Hi david
with regards to ur question number 4. the explanation u provided i belive
has no relevance to the discussion at hand beause what u explain is quite to
similar to the explaination in the hindu mythology with respect to "moksha"
where by body and mind seperate and considered 2 differen forms within the
same entity. And i certainly dont think we are discussing about 'moksha'
here. (sorry if i sounded rude :) *peace*)
nisha
>From: David McKay <ntkernl@yahoo.ca>
>To: MATH3500 <math3500@mathstat.yorku.ca>
>Subject: Autotomy - Bringing new meaning to the Brain Drain
>Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 23:21:28 -0500 (EST)
>
>After weeks of reading and analysis on the Lucas piece
>and "the riddle" I believe I have the answer.
>
>What puzzled me for the longest time was how a brain
>could become jammed. Especially after reading about
>how we are able to think at many levels and trump
>machines because of it. After much debate with myself
>over the merits of different scenarios and the
>relevance to Lucas' analysis I believe the brain is in
>fact looking for answers.
>
>Several people have explained very admirably how
>Lucas' analysis relates to Godel's Incompleteness
>Theorem. I believe this is very important to gain an
>understanding of the riddle and 'look' for possible
>answers to why this is happening.
>
>Here are some (of many) of the things that REALLY
>puzzled me about the Cherniak story that I had to work
>through to come up with my answer.
>
>1. Why did the new programmer 'fail' to get enticed
>by the riddle?
>2. Why did the topologist suffer identical
>consequences in a totally unrelated research project
>and field?
>3. Did Dizzard suffer the same consequences of the
>riddle 10 years prior? (credit to the other person in
>this forum who initially proposed this first!)
>
>4. What does this have to do with Self Reference?
>
>
>I re-read the Riddle (probably 6 times) and read other
>information and felt compelled to answer Question 4
>before moving on to formulate my answer to the riddle.
>
>After some creative brainstorming I still was
>thinking, Loop, infinite iterations, recursive
>questions for unkowns and tried to normalize my answer
>to fit seemed like all the other explanations I found
>while reading all the latest emails each day. I
>agreed with almaost all of them.
>
>Then, by accident, in my sub-concsious I thought of
>it while listening to music in the car. Similar to
>hearing special effects, like an echo. Well the idea
>was what if the rationalistic side of your brain could
>gain a conscience. The second order is attained.
>Previously mentionned by J.D Rueda for his analogy
>when a computer crashes. This is very similar.
>Except this is not a mechanistic process, this is the
>Brain gaining another 'level' of consciousness.
>
>This satisfied my belief that a self referential
>paradox was at play when these people articulated
>thoughts in their head how to compare, analyze,
>differentiate and ANSWER their questions.
>
>I encourage you to look up the definition of Autotomy.
> If you have read this far. You deserve to find out
>but I will leave it to your own curiosity.
>
>Answers to the questions I had above...
>1. Because the programmer failed to understand the
>information on the screen. He was new after all. I
>have a lot of other Questions regarding this person in
>the story. I am saving those for my essay!
>2. Topologists do it by their very nature. I don't
>really understand what they really do anyways. This
>was accidental. My apologies to all the Topologists
>out there.
>3. I believe yes. Dizzard must have been able to
>break out of the paradox in his brain and return to
>investigate and document his findings on the Autotomy
>of the brain.
>4. The brain has obtained another dimension of
>conscience and might be asking itself a question.
>Similar to the 2nd order and thinking outside the box.
> Once you are able to ascend to that level and
>dimension of consciousness, parts of the brain appear
>to be jammed as it debates several other new
>tantalizing ideas in a whole new dimension.
>
>Other questions like, did the brain disconnect from
>the body or the body from the brain, to protect
>against loss of the other party etc. These are
>obvious philosophical questions. Can make arguments
>for both ==> and then Inconsistancies.
>
>Let me know if this is just a bunch of nonsense or if
>it seems like a sound argument.
>
>
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________________________
>Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
>___________________________________________________________________
>This message was sent to the math3500 discussion list by David McKay
><ntkernl@yahoo.ca> .
_________________________________________________________________
Cool ringtones, snazzy logos! Funny cards, addictive games!
http://www.msn.co.in/Mobile/ Get them all at one place!
___________________________________________________________________
This message was sent to the math3500 discussion list by "Mary Anne Vincent" <vmary_anne@hotmail.com> .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Dec 07 2004 - 17:13:35 EST