[Fis] Life goes on - the Narration debate

[Karl Javorszky]

Dear Emanuel,



we very much sing from the same sheet. The whole question of how to count
in a fashion that suits biologic observations, using appropriate tools, has
arisen from the studying how drugs influence thinking.

At the U Vienna, there were experiments with drugs around 1973, in
collaboration with the Neurology Dept of the Medical Faculty. As we
students have discussed the setup, the statistics, the validation, the
question arose naturally, how the hormonal state of the brain, which is
considered to be a fluid medium, influences the discharge patterns of the
cortex, which are the system of thoughts.

One of the examples to visualise the problem would be a swamp or tidal
biotope, where evaporation, cloud building, rains and bolts perfectly
interact. The bolts, electrical discharges of -70 mV, are periodical but
otherwise uniform. The swamp, over which the clouds form, rain off,
discharge and reassemble again, can be of any composition. The uniformity
of the electrical discharges contrasts against the diversity of the fluid
components. Now one assumes: this type of swamp – that kind of discharge
patterns. There exists obviously a mirroring, picturing of the state of the
swamp in the discharge pattern of the lightning, which interactive,
self-controlled process normally functions smoothly, the regular
functioning of which we now influence by adding some drugs to the
composition of the swamp.

The discharges being of uniform fashion, their distinguishing character is
their temporal and spatial distance among each other. We leave the spatial
arrangements of the ganglia aside, as we assume that it is the same region
of the brain that distinguishes between {d’’, p’, d’, etc.}. It is not the
capacity of the brain we measure with the d2 test, but the coordination of
the ganglia. We measure not the quantity but the exactitude of the
responses of the organism. If we can arrive at the same result in a
differing quantitative realisation of the responses, then the quantitative
aspect is only of a secondary relevance. So it is the temporal sequence of
the bursts which is of interest. This is a sequence, while the swamp is a
contemporary mixture, in which the *when *is not a question, because all
that is, is *now*.

This has lead to the investigation, how many sequences are there per the
same number of mixtures. This has led to the results depicted in
oeis/A242615. That, in turn led to the necessity of having such
sub-collections of elements that are both contemporary and sequenced. Enter
cycles.

Excursus on cycles

One cannot talk enough about cycles. Any and all biologic process is built
up of cycles. The pre-Sumerians have discovered this but got regime
changed, internally displaced, relocated after having been outsmarted by
the Sumerians who knew how to count. Now we have to split up the meaning of
what is counting. The Sumerians have eliminated the pre-Sumerians, like we
did them up those Neanderthal fellows, and we have received the common
wisdom of counting in the fashion of 1,2,3,… and 2+3=5 and all that
follows. Not only history, but culture also is written by the victorious.
The pre-Sumerians did not count in this sense, they observed where is what
and when. How many times this *<a is on place p in time t> *is replicated
and repeated is of no great importance. In this matter, they deviated from
the winning side, whose history had been handed down to us, making us
experience that counting in the sense of using the number of fingers is the
real thing, that is counting, that is that what we have mastered at the age
of 6 and we are proud that we do not mix up counting with drawing
conclusions from observations, when is what where. Yet, is counting
anything else but observing something and giving it a symbol?

Let us imagine 16 beautiful ladies and a lazy group of pre-Sumerian owners
of them. The discussion is about how to adjust a point awards system for
the overall value of one of the 16 many-faceted objects, which system would
then rank that object to be undisputed first among the best.

An intricate ballet follows. Here enter the cycles. Contrary to intuitive
imagination, objects do not change places one-to-one, but rather they
engage in series of push-aways of other elements, where the last element
pushed will be pushed into the empty place the first element that has
started pushing had left vacant.

It is highly advisable that one actually draws the cycle patterns while
reordering 21 tuples {(1,1),(1,2),..,(5,6),(6,6)} so that one has a solid
optical grip of the idea of cycles. The task is to learn, how biology
counts. It counts in cycles. One has to understand the idea of cycles. The
task was similar as trigonometry was introduced. One had to draw triangles
in order to understand the basic concept. This effort cannot be helped.



Back to discharges of neurons. Cycles can co-exist during a middle of
temporal steps and then peacefully depart or cause a collision. Two long
cycles run concurrently. There is a stretch which allows for both to take
part in what is the case. The stretch can end without consequences if there
is a continuation for both outside of being in tandem, or will result in a
breakdown of the system, if there is no such state that would be a
continuation for both.

The suggestion is that ganglia being devilishly clever, the setup could
function in such a fashion that the breakdown is used as a reset point with
defined circumstances. The firing of the ganglion is at the end point of a
sequence the phases of which had been up to this point realisable. The
system uses the discontinuities as markers of a finish of commensurable
states.

Your investigations into the interdependence of thoughts and feelings can
be supported by the hypothesis, that Nature uses the predictability of
breakdowns of specific compromises at specific stages of the development of
the compromise. The stage of a collapse of the system is predictable, if
the system is running on substances that are known.

The model works on the concept of a Chronicle of a death foretold. The
circumstances condense, aggravate, constrict and lead to a noncontinuable
state.



The flooding of a cell with a nutrient A can well be pictured by the
assignment of a symbol to the elements that model the cell. The assignments
create ordinal relations among the elements. This is as good as saying that
one orders, sequences the elements according to a property A. Concurrent
flooding of the cell with nutrient B assigns likewise some ordinal values
to the elements. It is highly predictable, that concurrent orderings of a
collection on two ordering principles will show that there are
sub-sequences of the process where the two sets of requirements can
coexist, but there shall appear a moment, where the process breaks down,
leading to non-realisable states.

The pre-Sumerians have observed that whichever multitudes of properties
assign places to the ladies, there will inevitably turn up such situations
which would cause a lady to be at two places at once or bring forth places
where there are more than one ladies. The resulting Tinguely machine emits
lightnings regularly, at least in a rhythmic fashion (dependent on more
than one cycle). There is no standing still in the pre-Sumerian concept of
counting. The ladies constantly walk about, because they do have
distinguishing properties and within each property a score, and this score
determines the linear neighbourhood relations, therefore a place; but this
place and these neighbourhood relations apply only in the case that the
specific order is relevant. On the other hand, actual neighbourhood
relations do exist, because the ladies are always somewhere, therefore
orders are recognisable, at least as hypothetically being the case. That
the ladies have places is an implication of them having properties. That
the place is a knot in a path is an implication of a non-contradictory
state of the collection. The path is constituted by the cycles of women
that are constantly under way to the alternative. It is as important as the
fact that a triangle has three sides, that permutations consist of cycles.
Cycles are that subset of elements that travel together during a reorder
from Order A into Order B. The elements within a cycle are sequenced among
each other.

The main riddle of balance and breakdown of order and cooperation is, by
which degree of certitude one can conclude the existence of a reorder A,
deducted from the observed existence of a cycle which is a part of reorder
A. If a cycle of a reorder exists, how reasonable is it to assume that the
reorder globally exists? One would switch to counting in units of
predictability, and in that system of counting, lightnings are a natural
occurrence and can be used as a description of the state of a swamp. The
pre-Sumerians count in predictabilities, and *how many* of the elements
cause melées and immobilisations, is *not what they count*. One counts the
differing principles and types, and not on how many elements one sees them
realised. The predictable breakdown of the system is what appears to us as
a discharge of the ganglion.



Let me hope that this concept is encouraging for your investigations of
information as a sequenced description of structures to be observed on
sets. We are in full alignment. We describe the same deep structure using
differing surface structure words.



Respectfully yours

Karl

Am So., 14. Okt. 2018 um 15:25 Uhr schrieb Emanuel Diamant <
emanl.245 at gmail.com>:

> Dear Pedro, Dear FIS Colleagues,
>
>
>
> I am really pleased with the FIS discussion renewing, and I am thankful to
> Pedro for bringing the theme of Narration to the debate. However, I am
> disappointed that his introductory standpoint is focused mainly on the
> Humanity issues (economics, socio-cultural issues, literature, and so on),
> as well as the supporting references to the Christopher Booker’s and George
> Akerlof’s mentions. In my opinion, Narration (or Storytelling) is a
> fundamental and indispensable part of information producing, processing and
> communication chain. And as FIS teammates, we are first of all interested
> in these information-related issues and studies.
>
>
>
> I know that my understanding of these matters deviates significantly from
> the rest of my FIS partners. Never mind, with all due respect to the
> colleagues’ point of view, I will dare to persist with my comments on the
> Narration (Storytelling) issue.
>
>
>
> First, I consider that "*Information is a linguistic description of
> structures observable in a given data set” *
>
> Next, two kinds of structures are usually distinguishable in a data set:
> primary (or physical) data structures and secondary (or semantic) data
> structures. Respectively, their descriptions are denoted as physical and
> semantic information. The descriptions are implemented in some language
> with a proper alphabet. Thus, an information description appears as a
> string of letters, a piece of text, a fragment of a story or a narrative.
> This conjecture holds for all living beings, not for the human beings only.
>
>
>
> All further information processing or information communication issues are
> tightly coupled with this fundamental property – information is a text
> string, a fragment of a narrative – and as such it should be considered and
> treated in all information-related processes, investigations, and studies.
>
>
>
> Of course, contemporary neuroscience knows nothing about my elucidations.
> So, now and always – action potential propagation is regarded as an
> interneuron information flow and synaptic strength alterations are regarded
> as memory formation.  Of course, all that is a wrong and an erroneous
> depiction of the information handling matters. In my publications, I am
> trying to explain and repair these habitual flaws. But the public prefers
> the Good Old-Fashioned Traditional Approaches.
>
>
>
> I give up, ashamed.
>
> Best regards.
>
> Emanuel.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
> Fis at listas.unizar.es
> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20181015/19c914ea/attachment.html>