[FRIAM] sensitive, aren't we?

[Prof David West]

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
>