GaryGaulin
Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012
|
| Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 03 2017,21:51) | Usually, one doesn't have to do more than recycle parts of things Gary didn't bother to read for comprehension.
Gary:
| Quote |
That is part of the COGNITIVE MODEL that has NEURONS that they can make virtual ROBOTS with, like I do.
|
Once it was clear that Gary hadn't bothered to actually put anything like "NEURONS" in his PSC code, he suddenly went on this kick about how artificial neural systems (ANS) must be bad and inefficient compared to, as it turns out, just animating the heck out of things. |
Wesley, to be precise you must say I am modeling the behavior of basics like cortical columnar units, hexagonally connected populations of cells that are seen emerging at 6:30 into this model based video, which I just added to my new playlist right after the hexagonally arranging bubble experiment I filmed where I said one word that gets the whole playlist just right.
The Blue Brain Project
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NYKC8mq4P0&index=2&list=PLPCENRDc3DcTAW6uMMi3HNjF8Fvpn6vWx
Groove Is In The Heart is in there too, regardless of what fnxtr said above that is essentially true even though it's extremely unlikely anyone especially here in Massachusetts where that sort of action has been decriminalized (and I don't get out much anyway) would worry about that happening. I have not had a drink of alcohol in almost three decades and before that went years without any or development of prescription drug addiction. There have never been tracksite pot or whatever parties with scientists, students or teachers who have spent time working here. If they did bring a beer then I would need to start an extra strong pot of coffee, just for me to join them with what keeps me going instead these days. Their out of the blue offering to share a Fat One with me would certainly test my willpower, but that has not happened yet nor do I encourage it.
I now get a comfortable enough adrenaline high, just from the science thrill from your challenge that you yourself presented to me. Perhaps it's to let out my inner alpha-ness by butting heads with you. If true then there you go, we are living examples of "evolutionary" significance for you and others to work on was gained in the process that none the less makes such a primitive behavior worthwhile for us to continue with until we lock horns or something.
Neurological "research" has rare papers with good clues like the one I keep having to link to for modeling what's going on in the brain of at least mammals but it does not explain how to "animate" anything:
journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1000403
I am not starting with Video S1 showing a live rat:
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000403.s014
(4.78 MB MOV)
I have to model what's inside its skull making use of waves that are in turn make it so good at navigational reasoning such as this or it will look like I enjoy torturing things. Seriously.
It's also not my fault that what works too good to be a coincidence boils down to a simple wave geometry related process. Your need to complicate things with ANN's and such even has Occam's Razor butting back by shaving more than your beard off. The remaining explanation then pertains to all levels of biology the systematics apply to.
My making it look so easy is a part of what makes this a greater challenge than what you were expecting. So be thankful Darwinian territory is still all yours to rule. I'm only concerned with the scientific turf for intelligent causes of one kind or another. Your having to get out of the way of this much head butting alpha-ness tested model/theory frees it to boldly go to the only place left, where you can say deserves whatever stomping around happens after that out there. The Power of science does this way work in your favor, may the force be with you.
--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
|
