[FRIAM] sensitive, aren't we?

Nick Thompson nickthompson at earthlink.net
Tue Jun 25 12:13:04 EDT 2019


Hang on!  I missed this the first time.  What the dickens is a quantum signal, anyway? 

N

Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/


-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Simon
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 10:47 AM
To: Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm>
Cc: friam at redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] sensitive, aren't we?

And what about stochastic resonance?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 24, 2019, at 12:42 PM, Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm> wrote:
> 
> Ah Nick,
> 
> because they finely tune the carrier wave (that which you perceive as neural noise) in such a way that my quantum signal, being the delicate creature it is, can survive multiple synaptic shocks as it moves from neuron to neuron — the way you would want a well padded barrel when going over Niagara Falls.
> 
> davew
> 
> (I assume you are wearing your hip boots as standard gear in the MIB.)
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019, at 4:10 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
>> David,
>> 
>> I will see your "bushwash" and raise you a hornswaggle.
>> 
>> Why, my feathered friend, if quantum accuracy is so important, do you 
>> wear your retina backwards?  Why do you see through your ganglion 
>> cells.
>> 
>> Nick
>> 
>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University 
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Prof 
>> David West
>> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 4:24 AM
>> To: friam at redfish.com
>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] sensitive, aren't we?
>> 
>> Nick said:
>> "I was taught this fascinating trope in graduate school... yes, THAT 
>> long ago.  There is a second shoe, however.  Yes the retina (cochlea,
>> etc.) is that sensitive BUT the neural noise is much louder than that. 
>> 
>> So ... I think this is the right language ... even though the 
>> elements are sensitive to the smallest stimuli possible, the whole 
>> system cannot  resolve stimuli that small ... anywhere near."
>> 
>> Not to impugn your professors, but bushwah!
>> 
>> To make an analogy: the "neural noise" is akin to "junk DNA" just 
>> because they had not figured out what signals existed within the 
>> noise and how they were transmitted and received does not mean lost signal.
>> 
>> While "the system" seldom makes the effort to resolve at quanta scale 
>> does not mean that it cannot. (Why it seldom does is whole 'nuther
>> thread.)
>> 
>> But, assuming your professors were correct, would it be permissible 
>> to ask why the organism evolved the sensitivity only to evolve  the 
>> blockade? Or, having evolved the blockade why then evolve the 
>> sensitivity? Where is the competitive advantage in having either the 
>> sensitivity or the blockade? Or, do such questions tend not to 
>> edification?
>> 
>> I have seen the angels dancing on the head of the pin, so I know it 
>> can be done. Have also consorted with others, directly or 
>> intermediated by words, who can say, and demonstrate, the same.
>> 
>> davew
>> 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019, at 4:32 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
>>> David,
>>> 
>>> Can somebody forward this on to Mike Daly, whose email I can NEVER recover?
>>> 
>>> I was taught this fascinating trope in graduate school... yes, THAT 
>>> long ago.  There is a second shoe, however.  Yes the retina 
>>> (cochlea,
>>> etc.) is that sensitive BUT the neural noise is much louder than that.  
>>> So ... I think this is the right language ... even though the 
>>> elements are sensitive to the smallest stimuli possible, the whole system cannot
>>> resolve stimuli that small ... anywhere near.   To do what it does, it 
>>> needs to weed out its own noise.  So accuracy in vision is not a 
>>> question of accuracy of the elements, but of the ingenuity of 
>>> construction.  Note, for instance that we wear our retinas "backwards":
>>> we actually see THOUGH the many layers of the retina because the 
>>> light sensitive elements ... the rods and cones ... are at the back 
>>> of the retina.  So all that sensitivity of light sensing elements is 
>>> rudely cast away in the organization of the retina.  It's like we 
>>> are a football players who wear our jerseys inside out but boast about the
>>> precision, detail, and color of our logos.    
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hope you are well.  Where are you well?  
>>> 
>>> All my Peirce books were lost in the mail coming here, so I have 
>>> been focusing on my garden.  Mild, calm June.  May be the best garden ever.
>>> But my mind?  Not so sure about that. 
>>> 
>>> Nick
>>> 
>>> Nicholas S. Thompson
>>> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University 
>>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Friam [mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com] On Behalf Of Prof 
>>> David West
>>> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 4:15 AM
>>> To: friam at redfish.com
>>> Subject: [FRIAM] sensitive, aren't we?
>>> 
>>> Doing some reading on quantum consciousness and embodied mind and 
>>> came across these items:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-human-eye-could-help-
>>> te
>>> st-quantum-mechanics/
>>> 
>>> https://www.nature.com/news/people-can-sense-single-photons-1.20282
>>> 
>>> (A Rebecca Holmes from Los Alamos Natl. Labs is part of the 
>>> Scientific American reported research.)
>>> 
>>> not only can the human eye perceive individual photons (and perhaps 
>>> quanta level phenomena) "The healthy human cochlea is so sensitive 
>>> that it can detect vibration with amplitude less than the diameter 
>>> of an atom, and it can resolve time intervals down to 10µs [i.e., 
>>> microseconds, or millionths of a second]. It has been calculated 
>>> that the human ear detects energy levels 10- fold lower than the 
>>> energy of a single photon in the green wavelength…” Regarding human 
>>> tactile and related senses (haptic, proprioceptive), it has recently 
>>> been determined that “human tactile discrimination extends to the 
>>> nanoscale [ie, within billionths of a meter],” this research having 
>>> been published in the journal, Scientific Reports (Skedung et al 2013)"
>>> 
>>> interesting stuff
>>> dave west
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ============================================================
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at 
>>> cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
>>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ============================================================
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at 
>>> cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
>>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>> 
>> 
>> ============================================================
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at 
>> cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>> 
>> 
>> ============================================================
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at 
>> cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe 
>> http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>> 
> 
> 


============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove




More information about the Friam mailing list