Карасев Александр Владимирович : другие произведения.

Than a neural picture of the world different from speculation about - we live in a computer

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
Школа кожевенного мастерства: сумки, ремни своими руками
 Ваша оценка:
  • Аннотация:
    All such speculations do not contain anything fundamentally new, because they do not imply a new extrapolation from physical concepts to the general picture of the universe. In all such cases, the traditional extrapolation remains within the framework of the atomistic picture of the world - in essence, exactly the same as in the classical mechanism. The neural picture of the world offers a fundamentally new holistic extrapolation from physical representations to the general picture of the universe, built on the principles of holism - from complex to simple. It is this extrapolation, and not idle fictions that we supposedly live in a neurocomputer and constitutes the foundation of the neural picture of the world.
  Than a neural picture of the world
  different from speculation about
   - we live in a computer
  
  A.V.Karasev
  
  All such speculations do not contain anything fundamentally new, because they do not imply a new extrapolation from physical concepts to the general picture of the universe. In all such cases, the traditional extrapolation remains within the framework of the atomistic picture of the world - in essence, exactly the same as in the classical mechanism.
  The neural picture of the world offers a fundamentally new holistic extrapolation from physical representations to the general picture of the universe, built on the principles of holism - from complex to simple. It is this extrapolation, and not idle fictions that we supposedly live in a neurocomputer and constitutes the foundation of the neural picture of the world.
  
  At first acquaintance, it may seem that the neural picture consists only in the fact that we, allegedly, live in a neurocomputer [1].
  And, therefore, there is nothing new in it - it has long been announced that we live in a matrix, a hologram, or in a quantum computer. But this is not at all the case. Indeed, the neural picture of the world is based on the fact that quantum mechanics is very similar to a neural network [2]. Well, so what? You never know - who looks like whom? The fact is that this similarity can be used to build a fundamentally new picture of the world. And what is this - a picture of the world and what is it for?
  Here is a Scientist building a laboratory. He's got something puffing, ticking, clicking, buzzing. He summarizes all this and says - The world consists of atoms. And in this world there is only that which is observed. Only atoms and emptiness. There is nothing else. There is no invisible world. There is no sky, but there is only atmosphere. There is no god. And everything is allowed.
  This is an atomistic picture of the world [3].
  So, the physical picture of the world is needed for extrapolation from physical laboratory data to the idea of the structure of the entire universe as a whole. This is its essence.
  The essence of the neural picture of the world is that all the observed information, all this clicking and buzzing, can be generalized in another way. There are no atoms. In general, there are no permanently existing things in the world we observe. And there are only events that we are used to generalizing in the language of particles - they say, the electron is at a point such and such. In fact, no electron exists between events. This is just for convenience it says so. So that when if there are a lot of electrons - it seems like they really are and there is a current, and we see the movement of the ammeter needle. But when there is only one electron, then it is clear that it actually does not exist. And there is only a sequence of some elementary events.
  And this sequence can be described differently - in the language of a neural network. As if certain neurons are excited, which are tied into a single global network. A laboratory is a specially prepared, deliberately simplified, isolated fragment of the world wide web, on which the most primitive algorithms for firing neurons are studied. We observe these excitations as particle registration events. This is a neural picture of the world [4].
  So what?
  And the fact that in a neural language, in a neural picture, it becomes obvious and clear that in addition to specially prepared, intentionally simplified primitive fragments of the network, more developed, more complex fragments of the same network can and should exist. At least their existence is not prohibited by anyone or anything. These fragments are not directly observed in the physical world - that is, in physical laboratories. But they can manage physical fragments.
  That is, connections between neurons can be organized in such a way that information from the simplest fragment is sent for processing to a complex (higher!) Fragment. There a decision is made, which is translated for execution back into the simplest (physical) fragment. And already in it physical events are observed. Then we will say - a higher entity from the invisible world (soul) controls the physical body until the connection between the soul and the body is broken.
   So, the invisible world exists. And at least there are pagan gods. At least, they can exist. These are the highest neural layers that control the forces of nature, society, time and space. They also have a personality. Ancient people intuitively felt the influence of higher personal entities and personified them as pagan gods and demons, who are also united by neural connections into generalized personalities [2].
   Thus, the essence of the neural picture of the world is in a new extrapolation from laboratory experiments to the summits of the universe, and not at all in the fact that we live in a neurocomputer. And in general - such questions (where we live) go beyond science. It's like counting angels at the tip of a needle. There is nothing fundamentally new in such questions. Even Plato taught that we are like a prisoner watching shadows in a cave. Let's remember
   Omar Khayyam
  
   This world - is these mountains, valleys, seas
  Like a magic lantern - like a dawn lamp.
  Our life is a drawing on glass
  Immobile inside the lantern.
  
  Why not a hologram!
  
  Khayyam often compares the universe with ceramics - and with what else to compare it at that time.
  
  The Potter who sculpted
  The bowls of our heads ...
  
  When Allah kneaded the clay of creation ...
  
  And then the question arises - this Ceramics was created by a certain Potter, or arose by itself. And the ancient atheists became proud
  
  - It is not the gods who burn the pots!
  
  And since then nothing fundamentally new has been invented, only the forms of this question change in accordance with the professional preferences of the era. In past times, mechanics was developed and, accordingly, the universe was compared with the most popular mechanism - with a clock. Is this how the Universal Clock is made by the Watchmaker? Or is this watchmaker blind? Then no one said that we live in a clock, but it seemed to be implied by itself within the framework of classical mechanis
  Now there are comparisons with a hologram, a computer - Lloyd insists that this computer is certainly a quantum one [5]. As if quantum mechanics could not be programmed in the most ordinary computer. Yes, it will be ineffective. But the inner observer who lives in this computer will never feel this inefficiency. Moreover, this computer can be mechanical. All the same, the time of the inner observer will be counted according to the ticks of this old horse. Yes, this horse will drive his Creator-Mechanic crazy. But the inner observer does not know these torments.
  For the internal observer, all this speculation about the Potter, the Watchmaker, or the Programmer is beyond Science. Because he will never know and, in principle, cannot find out anything about it. Just like the Platonic prisoner, he will never know anything about the true reason for the play of shadows in the cave. And this is nothing new since ancient times. All these questions are anti-scientific.
  And the scientific question - here:
  
  - What comes first in this game of shadows?
  
  - If this game (or hologram) determined by combinations, interaction, interference of microscopic shadows, from which large shadows are summed up?
  This is the worldview of atomism.
  
  Or vice versa - larger shadows determine this whole game, the whole movement of small shadows? This is how the neural picture of the world answers.
  This question is quite scientific. Moreover, this is the main question of the whole worldview. And this main question is solved not by a couple of magic phrases, but by the whole history of the development of science.
  Atomism claims that there are no other objects besides physical objects. And apart from physical laws, there can be no laws. Everything is determined at the micro level. And all modern modifications of this main question are based on the foundation of the atomistic worldview.
  For example, it is namely the atomistic universe that is programmed in Lloyd's quantum computer. That is, in this quantum computer, the motions of elementary particles are summed up most EFFECTIVELY, and in the process of this summation, supposedly, the whole diversity of the Universe, including man, appears.
  The same can be repeated for the representation of the Universe as a hologram, because in this case the terminology itself is built on atomistic concepts - particles (even quantum ones) in empty space [6].
  So, atomism claims that everything is determined at the micro level, from movement, interaction, interference of elementary particles. And the neural picture claims the opposite - everything is determined by the struggle of higher personal entities. And only the most primitive, specially prepared fragments of the Universe, deliberately absolutely devoid of higher control, obey physical laws, which have been studied and investigated only for them.
  If we assume that no algorithms are possible in the neural picture of the world other than those that we observe at the micro level, then no neural picture is needed at all. It would be another useless variation of the atomistic picture of the world, on the topic - oh, we live in a neurocomputer. But this is not so, because the neural picture represents a fundamentally new extrapolation of physical data. And the direction of neural extrapolation is diametrically opposite to atomistic one.
  Atomists argue that extrapolation goes from simple to complex - from particles to molecules, then cells, then organisms, then evolution ... And the neural picture looks the other way around - More and more simplified neural layers are exfoliated from higher personal entities. And so on from the entire Universe as a whole - down to the simplest physical objects observed in the laboratory. In philosophy, this approach is called holism.
  But until now, holism has not had a physical basis, so it is still considered the useless fad of armchair philosophers. The neural picture provides the necessary physical foundation for holism, and for vitalism, and for the noosphere, and for Sheldrake's teachings and for many phenomena that are now considered paranormal - and therefore pseudoscientific [7-8].
  In the atomistic picture of the world, the assertion about the primacy of the micro level is unshakable - there are only particles and emptiness. And it is not so important whether there is quantum interference between these particles or not. But in the neural picture of the world, such a statement sounds simply ridiculous. It's like saying - I'm studying the operation of a chess program. I started with the simplest level, where the move is chosen equally probable. And suddenly I declare that there are no more difficult levels and cannot be! In the neural picture of the world, there must be levels of the highest complexity. And their existence is indirectly confirmed not only by paranormal (from an atomistic point of view) phenomena, but also at the lowest, physical level [9].
  In conclusion, I would like to stress once again that any picture of the world inevitably looks like a pitiful model in comparison with the grandiose greatness of the true Universe. Our weakness is too great. Poincaré teaches that there can be no true or false picture of the world - there are only more or less convenient pictures for certain applications [10]. The atomic picture of the world is, of course, incomparably more convenient for applied physics. The neural picture of the world is more convenient for understanding the general interconnection, and, in particular, the interdependence of the observer with the outside world. Because the personality of the observer is organically included in the neural picture for the first time. In any variations of atomism, only the observer's body is included in the picture of the universe, but his personality is not clear where [11]. And this personality cannot be programmed either in a quantum computer or interfere in a hologram below. Because even from the infinity of dead particles or waves, it is impossible to synthesize a living personality.
  This personality can be at least speculatively described only by a neural picture of the world. Here, the entire Universe as a whole and even the simplest physical objects have personal properties, so that the border between living and nonliving is blurred [12]. Therefore, the personality of the observer no longer looks like a foreign object - it is determined by the connections and algorithms of the neural network - more complex, but, in principle, similar to those that describe the behavior of the simplest physical objects.
  
  References
  
  1. Карасев А. В. Вселенная в нейрокомпьютере. http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/neuroun.shtml
  2. Карасев А. В. Нейронная картина мира. Вестник новых медицинских технологий. 2002. том 9. N 2. http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/nkmfs.shtml
  3. Карасев А.В. Против Эпикура. http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/epikur.shtml
  4. Карасев А.В. Трехмерное пространство и спин электрона в нейронной терминологии. Квантовая Магия, 2011, том 8, вып. 2. http://quantmagic.narod.ru/volumes/VOL822011/p2168.pdf
  5. Сет Ллойд. Программируя Вселенную. Квантовый компьютер и будущее науки.
  6. Алексей Алексенко. Вселенная - не голограмма. ttps://snob.ru/selected/entry/116415
  7. Карасев А.В. Легитимация учения Руперта Шелдрейка в нейронной терминологии квантовой механики http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/rs.shtml
  8. Карасев А.В. Обоснование витализма в нейронной терминологии квантовой механики. Квантовая Магия, 2012, том 9, вып. 1. quantmagic.narod.ru/volumes/VOL912012/p1235.html
  9. Карасев А. В. Физические подтверждения нейронной картины мира.
   http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/phpnkm.shtml
  10. Пуанкаре А. О науке.- М.: Наука, 1990. http://ilib.mccme.ru/Poincare/O-nauke.html
  11. Шредингер Э. Природа и греки.
  12. Карасев А.В. Параллельные миры, информационные поля, коллективный разум в нейронной картине мира. http://samlib.ru/k/karasew_a_w/par_mir.shtml
 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список

Кожевенное мастерство | Сайт "Художники" | Доска об'явлений "Книги"