infra-org (urls)

Sean Lynch seanl at literati.org
Sat Dec 7 13:22:58 PST 2013


On Sat, Dec 07 2013, brian carroll wrote:

> Jim Bell wrote:

>> "Spooky action" entanglement has been measured to operate at a velocity of
>> at least 10,000 'c', where 'c' is the speed of light in a vacuum.  (signals
>> transmitted on optical fibers about 20 kilometers apart.)  Unfortunately,
>> there does not appear to be any way to employ this to transmit information.

> it also makes me wonder, given the insane speed vs. infinitesimal distance
> if *information* could operate as a kind of cognitive pressure on the mind,
> (as with predictive Random Event Generator (REG) vs RNG where patterns
> organize/emerge out of quantum-noisefield) thus corollary perhaps to the
> analogy of water pressure for electrical circuits and flow based on pneuma-
> tic dynamics in a potentially bounded or closed system). that may enter
> into questions of 'where information actually exists', perhaps stored outside
> the brain in noosphere as patterns or forms (invisible constellation/structure)
> that is referenced or linked to rather than contained within a brain, and thus
> boundary of brain vs. mind. same: digital computer vs.quantum processor,
> perhaps. thus issue of channeling or tuning into versus as origin of truth.
> what if a fundamentally different data model, thus security model, etc.

> this conceptualization has the individual person modeled as an antenna,
> tuning into various structures based on what resonates, aligns correctly,
> what circuits or feedback loops or environments exist. versus machine
> of clockwork, rote memorization, and processor speed of read/write.

This is exactly the model of the mind that I believed in when I was in
college. These days I believe that consciousness consists of information
but that information, far from being static, is actually the connections
among potential events. It's like a complex machine: pull lever A here
and gear B over there moves. The complex set of (abstract, not concrete)
connections that makes up the "model" of our reactions to various sets
of stimuli *is* our consciousness, versus there being some component in
there that produces the illusion of consciousness.

I'm sure that sounds sort of crazy; condensing such a large set of
varyingly intuitive leaps into a single paragraph is probably not such a
great idea. Happy to provide more background on the list or privately
for anyone who's interested.

-- 
Sean Richard Lynch <seanl at literati.org>
http://www.literati.org/~seanl/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20131207/7c724aff/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the cypherpunks mailing list