Hello Lance,
"Lance Sherman" <lancesherman at home.com> skrev i melding
news:nRZy7.65160$My2.35990924 at news1.mntp1.il.home.com...
> Hi Brian...
>> Thanks for your thoughts on The Cerebral Code. I looked at it (the entire
> text, along w/most of Calvin's writings are available @his web site,
>http://faculty.washington.edu/wcalvin/ .) I certainly commend him for
> making this science freely available.
Thanks for the link, specially for those who have never heard about this
before.
> I see a lot of provocative ideas in his work, esp'ly the application of
> Darwinian principles.
Yes, I liked the idea - it seemed very biological :-)
How else would humankind advance, if not by developement in the mental
facutly as well ??
> The ideas re the triangle and hexagon structures he finds in each layer of
> the cortex, excited me the most.
Me too, and I had this inner image of his Sashimi-theory of consciousness
were one layer dominates (as a thought) in one timeframe, while another
layer of hexagons expands and grows, to replace the other thought as _the_
new consciousness.
The best phrase is on the page 189-190 which begins with "IF SO MANY
THINGS are happening at once in the neocortex, why do we have a unity of
conscious experience?"
I loved that part.
> However, IMHO, he doesn't give enough importance to temporal issues - I
> think Hebb built on processing of sequences. Not just cell assemblies but
> "phase sequences". And I still think this is the best bet for modeling
the
> operation of the brain.
Yes, we _are_ temporal animals, but remember the layers ?
They are never static, there are always new ones growing from cues
externally
(environment) or internally (memories).
Do you remember the time that you did a test of your graphics-card for your
PC ?
We have all done it - what I think about is that one of those tests
are -layering_
of varios plots onto each other with different colours and sizes.
The whole screen is the neocortex, but the squares (which is not necessarily
how it operates on OUR brains) are the always shifting consciousness.
Sometimes the plots are small, othertimes they can grab a relly big part
of the whole.
Now the last part is what I call _consentration_ !!!! :-)
> I'll confess: tho i think Moby is somewhat in his own little world (like,
> I'm not?) I admire and agree with his commitment to processing temporal
> information. And Ron Blue, he is closer to my thinking, at least in his
> commitment to balance - as he calls it, "correlation opponent processing".
> Too bad these guys don't write as clearly as Calvin. Too bad I don't,
> either.
We're all in our own worlds, it's a part of being human to have models of
representation.
It is when reality shifts TOO much from what we have inside, that the danger
begins.
I think that Ron has in part some of the same theory as Calvin, but it might
operate on slightly different principles (as he has the correlation opponent
processing).
You think _you_ write bad :-)
I think that _I_ write bad, it should have been much better.......
Don't worry, as long as your ideas is crystal-clear, and you know that what
you
express is truely reflected here, then don't worry(see how bad I expressed
myself?).
> So, for those who think there is something to these time based ideas, try
> Peter Cariani's site, www.cariani.com. Neural timing nets - there's a big
> idea.
Thanks !!!!
I'd log onto there and read.
Anyway, I'm going through "Memory" by Kandel et al.
Brian
> And thanks to Dieter for pointing me there! (couple months ago)
