[Fis] Emotional Sentience & Information

[Karl Javorszky]

>
>
> Dear Kate and FIS,
>
>
>
> Emotional Sentience and Information 24 04 08
>
>
>
>    1. Subject introduced
>
> Kate directs our attention to emotions, specifically *the informational
> logic**. *
>
> Eric points out: *“…**we need a more clear definition of what do you
> think emotions are as related to information. … Are they a type of
> information?...** a whole bunch of different concepts together …[need ] …
> linking….*
>
> Aaron: *“…evidence related to the evolution of various interacting forms
> of life … roles of biochemical mechanisms involved in processes of
> evolution, reproduction, development, learning and interacting with the
> environment, including features of the environment that are products of the
> above relatively recent processes, such as … social
> constraints/influences.”*
>
>
>
> In my eyes, Kate’s concept fits well to the contribution of a young
> English woman colleague who discussed permutations and their role in
> surprisingly many fields of the world, including genetics, maybe a year
> ago. It is a pleasure to greet a clinical psychologist here.
>


>
>    2. Context of emotions: general, as opposed to
>
> To have emotions (to be in a state of being subject of physio-chemical
> fundaments of thinking which state deviates in quality and/or intensity to
> the usual states) is a distinguishable experience and it is possible to
> conduct a reasonable discussion about the subject. (This is such a case
> where the eye can see itself.) As the definition shows, the living organism
> is always in a state of being emotional, only we usually discuss the
> extraordinary, as being contrasted to the no-news flow of status reports.
>
> Neurology is embedded between physiology and psychology. It is a Black
> Box. Let us consider that we have found an alien contraption, left on Earth
> by visiting extraterrestrials, and we understand how it intakes and how it
> discharges what it feeds on (which can be information), but we have no idea
> how it senses (maybe erroneously) the well-suited situation to flirt, do
> business, hide or fight, etc.
>
> Kate’s proposition approaches the subject in a fundamental way. Widening
> our perspective, we say that what we call emotion is a phenomenon that is *contemporary
> *while what we call action is in a temporal flow.
>
> Kate directs our attention to the fact, that whatever differentiation we
> exercise on classifying the material substrate of the input of the brain,
> we mix together a cocktail which nourishes tha brain. In whichever
> numbering system we differentiate the constituents of the usual, normal
> nourishment of the brain, we end up with one maximal number for the kinds
> of variants that can be cooked up by the biochemical kitchen of that
> individual. Whether we count in liter, centiliter, mililiter or microgram
> per mililiter, there is an upper limit for the number of qualitative
> differences within a mixture.
>
> We discuss here, in colloquial speech, emotions in the understanding that
> these are extraordinary, significant, decisive degrees of emotional
> charges. In a neutral view, all variants of possible emotions should be
> considered as a background, and the importance is not that some mixtures
> lead to agitations, illness or death, but rather that the interchange
> between emotions and actions incessantly works, except exactly in those
> cases, where there is too much of an emotional imbalance.
>
>    3. The usual background
>
> What Kate speaks about is the collection of coincidences that can be
> concurrently the case. For an individual to be as usual, *{k1,k2,k3,…ki} *of
> physiological values should be within ranges *{r1,r2,r3,…ri}. *As
> colloquially understood, an emotional state is diagnosed if any of *{k1,k2,k3,…ki}
> *is outside the ranges of *{r1,r2,r3,…ri}. *(Colloquially explained:
> emotions in social usage of the term: flares and ejections of the Sun,
> neutral usage: the activities of the Sun.)
>
> Having an overall fixed numeric limit helps in understanding how the
> contemporary is interwoven with that has been and that which shall come.
> Emotions are those states of the assembly which are at the same time, a
> temporal cross-section. Actions are sequences of states in which everything
> is contemporary. (Slicing the film into very thin snapshots.)
>
> Which contemporary state has evolved from which different contemporaneous
> state and to which state of contemporaneous coincidences will lead to, is a
> complicated combinatorial mechanism. Having a Grand Total means the problem
> is solvable.
>
>    4. How Nature does it
>
> Nature, bless her heart, makes use of a numerical discongruence within the
> counting system that makes the whole system double-focused, by a
> combinatorial discongruence to the tune of 3.4E-92 %, a very small extent
> indeed. The consequences of this small inner relative inexactitude are felt
> all through the system. Nature uses the fact, that if the total is known,
> and value of the last sudoku token is no more a question, then in a
> representation on the level of how many guesses till you solve the sudoku
> can simply do away with a whole unit and can reset the calculation in the
> fashion like astronomers reset to a new epoch. The same informational
> content with one material unit less. The exchange in the *bazaar **(oeis.org/A242615
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://oeis.org/A242615__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!TSiukTIsFgXROB4-BcSARDP-UG1cUuxj2qtOrJnue-ru9rJkt2z5alF9jgxay7m2A4Ic8gmdRDfdU2TZV3HLtMJyhYc$ >)* provides the means/terms for the interchange.
>
>    5. How we do it
>
> Slowly and circumspectly. Even the Himalaya of convincing evidence that
> the Sumerian way of counting works all right will be subverted by erosion
> due to periodic changes. Empirical science shows how Nature does it,
> adapting to and within itself due to requirements posed by periodic
> changes. This basic technique had been discovered by some protoplasma and
> is solidly based in laws of physics. The transmission happens by means of
> synapses in Nature. That what is being transmitted has been given the name
> of *liaison* in a model depicting the interactions. Slowly, small
> insights will organize into a whole idea and on a day not so far off, one
> of he learned Friends will say to a different learned Friend,
>
> So, this means
>
>             Neurology works by using complicated truth tables, extents,
> frequencies, qualities;
>
>             The main idea is to use two perspectives: *along *and *across
> *time;
>
>             Using cycles from periodic changes, one has a complete catalog
> of all possible slices and therefore of all possible combinations of
> coincidences that can be contemporary;
>
>             Nature has provided for us elaborate tables, on which we can
> measure what happens next, based on that what is now;
>
>             There is a gearbox between the idea of a periodic change and
> such facts which make/show it possible that a periodic change is taking
> place. This gearbox consists of cycles;
>
>             The best introduction to understand emotions and actions and
> non-actions is to place 12 books on one’s desk, sorted on author-title, and
> reorder the sequence into title-author, all the while noting the occurrence
> and properties of cycles.
>
>
>
> Those books which are *in transit *are different to each other. Together,
> they constitute a logical reality which has its own rules, notwithstanding
> the identities of the books. Being in transit becomes a logical universe,
> like tourism is an industry as such. What we propose is to learn the rules
> of ‘transitism’ and become a competent operator like a tourism manager.
> Time is counted on the community of books in transit in many different
> ways. Nature appears to use a *metronome *cycle of 129 length which is
> inside/outside of a *folding* cycle, which is 128 long.
>
>
>
> Thank you, Kate for introducing the subject of how a commutative assembly
> and a sequenced assembly interact. Due to some rigidities of the Sumerian
> canon, it needs parallel to it the Accadian canon, which deviates to the
> Sumerian in following:
>
>    1. Limited number of units (Eddington 137)
>    2. Units are individuals (pairs of* a,b*)
>    3. Their habitat is subject to periodic changes (resortings)
>    4. The movement patterns of individuals due to periodic changes draw
>    their own geometry (serving as a spatial background)
>    5. The lateral relations among elements due to being members of cycles
>    create a system of *liaisons.*
>
>
>
> Thanks again
>
> Karl
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20240408/816efd4d/attachment-0001.html>