about all that sorting out and updating, from dream experiments and observations.

But a cigar is sometimes just a cigar...right? 😉

Originally posted by Taoman
What I was liking was the tendency to use abstractions about 'God' and how that can be used to avoid silly 'rules' of facts, reason and observation.

Your statement, however, is fine by me. Our learning capacity is probably without limit in a physical sense, or more like the mind itself looks after all that, what we no longer need or use it puts aside or re ...[text shortened]... reaming is about all that sorting out and updating, from dream experiments and observations.

yes, how is it possible to quantify the subconscious?

Originally posted by googlefudge
For the purposes of looking at the storage capacity of the brain, you only need go
down to the level of the smallest storage unit.

A PC hard drive doesn't gain the ability to store more information by changing it's
location in space.

It still has the same number of sectors containing the same number of binary bits.

Similarly, whatever mechan down to the molecular/atomic level, and the number of discrete states
is definitely finite.

There is a difference between 'states' and 'storage'. It is possible for a computer hard disk to have more states, than its supposed storage. For example, with sophisticated tools, one can read what was stored on the hard disk prior to what is there now. It is said that one must overwrite data up to 7 times with random bits in order to guarantee that the original data is no-longer accessible.
Using normal tools, the hard disk can only read digital data off it, and will have a finite number of possible outputs. However the brain is analogue and even tiny fluctuations in electrical charge or gravity can potentially change the outcome of a read operation. However I would say that the number of possible outcomes of a read operation is still finite even though an infinite number of actual physical states may lead to a given outcome.
Storage is another matter. What the brain intentionally stores is at a higher level much like the hard disk, and is probably finite (in possibilities). It is definitely finite in terms of actual storage at any given time.

Originally posted by twhitehead
You are confusing a number of different things. You are confusing storage capacity with possible states, and you are confusing 'very large numbers' with 'infinity'.
I would argue that it is possible that the possible states of the brain is in fact infinite if space is smooth ie if a fundamental particle can exist on any point along a number-line in space ...[text shortened]... te, but probably well within our ability to estimate and even surpass with computer storage.

I think the human memory system cant be likened to a memory of a pc, although many have done just that in a bid to understand the workings of the brain.
I think the "storage capacity" is potentially infinite if you keep discarding non-useful inofrmation when it is no longer needed. I may have a few things confused, but no one else can explain to me any better.
Better to say that pc's are modelled on the human brain than vice versa imo

Originally posted by googlefudge
I didn't confuse anything, and what I said was perfectly true.

twitehead was correcting Karoly not me.

To have an infinite capacity for learning you need an infinite storage capacity
to store all the new information.

If you don't have infinite storage capacity then there will come a time when that
capacity is exceeded, and you have to forget ...[text shortened]... to learn, because they would require
more complex brains capable of more complex thoughts.

Limits and ranges are not finite. The power of creation is infinite. And I'm not just talking about growing tomatoes instead of capsicums. I mean a complete overhaul of the linear thinking that dominates our current world. Such a drag

Originally posted by Taoman
Yeah, ain't it fun!

To think that ;truth; is so simple that it can be explained positively or negatively is wild.
of course this is still from the so-called free will standpoint, which most acknowledge and can practice (pretty simple really), but repeatedly conclude that reality is something that is happening to them and that all those quantum insights are largely unhelpful for physics.

BTW thanks for the help with answering that brain capacity question. Thats exactly what I was trying to say. Billions of neurons can make infinite patterns of connections, but I guess it always has to be built on the previous neuron patterns that we are already familiar with.

Originally posted by Soothfast
But a cigar is sometimes just a cigar...right? 😉

Now, what do you mean by a cigar? No, it is not just a cigar. Firstly it is just a leaf of a plant, a rolled up leaf of a plant. That it is a "cigar" is an imputation from a human mind, who as a human knows it can give either good feelings or not good feelings, depending on whether you like cigars. So from a human perpective yes, its a rolled up leaf of a tobacco plant (very skillfully) that is labelled in one language as a "cigar".

Now this may offend dedicated cigar connaisseurs, but one could also be used as a doorjam or to clean out a dirty jar, probably by those who hate cigars.
Is then a cigar a doorjam or a jar cleaner?
Interestingly, the concept of "a cigar" also is partly defined by the fact that some people hate them. I personally love the smell of a cigar, but a rare smoker. That's what cigars do - they separate the men from the boys, the women from the girls, well, for some viewpoints. 🙂
But then does the meaning inherent in the concept of a cigar also arise from the pleasure of the senses? In fact, is a cigar really only a cigar when it is smoked? Otherwise does it not it remain a rolled up leaf with some labelling. And, of course, the other connotations and imputations, you are no doubt referring to, they also are part of what a cigar "IS".
No, a cigar is definitely NOT "just" a cigar! 🙂

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I think the "storage capacity" is potentially infinite if you keep discarding non-useful inofrmation when it is no longer needed.

If it is discarded then it is no longer stored.
Are you actually saying that the brain could potentially store one of an infinite number of facts, but not an infinite number at any given time? If so, I might almost agree, though googlefudges argument that there are only a finite number of states at the storage level would seem to be correct.

I may have a few things confused, but no one else can explain to me any better.
Better to say that pc's are modelled on the human brain than vice versa imo
Actually neither is modelled on the other.

Originally posted by twhitehead
If it is discarded then it is no longer stored.
Are you actually saying that the brain could potentially store one of an infinite number of facts, but not an infinite number at any given time? If so, I might almost agree, though googlefudges argument that there are only a finite number of states at the storage level would seem to be correct.

[b]I may ...[text shortened]... modelled on the human brain than vice versa imo
Actually neither is modelled on the other.[/b]

The brain is readily referred to as a "computer".

My memory has changed for remebering people.
It's like I cant remember anyone's name but when they stand in front of me, something prompts my brain to spit out the name.
I used to have a storage type memory , like pc's, but in the last ten years my mind really just seems to remember the important things.

Not very impressive?
People are fairly taken aback,(and impressed), when you remember their name from 6 months ago and they've only met you once. (Of course I dont tell them That I have no clue as soon as I've left their company 🙂 )
Explain that, you phycicist fellows 🙂

Originally posted by Soothfast
Are you saying a brain can hold an unlimited amount of data? Or, more precisely, are you saying that at any particular point in time there is no upper bound on the amount of data that a brain can store?

If a lot of input comes at once it jams. If the input comes at a reasonable rate, I never feel my mind is "full" like an overflowing glass. Their appears experientially no limit to receiving knowledge. But I do think the brain discards continuously that which is peripheral and "forgets" that which it hasn't used or accessed for sometime. We know repetition impresses the brain, trains it or help set it to link up quickly with signifiers and data. Highly complex.

If quantum processes are active in the brain/mind function, the available reference base, while not infinite, would be exponentially increased. Holographic type processes have been suggested in this regard where, a small change of reference point in the same "space" manifests an entirely new "bank" of information. This is by the use of constantly shifting interference patterns across the brainwave activity. That is I think, something of the way these theories are being explored.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
The brain is readily referred to as a "computer".

It is a computer. It computes. It is not however a man made computer nor to be confused with one.

My memory has changed for remebering people.
It's like I cant remember anyone's name but when they stand in front of me, something prompts my brain to spit out the name.
I used to have a storage type memory , like pc's, but in the last ten years my mind really just seems to remember the important things.

Not very impressive?
The human brain is extremely impressive. It is a complicated computer capable of extreme multitasking and multiprocessing. It is a parallel computer quite unlike man made serial computing. We are only just beginning to make computers that use parallel computing on a large scale and even then they tend to be specialized so equivalent to say one particular function in the brain such as sight processing.
What always impresses me is how the brain does most of its processing without alerting our consciousness. Much of what we do is subconscious - and we usually don't realize it. We can do amazingly sophisticated tasks entirely subconsciously.

Originally posted by Taoman
Now, what do you mean by a cigar? No, it is not just a cigar. Firstly it is just a leaf of a plant, a rolled up leaf of a plant. That it is a "cigar" is an imputation from a human mind, who as a human knows it can give either good feelings or not good feelings, depending on whether you like cigars. So from a human perpective yes, its a rolled up leaf of a tob ...[text shortened]... also are part of what a cigar "IS".
No, a cigar is definitely NOT "just" a cigar! 🙂

Surely you've heard the phrase before, yes?

From the Wikipedia page for "Cigar":

Sigmund Freud, the founder of Psychoanalysis, smoked 20 cigars a day, despite health warnings from colleagues. Because of his frequent references to phallic symbolism, it is often claimed that his colleagues challenged him on the "phallic" shape of the cigar. Freud is supposed to have replied "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar," however, there are no records of such a conversation ever having taken place.