On 6/2/21 8:37 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Yeah, not clear where the intuition for infinite sampling (path integral) > comes from in connecting the two. Although sometimes it seems like I DO try > everything. > Given your remark about men possibly having a smaller number of objectives > than women, why not turn over every damn rock? :-)
Ha! Yeah, I'm not really a fan of the simulation hypothesis. But it does approach the "unconventional computing" idea where we might turn every damn rock into a computer, along with every bacterium, squid, and cow. If we could turn the whole world into a (multifarious) computer, then, almost by definition, we'd automatically try every path because the paths *are* the computer. > Even with no stateful change, there's the disruption of the "instruction > cache" by jumping around a lot. I would think there would be some analogous > neural locality to different tasks too, and longer spreading signals to jump > between different tasks. Aha! Thanks. I totally forgot about "computational momentum" ... midway through yet another article on the fatal flaws of Pinker's "Enlightenment Now" before my shower this morning, I needed more coffee and while walking upstairs I resumed that podcast on "Unwinding Anxiety". It was like grinding the gears on my old Datsun. > I think part of it is that the parallelist ways are harder to unpack and > explain. So when asked how it is one makes a judgement (say about a social > situation), it is hard to start from the start. That means bringing to bear > the diachronic tools to rationalize a story. I wonder how many good writers > and artists are really diachronic. I suspect they cannot be. So, the "parallelism theorem", which argues any parallel process can be accurately simulated by a sequential process, reminds me of the fragility of "mimic models" (e.g. https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.09749). Unpacking and explaining is like the serialization of, say, an XMLStore ... or the scanning of a bitmap ... or maybe lossy decryption. Story-tellers are, inherently, liars ... gaslighting us with their just-so fiction. > Controlled exertion. What's not to love? If I could do it hanging on a > hook in a spacesuit, I would. Snap off my head and do some work while the > Neurallink driver pushes the body through spinal interfaces. :-) Hilarious. The mindful practice of getting into an action pales in comparison to the transhumanism of downloading one's brain to a high performance machine. I've always wanted one of those electrical muscle stimulators I saw in a documentary about Bruce Lee umpteen million years ago. It'd be so cool to sit on the couch eating pizza while my torso was doing ab exercises ... except I suppose now it might cause some reflux or somesuch. -- ☤>$ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
