AI and cognitive psychology rant (getting more and more OT - tell me if I should shut up)

[Robin Becker]

In article <j26opv4m5gm5hqghed990s9j5n4fdvkgv4 at 4ax.com>, Stephen Horne
<steve at ninereeds.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>On 26 Oct 2003 18:01:47 +0000, jjl at pobox.com (John J. Lee) wrote:
>
>>Weak link, very weak, Anton. ;-) Still, at least you're trying, unlike
>>me...
>
><desperate attempt to lighten the tone>
>
>I'm *very* trying ;-)
>
>
>OK, sorry for the bad joke.
>
>
Well here's even more fun the following quotes from this

http://www.scieng.flinders.edu.au/cpes/people/cahill_r/Semantic.html

seem to be in my corner, but as before I'm getting dizzy even reading
it.


'''
That process physics could be implemented by a model of Mind in the SNN
to reveal the fundamental semantic, temporal, experiential nature of
reality is deeply satisfying for a number of reasons: 1.) the essential
semantic nature of reality has been thrust upon us by the rigorously
proven limitations of self-referential syntactic systems, and so rests
upon the most secure imaginable and uncompromisingly honest intellectual
foundation; 2.) it is, of course, Mind in which semantic and the Meaning
to which it corresponds is ultimately registered[10]; 3.) Mind, as the
theoretical statistician turned economic theorist and pioneering
biophysical economist, Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen argues, appears to be
required for the experience of what Dr. Cahill calls the "present
moment" or the "now" required if we are to make meaningful observations
at all.
'''

'''
To elaborate upon this third point: Georgescu-Roegen tells us of an
illustration by Nobel Prize-winning physicist, Percy Bridgman, showing
that with the advent of relativity in physics, it is perfectly possible
for two separated observers travelling in different directions through
space to register a signal from a third position in space as two
different facts. One observer may, for instance, detect a " ‘a flash of
yellow light’ " while the second registers the same signal as " ‘a glow
of heat on his finger.’ " Bridgman’s point, according to Georgescu-
Roegen, is that for relativity to be able to assert that about the same
event implies that even relativity physics really presupposes
simultaneity in some absolute sense despite its attempt to show
simultaneity’s problematic nature with the registration of a single
event as two distinct facts. Furthermore, relativity physics does not
show how this absolute simultaneity could be established.
''' 
-- 
Robin Becker