Don't you see that the paper you presented is neural network approach. There is plenty of such in the Internet, but you see neural network is not more than image recognition system what consists of two dimensional array of "neurons" what fire when pulses come from certain range (this is how it recognises images). It comes from the age of logical elements when they couldn't imagine anything else to model neurons, but they are not the only image recognition systems, to mystify them and even call them "consciousness" is the most unscientific thing what ever can be.

***If you do not want me to point out the latest papers that purport to be about consciousness, then just say so***

I take that your "BEC consciousness" means quantum consciousness in BEC, but you didn't explain what it is.

***You have never explained what you mean by quantum consciousness either. Yet you keep using those words. So allow me to say what it means to me. I think there are two kinds of consciousness, one based on a classical computer that is local and that we can detect and are aware of in our own brains. Our imagination and our dreams are a result of classical computation in my opinion.

Then there is also a quantum computer in our brain that is non-local and undetectable and made up of uncollapsed waves, not particles, which exist in the BEC medium. This is the aspect of our brain that allows us to solve problems without consciously thinking about them. You have certainly had the experience of trying to solve some problem without success.So for some time you stop thinking about it. And then suddenly in a flash the whole solution comes to you. I attribute that to a quantum computer.

But that is not normal consciousness. It is a kind of invisible consciousness. The consciousness that humans are aware of is based on a classical computer. So for me the term quantum consciousness is a misnomer. But my Dark Matter paper is about non-local invisible consciousness. And of course all this is hypothetical.***

If you read then I never said that quantum consciousness must not be nonlocal, just if it is nonlocal then space may well be 2d, because nonlocality is not a part of the cartesian space.

***This I do not understand at all- the 2-d and that non-locality cannot be 3-d. In an axion BEC, the non-local properties come entirely from the size of each particle's wave fuction being global as well as 3-d. That's why it's makes a good candidate for the pilot wave medium. Can you elaborate on your 2-d vs. 3-d comments above, so I can undestand their basis?


Richard

• Yes we have differences - tkorrovi - November 27, 2003 - 16:10 UTC
  • Please elaborate - yanniru - November 27, 2003 - 23:25 UTC
    • What I wanted to say - tkorrovi - November 28, 2003 - 00:37 UTC
      • I just wanted your opinion - yanniru - November 28, 2003 - 15:52 UTC
        • Thank you - tkorrovi - November 29, 2003 - 15:25 UTC