|
|
|
Smart
Remarks 3: Leibniz, Maxwell, Turing, Churchland, Lockwood, Salam,
Wigner
|
|
|
|
Leibniz
|
Leibniz
Besides, it must be
confessed that Perception and its consequences are inexplicable
by mechanical causes; that is to say, by figures and motions.
Leibniz
|
|
If we imagine a machine so constructed as to produce
thought, sensation, perception, we may conceive it magnified —
to such an extent that one might enter it like a mill. This being
supposed, we should find in it on inspection only pieces which
impel each other, but nothing which can explain a perception. It
is in the simple substance, therefore, —not in the
compound, or in the machinery, —that we must look for that
phenomenon [...]
Leibniz
|
computation
|
|
McCulloch
Turing
|
In 1943 Warren
McCulloch and Walter Pitts proposed a general theory of
information processing based on networks of binary switching or
decision elements, which are somewhat euphemistically called
"neurons," although they are far simpler than their
real biological counterparts ...
McCulloch and Pitts
showed that such networks can, in principle, carry out any
imaginable computation, similar to a programmable, digital
computer or its mathematical abstraction, the Turing machine.
Muller, Reinhardt
When
a beam of light falls on the human eye, certain sensations are
produced, from which the possessor of that organ judges of the
color and luminance of the light. Now, though everyone
experiences these sensations and though they are the foundation
of all the phenomena of sight, yet, on account of their absolute
simplicity, they are incapable of analysis, and can never become
in themselves objects of thought. If we attempt to discover them,
we must do so by artificial means and our reasonings on them must
be guided by some theory.
Maxwell
[...]all
chemical binding is electromagnetic in origin, and so are all
phenomena of nerve impulses.
Salam
|
|
Turing
Turing
had a strong predeliction for working things out from first
principles, usually in the first instance without consulting any
previous work on the subject, and no doubt it was this habit
which gave his work that characteristically original flavor. I
was reminded of a remark which Beethoven is reputed to have made
when he was asked if he had heard a certain work of Mozart which
was attracting much attention. He replied that he had not, and
added "neither shall I do so, lest I forfeit some of my own
originality."
"Some
Comments from a Numerical Analyst"
James
H. Wilkinson
|
NNs
|
|
Maxwell
Lockwood
Salam
|
|
Maxwell
What it would amount to, in terms of the present
proposal, is that we have a 'special' or 'privileged' access, via
some of our own brain activity, to the intrinsic character of,
say, electromagnetism.
Lockwood
|
color
EM
(pdf)
eye
|
|
Wigner
|
[Let] us now
turn to the assumption opposite to the “first alternative”
considered so far: that the laws of physics will have to be
modified drastically if they are to account for the phenomena of
life. Actually, I believe that this second assumption is the
correct one.
Can arguments be adduced to show the need for
modification? There seem to be two such arguments. The first is
that, if one entity is influenced by another entity, in all known
cases the latter one is also influenced by the former. The most
striking and originally the least expected example for this is
the influence of light on matter, most obviously in the form of
light pressure. That matter influences light is an obvious
fact—if it were not so, we could not see objects. The
influence of light on matter is, however, a more subtle effect
and is virtually unobservable under the conditions which surround
us [...] Since matter clearly influences the content of our
consciousness, it is natural to assume that the opposite
influence also exists, thus demanding the modification of the
presently accepted laws of nature which disregard this influence.
|
|
Wigner
Since matter clearly
influences the content of our consciousness, it is natural to
assume that the opposite influence also exists, thus demanding
the modification of the presently accepted laws of nature which
disregard this influence.
Wigner
|
mind
matter
|
|
Llinas
Pellionisz
Umezawa
|
Does
neural form follow quantum function?
As
we have seen in preceding sections, manifestation of ordered
states is of quantum origin. When we recall that almost all of
the macroscopic ordered states are the result of quantum field
theory, it seems natural to assume that macroscopic ordered
states in biological systems are also created by a similar
mechanism.
Umezawa
|
fractals
|