tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post3077784546874644769..comments2023-06-18T01:25:08.748-07:00Comments on Information Transfer Economics: Obviously E. coli is a rational utility maximizerJason Smithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12680061127040420047noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-67616089408270148642015-08-08T12:02:47.892-07:002015-08-08T12:02:47.892-07:00I answered Sumner. I'm guessing he either 1) t...I answered Sumner. I'm guessing he either 1) thinks human events are drawn from a distribution with a convergent mean and variance or 2) doesn't understand ratex requires you to be able to calculate a finite mean and variance.<br /><br />I don't think quantum mechanics has any real effect on how a human brain works. A lot of processes in neurons involve millions of neurotransmitter molecules and zillions of ions; it's hard enough to keep that many things in a quantum coherent state at absolute zero (nano-Kelvin).<br /><br />However! Quantum effects may be important in how particular proteins (and other molecules) work:<br /><br /><a href="http://arstechnica.com/science/2011/12/more-evidence-found-for-quantum-physics-in-photosynthesis/" rel="nofollow">http://arstechnica.com/science/2011/12/more-evidence-found-for-quantum-physics-in-photosynthesis/</a>Jason Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12680061127040420047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-63487846367781993472015-08-07T10:22:41.478-07:002015-08-07T10:22:41.478-07:00As is my habit, I thought it'd be fun to post ...As is my habit, I thought it'd be fun to post a link to this elsewhere where a discussion of rationality was taking place. <a href="http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=30042&cpage=2#comment-396280" rel="nofollow">Ray Lopez took issue and brought up free will and Roger Penrose</a>. I've never read Penrose's book, but I'd done a <a href="http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quantum_consciousness#Roger_Penrose" rel="nofollow">cursory look into his ideas on this before</a>.<br /><br />My non-expert opinion is swayed by the argument that it's a stretch to say that quantum effects come into play at the scale of a neuron and what causes it to fire, especially in light of the fact that we've more or less successfully replaced them with deterministic machines in a few cases (e.g. cochlear implants). Why am I telling you this? Because I figure you may have an informed opinion.<br /><br />Also, you should be aware that <a href="http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=30042&cpage=2#comment-396288" rel="nofollow">Sumner took issue with your comment</a>. And honestly I don't understand your comment either.Tom Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654184190478330946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-20690700198953578952015-08-06T16:41:22.003-07:002015-08-06T16:41:22.003-07:00Interesting way to put it!Interesting way to put it!Tom Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654184190478330946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-71713522612451862302015-08-06T14:16:55.171-07:002015-08-06T14:16:55.171-07:00Hi Tom,
I'd agree that a brain as such isn...Hi Tom,<br /><br />I'd agree that a brain as such isn't necessary and brain-like functions could emerge from things without brains (I think Hofstadter uses a metaphor with ants in Godel Escher Bach -- although ants have brains).<br /><br />My point was that the normal "rational utility maximizing" Operating System (rum-OS) typically runs on a processor called a "brain". With E. coli we seem to be seeing the same output of the rum-OS running on a single transistor. That is to say that maybe the software behind the rum-OS isn't really that complicated and doesn't call the various functions of a brain like planning ahead or consciousness ...<br /><br />In the old x86 chips you could add a math co-processor. If a program ran as fast with or without the math co-processor, it probably wasn't using it. In the same way, the rum-OS probably isn't using much of the brain that couldn't be accomplished with a single neuron/cell.Jason Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12680061127040420047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-85662750532625868472015-08-06T13:30:03.843-07:002015-08-06T13:30:03.843-07:00You mention "without a brain" ... and I...You mention "without a brain" ... and I'm not going to dispute that, but what is a brain anyway, except a machine to store and process information. So how can we say for sure that another system that stores and processes information doesn't have something analogous to a brain? I'm sure somebody has thought this through a lot more carefully than I have, but I always wonder if there are other "brain like processes" going on right under our noses that are so different or on such an entirely different time scale than our own brain process, that we just don't see it.<br /><br />I'm not necessarily advocating for such things existing... but I'm wondering how or if we can rule them out.<br /><br />I sometimes imagine that a termite, bee or ant colony might qualify... almost like a bunch of disembodied brain cells... passing some chemical signal around between individuals. How can we be sure that the colony as a whole can't be said to experience its environment in some manner (wholly alien to our own)?Tom Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654184190478330946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6837159629100463303.post-9971547744664758932015-08-06T13:13:47.387-07:002015-08-06T13:13:47.387-07:00Interesting... I'm glad you found that. (Good ...Interesting... I'm glad you found that. (Good memory, BTW)<br /><br /><a href="http://falkenblog.blogspot.com/2010/07/batesian-mimicry-explanation-of.html" rel="nofollow">Here's another biology inspired piece.</a>Tom Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17654184190478330946noreply@blogger.com