Comments on: Physical Intelligence http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3069 examining transformative technology Wed, 03 Apr 2013 18:23:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3069#comment-857766 Sun, 14 Jun 2009 05:29:37 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3069#comment-857766 The 'History' section of the wikipedia entry for Perceptron gives a quick overview of the 'soap opera', but don't let that keep you from buying the book ;-) The ‘History’ section of the wikipedia entry for Perceptron gives a quick overview of the ‘soap opera’, but don’t let that keep you from buying the book ;-)

]]> By: http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3069#comment-857034 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:57:01 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3069#comment-857034 This doesn't amount to a new theory. Reductionist arguments have long held sway even with intelligentsia. Newtonian mechanical views fail to deal with fundamental underlying reality, especially at quantum levels and including macro levels. They all fail because the theories don't account for the theorist/observer. Einstein, Heisenberg, Schrodinger, and many of their pals all noted the action of observer critical to any working of reality. More basically, all knowledge requires a knower. If that knower consists of glorified mechanical parts it hasn't the integrity we attribute to knowing anything. If DARPA studies come to the conclusion its investigators use as their premise they demonstrate only circular arguments. They prove they can't and don't know anything, at least about scientific method. A more enlightened approach would treat mind with hologram related studies. This doesn’t amount to a new theory. Reductionist arguments have long held sway even with intelligentsia. Newtonian mechanical views fail to deal with fundamental underlying reality, especially at quantum levels and including macro levels.

They all fail because the theories don’t account for the theorist/observer. Einstein, Heisenberg, Schrodinger, and many of their pals all noted the action of observer critical to any working of reality. More basically, all knowledge requires a knower. If that knower consists of glorified mechanical parts it hasn’t the integrity we attribute to knowing anything. If DARPA studies come to the conclusion its investigators use as their premise they demonstrate only circular arguments. They prove they can’t and don’t know anything, at least about scientific method.

A more enlightened approach would treat mind with hologram related studies.

]]> By: Physical Intelligence | Everything News Portal! http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3069#comment-856712 Physical Intelligence | Everything News Portal! Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:02:50 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=3069#comment-856712 [...] Read more … [...] [...] Read more … [...]

]]>