RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (618) < ... 605 606 607 608 609 [610] 611 612 613 614 615 ... >   
  Topic: A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin, As big as the poop that does not look< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Texas Teach



Posts: 1639
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2018,21:07   

Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 13 2018,20:44)
I only ever delete spam comments.

Speak of the devil.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
stevestory



Posts: 10930
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2018,22:49   

Quote (Texas Teach @ Mar. 13 2018,22:07)
Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 13 2018,20:44)
I only ever delete spam comments.

Speak of the devil.

Huh?

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 1639
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 13 2018,22:53   

Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 13 2018,22:49)
Quote (Texas Teach @ Mar. 13 2018,22:07)
Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 13 2018,20:44)
I only ever delete spam comments.

Speak of the devil.

Huh?

Just that they spammed the thread right after you said that.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
stevestory



Posts: 10930
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 14 2018,00:08   

I didn't even see that.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 14 2018,01:27   

There is a new neural model that comes in three varieties getting around in neuroscience that works great with the ID Lab. It's more or less what I have been assuming to be happening, and provides the solution to a problem caused by there sometimes being more than one directional path contained in surrounding incoming signals. It's biological detail I hoped a breakthrough like this one would eventually explain happening in real cells.

At the moment the program code sums multiple possibilities to a single angle that is often the wrong way to go when near a place to avoid. With so much else needing work it was good enough the way it was. Now it's worth adding what's described in this paper:

New Types of Experiments Reveal that a Neuron Functions as Multiple Independent Threshold Units
www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-18363-1
 
Quote
More precisely, the neuron contains many independent excitable sites, each functioning as an independent threshold unit which sums up the incoming signals from a given limited spatial direction, most probably by a dendrite or a bunch of dendrites (Fig. 1C, model III). These anisotropic excitable sites are not identical and are characterized by different spike waveforms and different summation specifications. The neuron is a more complex and structured computational element than expected, and the implications on the functionality of neural networks are stimulating.


It makes sense that at least some neurons need these multiple "anisotropic excitable sites". The implications are indeed very stimulating.

Below is a HD sized peek at what the ID Lab critter now looks like. Spike train signals are shown at left. The spatial network that needs neurons with properties as described in the paper is at the upper right. New visual code for the RGB colors made it easy enough to model back from its new vestibular-like motion system with what the 12+ video MIT course Motion perception and pursuit eye movements describes for reducing a large data stream to a small number of directional spike trains that no longer need color information in them. At some point I wanted to include all that applies to 2D vision into the model. So before deciding what to do with the RGB signals I forced myself to not miss a minute of the one semister class and kept replaying parts that didn't at first make perfect sense. It included all the information I needed to make simple to code, and applies to other types of sensors where many need to be reduced down to a small stream of directional signals before addressing memory that recalls appropriate motor routines. I previously had an idea of what was needed but not being absolutely sure what was slowing me down enough to make a few days of classroom work worth the time in the long run. Right after in program comments drawing out the circuit(s) using text characters and summing up what the code has to do I found the paper at the Reddit neuroscience forum that pertains to the navigational reasoning network code. I then had to write that into program comments that now contains a link to the paper too. Without it there is nothing "in the literature" to support the reasons why the simulated neurons must work the way they do. It's like the perfect ending to the issue over the way I have been modeling neurons. My program code need for what will by virture of having been published in Nature otherwise endlessly puzzle neuroscientists is scientifically useful for explaining why it actually makes more sense than all the models these researchers are attempting to obsolete. It's much more than my being able to find evidence that neurons work as I expected there is a two way thing going on where combined they are like scientifically invincible. Buzzword based AI expectations are no longer even in the neuroscience arena. What I have became useful to what's winning for the wet-labs that like to grow neurons to experiment with, and will now explain where the authors of the paper would likely like to see me online briefly explain what I know. My having something like this to say is able to speak for itself in regards to how well things are going. Much of the above message was practice for what I need to say, at this time, even though doing so also slows down the programming work a little. There has been so much making sense all at once that keeping up is beyond what I have for free time. But now at least I have what neuroscience expects to see on the screen for signals and new way to explain what's novel about how it works:


sites.google.com/site/intelligencedesignlab/home/ScreenFor7.png

--------------
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.

   
ChemiCat



Posts: 517
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 14 2018,04:40   

Quote

Quote
I'm not bothered by rope connected treehuggers getting in touch with their inner cells by networking out as neural networks and such by following the most basic communication rules they live by, learn their language.


Yes this was my comment on the absurd language used by Gaulin. It has disappeared.

  
ChemiCat



Posts: 517
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 14 2018,04:59   

Quote
Below is a HD sized peek at what the ID Lab critter now looks like.


I cut the rest because it has no relevance to the biology of living entities. It has nothing to do with biology, science or even IDC. It ignores everything that shows it is rubbish and compounds the many errors it produces. To adapt a quote, it is not even pseudoscience any longer. It is the product of a mind warped by religious fervour to reinforce his shaky faith.

Gaulin, your garbage has been polluting the internet for many years and during that time nobody has said anything good about it. There is nothing in your weird notions that is of any use to science and you are wasting your time, ruining your health and neglecting your family. Give it up for them if nobody else.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2018,02:36   

I just found mention of why 1950's ANN's and their offspring like Deep Learning are not really representative of biological neurons. It's in a tutorial for cortical theory from Numenta:

HTM Overview (Episode 0)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMB0ri4qgwc&feature=youtu.be&list=PL3yXMgtrZmDqhsFQzwUC9V8MeeVOQ7eZ9&t=668

Now it's not just me explaining this, video speaks for itself. The ANN related branches of AI more or less went on as though biological science (or more like lack of) was still on their side. You actually are about to witness an epic of scientific history, filled with all the weirdness expected of us.

There is no need for anyone to panic. Remember Deep Learning will still work in applications it's OK for and be still be easier to mass produce than chips where all major regions of the human brain must be onboard just to be able to function as a speech to text converter for a phone. We only have to adapt to changing times by becoming more realistic about the strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches. For neuroscience neuroscientists are as they say "still working on it" but that's expected, or at least by theory I'm responsible for where inner cell behavior must be included or else there is an incomplete model of a neuron. The realization that the challenge is not as easy as it seemed in 1950 is just fine by me. For those who need more left to discover or they'll never pay back their college loans are OK with scientific discovery galore continuing on for at least another generation or more..

--------------
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.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 19 2018,18:55   

The Neural Code: Road Block on the Way to AI
Quote
All it takes to open the road, I maintain, is giving the correct answer to a simple question: how does the neural tissue in our brain produce and represent the mental phenomena that we experience introspectively?

Before you brush away this question as long-since answered, naive, misguided or irrelevant, come along on a little ride and I will convince you that the current answers to this question are grossly insufficient and that the correct answer may be around the corner.

mindfire.global/2018/02/23/neural-code-road-block-on-the-way-to-ai/#Intro

--------------
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.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 20 2018,07:06   

More in comments:
www.reddit.com/r/neuroscience/comments/84oun9/brain_activity_while_reading/

--------------
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.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2018,17:26   

Quote (Texas Teach @ Mar. 23 2018,16:28)
 
Quote (fnxtr @ Mar. 23 2018,11:11)
Spam on the Gary Gaulin thread.

(I know, I know: "How can you tell?"

The English is better.  Even when it’s Russian.

That's a lame excuse for having made fools of yourselves in public, by having followed the crowd on the road to nowhere.

The future is still rapidly going where I said it would:

www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/2018/03/early-life-experiences-influence-dna-adult-brain

Please try to keep with neuroscientific progress too:

HTM School - Grid Cells (Episode 14)

--------------
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.

   
stevestory



Posts: 10930
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2018,18:17   

Quote
I'm not bothered by rope connected treehuggers getting in touch with their inner cells by networking out as neural networks and such by following the most basic communication rules they live by, learn their language.


"What" ain't no country I ever heard of! Do they speak English in "What?"

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2018,19:16   

Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 24 2018,18:17)
   
Quote
I'm not bothered by rope connected treehuggers getting in touch with their inner cells by networking out as neural networks and such by following the most basic communication rules they live by, learn their language.


"What" ain't no country I ever heard of! Do they speak English in "What?"

Human slime mold experiment, from the video I was describing:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UxGrde1NDA&feature=youtu.be&t=514

That's something a person certainly does not see everyday. Spectators who saw the group but did not ask what is going on must have had all sorts of strange thoughts as to what they were doing. The experiment can at first glance be seen as a variation of a 60's hippy thing that is in a way still with us today:


Image from: ecoequine.wordpress.com/2016/03/30/you-say-tree-hugger-like-its-a-bad-thing/

--------------
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.

   
coldfirephoenix



Posts: 57
Joined: Sep. 2017

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2018,18:34   

Quote
That's a lame excuse for having made fools of yourselves in public


Why do you do this to yourself, Gary? I refuse to accept that you are THAT oblivious, to not see a problem with you -of all people- writing it.

You had to know that everyone could point out that your bag of poo-pseudoscience has been ripped apart and laughed at on any platform you have presented it. There are entire discussion threads at reddit that seriously debate whether or not you are mentally challenged.

This delusion is really cringeworthy. The thing is, you KNOW you are wrong. That's why you steadfastly refuse to let peer-review tell you how much you misunderstand even the basis of science. If you thought there was ANYTHING there, you would have no reason not to submit yourself to that. We've been over this already.

  
Henry J



Posts: 5045
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 26 2018,09:53   

Oblivious? Surely not!

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 1639
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 26 2018,16:35   

Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 26 2018,09:53)
Oblivious? Surely not!

He is oblivious.  And don’t call me Shirley.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
stevestory



Posts: 10930
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 26 2018,16:45   

Quote (coldfirephoenix @ Mar. 25 2018,19:34)
There are entire discussion threads at reddit that seriously debate whether or not you are mentally challenged.

This delusion is really cringeworthy. The thing is, you KNOW you are wrong. That's why you steadfastly refuse to let peer-review tell you how much you misunderstand even the basis of science. If you thought there was ANYTHING there, you would have no reason not to submit yourself to that. We've been over this already.

ID Creationism did not exactly attract the best and the brightest to begin with. After dover, the least-worst of that sorry bunch had enough dim understanding to infer that the jig was up, and they were better off elsewhere. Dembski quit, Mike Gene bounced, and a few others. So here in 2018, we're left with the rejects of the rejects. Bornagain, kairos, byers, gary, joe g, these are all people with clear mental issues.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 27 2018,07:12   

I have to make it clear that I do not represent the Discovery Institute or their associates, and they certainly do not represent me.

The theory of ID I wrote in order to show what a (from their premise) scientific theory looks like is still getting enough hits, from where it's at right now. Between my day job not paying much more than minimum wage and the computer model having become a priority to at least finish up enough to put online: all other projects are on hold, maybe forever.

--------------
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.

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 1639
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 27 2018,15:59   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 27 2018,07:12)
I have to make it clear that I do not represent the Discovery Institute or their associates, and they certainly do not represent me.

The theory of ID I wrote in order to show what a (from their premise) scientific theory looks like is still getting enough hits, from where it's at right now. Between my day job not paying much more than minimum wage and the computer model having become a priority to at least finish up enough to put online: all other projects are on hold, maybe forever.

But, as we keep telling you, their premise is wrong and/or nonsense.  So everything you try to build from it is crap.  Why you chose to hitch your wagon to their lies is beyond understanding.

We’ve also been telling you for years to stick to your day job.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 27 2018,17:09   

Quote (Texas Teach @ Mar. 27 2018,15:59)
 
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 27 2018,07:12)
I have to make it clear that I do not represent the Discovery Institute or their associates, and they certainly do not represent me.

The theory of ID I wrote in order to show what a (from their premise) scientific theory looks like is still getting enough hits, from where it's at right now. Between my day job not paying much more than minimum wage and the computer model having become a priority to at least finish up enough to put online: all other projects are on hold, maybe forever.

But, as we keep telling you, their premise is wrong and/or nonsense.  So everything you try to build from it is crap.......


Like it or not the premise/hypothesis tests true like this:
 
Quote
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, whereby the behavior of matter/energy powers a coexisting trinity of systematically self-similar (in each others image, likeness) intelligent “trial and error” learning systems at the genetic/molecular, cellular and multicellular level. This process includes both single cell zygote to human development that occurred in our own lifetime, and the very long ago first emergence/origin on this planet of molecular, cellular, then multicellular level intelligence.

Behavior from a system or a device qualifies as intelligent by meeting all four circuit requirements that are required for this ability, which are: (1) A body to control, either real or virtual, with motor muscle(s) including molecular actuators, motor proteins, speakers (linear actuator), write to a screen (arm actuation), motorized wheels (rotary actuator). It is possible for biological intelligence to lose control of body muscles needed for movement yet still be aware of what is happening around itself but this is a condition that makes it impossible to survive on its own and will normally soon perish. (2) Random Access Memory (RAM) addressed by its sensory sensors where each motor action and its associated confidence value are stored as separate data elements. (3) Confidence (central hedonic) system that increments the confidence level of successful motor actions and decrements the confidence value of actions that fail to meet immediate needs. (4) Ability to guess a new memory action when associated confidence level sufficiently decreases. For flagella powered cells a random guess response is designed into the motor system by the reversing of motor direction causing it to “tumble” towards a new heading.


Those who think that it's no big deal are unfamiliar with the unforgiving ways of science. The worse is when someone who believes they never mix science and religion does not hesitate to do so, right after "creationists" taught them how.

You're no better than the ones you blame.

--------------
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.

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 1639
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 27 2018,17:30   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 27 2018,17:09)
Quote (Texas Teach @ Mar. 27 2018,15:59)
 
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 27 2018,07:12)
I have to make it clear that I do not represent the Discovery Institute or their associates, and they certainly do not represent me.

The theory of ID I wrote in order to show what a (from their premise) scientific theory looks like is still getting enough hits, from where it's at right now. Between my day job not paying much more than minimum wage and the computer model having become a priority to at least finish up enough to put online: all other projects are on hold, maybe forever.

But, as we keep telling you, their premise is wrong and/or nonsense.  So everything you try to build from it is crap.......


Like it or not the premise/hypothesis tests true like this:
 
Quote
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, whereby the behavior of matter/energy powers a coexisting trinity of systematically self-similar (in each others image, likeness) intelligent “trial and error” learning systems at the genetic/molecular, cellular and multicellular level. This process includes both single cell zygote to human development that occurred in our own lifetime, and the very long ago first emergence/origin on this planet of molecular, cellular, then multicellular level intelligence.

Behavior from a system or a device qualifies as intelligent by meeting all four circuit requirements that are required for this ability, which are: (1) A body to control, either real or virtual, with motor muscle(s) including molecular actuators, motor proteins, speakers (linear actuator), write to a screen (arm actuation), motorized wheels (rotary actuator). It is possible for biological intelligence to lose control of body muscles needed for movement yet still be aware of what is happening around itself but this is a condition that makes it impossible to survive on its own and will normally soon perish. (2) Random Access Memory (RAM) addressed by its sensory sensors where each motor action and its associated confidence value are stored as separate data elements. (3) Confidence (central hedonic) system that increments the confidence level of successful motor actions and decrements the confidence value of actions that fail to meet immediate needs. (4) Ability to guess a new memory action when associated confidence level sufficiently decreases. For flagella powered cells a random guess response is designed into the motor system by the reversing of motor direction causing it to “tumble” towards a new heading.


Those who think that it's no big deal are unfamiliar with the unforgiving ways of science. The worse is when someone who believes they never mix science and religion does not hesitate to do so, right after "creationists" taught them how.

You're no better than the ones you blame.

Like I said, utter crap.

And you still don’t show others the respect of learning to write in English.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
ChemiCat



Posts: 517
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 28 2018,04:23   

Quote
Those who think that it's no big deal are unfamiliar with the unforgiving ways of science. The worse is when someone who believes they never mix science and religion does not hesitate to do so, right after "creationists" taught them how.


There goes a military grade irony meter.

Gaulin, are you so wrapped up in your weird little world that you do not see that science has disproved your worthless drivel. Over. And over again?

Your "model" ignores all of cognitive science, biology, chemistry and physics. Computer games are more realistic than your Pacman imitation.

There are whole passages of your "theory" that go against everything that biology has learnt since Darwin. "Molecular intelligence" being the worst concept ever. This blows your "theory" up on the launch slipway, it doesn't even get to float.

Oblivious doesn't come close to explaining your not-even-wrong ideas.

  
k.e..



Posts: 4557
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 28 2018,10:25   

Hey Gary you've got some competition.

A Flat Earther rocket man "Mad Mike" has blasted himself 1800 feet into the air on a steam powered! rocket.

Quote
In speaking with the Associated Press, Mad Mike made clear his disbelief for science:

I don’t believe in science.

I know about aerodynamics and fluid dynamics and how things move through the air, about the certain size of rocket nozzles, and thrust, but that’s not science, that’s just a formula.

There’s no difference between science and science fiction.


Link

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
stevestory



Posts: 10930
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 28 2018,11:33   

Objection. Mad Mike is Way more competent than Gary.

   
ChemiCat



Posts: 517
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 28 2018,12:39   

At least Mad Mike achieved lift-off. Something Gaulin could do if he stuffed his 'theory' where the sun don't shine and lit it.

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1100
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 28 2018,13:39   

Quote (k.e.. @ Mar. 28 2018,10:25)
Hey Gary you've got some competition.

A Flat Earther rocket man "Mad Mike" has blasted himself 1800 feet into the air on a steam powered! rocket.

 
Quote
In speaking with the Associated Press, Mad Mike made clear his disbelief for science:

I don’t believe in science.

I know about aerodynamics and fluid dynamics and how things move through the air, about the certain size of rocket nozzles, and thrust, but that’s not science, that’s just a formula.

There’s no difference between science and science fiction.


Link

So far, Mad Mike's science fiction works a hell of a lot better than Gary's "science."

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 31 2018,16:35   

This is important to note:
numenta.com/blog/2018/03/19/thousand-brains-model-of-intelligence/

And on April 3 the old Kurzweil AI forum will be closed, but there is more info on that and other things recently discussed:  
www.kurzweilai.net/forums/profile/gary-s-gaulin

--------------
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.

   
ChemiCat



Posts: 517
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: April 01 2018,04:24   

Quote
This is important to note:
numenta.com/blog/2018/03/19/thousand-brains-model-of-intelligence/


So still plagiarising the work of scientists to add it to your fake science?

This is NOT evidence for your rubbish, Gaulin.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5349
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: April 05 2018,10:22   

You're going to need the first 5 or so of these pertaining to things such as each tiny cortical column likely being able to on their own identify whole objects, not a step by step hierarchy involving multiple parts of the brain. At 7 minutes into #5 is a discussion of the purpose of brain waves not yet known and a need for (one way or another) evidence:

The Neuroscience behind HTM Sensorimotor Inference (Part 1)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNc73-tHHgY

Now that you have the background information:

discourse.numenta.org/t/oscillatory-thousand-brains-minds-eye-for-htm/3726

Our models/theory being this similar made it easy for me to trust the opinion of the Numenta team. They have the ability to repeat my results, Jeff likes to write papers and at least Matt had some prior knowledge.

What I needed to say became most like a routine "theory of operation" using terminology found in theirs for the HTM model. This at least spares a journal from having to find someone who can make full sense of it and are willing to review what I have so far. I guess we have to stay tuned, for more.

--------------
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.

   
ChemiCat



Posts: 517
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: April 05 2018,18:37   

Quote
You're going to need the first 5 or so of these pertaining to things such as each tiny cortical column likely being able to on their own identify whole objects, not a step by step hierarchy involving multiple parts of the brain. At 7 minutes into #5 is a discussion of the purpose of brain waves not yet known and a need for (one way or another) evidence:

The Neuroscience behind HTM Sensorimotor Inference (Part 1)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNc73-tHHgY

Now that you have the background information:

discourse.numenta.org/t/oscillatory-thousand-brains-minds-eye-for-htm/3726

Our models/theory being this similar made it easy for me to trust the opinion of the Numenta team. They have the ability to repeat my results, Jeff likes to write papers and at least Matt had some prior knowledge.

What I needed to say became most like a routine "theory of operation" using terminology found in theirs for the HTM model. This at least spares a journal from having to find someone who can make full sense of it and are willing to review what I have so far. I guess we have to stay tuned, for more.

--------------
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.


No, no idea what this means, if it has a meaning at all.

  
  18530 replies since Oct. 31 2012,02:32 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (618) < ... 605 606 607 608 609 [610] 611 612 613 614 615 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]