On 7/21/25 8:23 AM, glen wrote:
> Excellent! There's a lot here. So rather than give a reply, I'm going to try to put it in bullets of my own words. I'm posting it, rather than taking local notes for 2 reasons: 1) just in case you(anyone) find(s) the energy to correct me. I don't indent for these questions to be answered, only to notify others how badly I've mangled Eric's intent and to remind me of threads to pull. And 2) so that I can maintain the transparency of the corpus. I don't want my private notes to pollute it.
> 
> • the brain as a sensory organ: current activity = streaming in through the senses
> • a resonance from current activity to a counterfactual active role
> 
> ¿ I worry about the composition of the resonance process. Are we supposing a very large, slow (big scope) thing can resonate from a very fast, small thing and vice versa? Can a singular thing resonate from a collection of things? Etc. I'm assuming the answer's yes.
> 
> • synthesis by resonance, versus
> • synthesis by cutting and reassembling in a nearly asemantic "logic" (symbols+grammar)
> 
> ¿ Would it matter if the composition in synthesis by one were "impoverished" in comparison to the other? E.g. if Rosen, Penrose, hypercomputation people (?) were right somehow that synthesis by resonance+brain does something that the other can't do? How would one demonstrate greater/lesser capability?
> 
> • So the more "organically" organized, "online" brain and the vN-organized machine are not so much diff in kind, at least in some 1 or small sense/function: the ability to simulate.
> 
> • So these unbindable "logics" might arise and be used at very fast, fine-grained, low order processes as well as slower, coarse, high order processes.
> 
> • An assertion here seems to be that even very temporary, very local/private, one-off/idiopathic logics-thinking-systems-architectures grown in the brain are "effective" - do some work, are artifacts in the world. Maybe even 100s or millions of them are constructed, used, and tossed as we go about our day?
> 
> • candidate member of the not-metaphor group: concepts grounded in a (possibly traceable provenance) resonance network where some vertices were in the "active role"/current experience.
> • a formalism bound to coarser (including high order) *and* finer conceptual structures
> • the translation across bindings might OK as long as we have a measure of how well it fits - flex & slop

