<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" id="owaParaStyle"></style><style type="text/css"></style><style type="text/css"></style><style type="text/css"></style><style type="text/css"></style>
</head>
<body fpstyle="1" ocsi="0">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;"><br>
<div style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #000000; font-size: 16px">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRpF671329" style="direction: ltr;"><font face="Tahoma" size="2" color="#000000"><b>De:</b> PEDRO CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ<br>
<b>Enviado el:</b> lunes, 28 de noviembre de 2016 19:48<br>
<b>Para:</b> fis@listas.unizar.es<br>
<b>Asunto:</b> Physical Phenomenology and Forms of Information (From Jerry Chandler)<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>
<div style="direction:ltr; font-family:Tahoma; color:#000000; font-size:10pt"><font face="Times"><font size="3">Da: "Jerry LR Chandler" <<a href="https://e-aj.my.com/compose?To=jerry_lr_chandler@mac.com" target="_blank">jerry_lr_chandler@mac.com</a>><br>
Data: 28/11/2016 5.35<br>
A: "FIS Webinar"<<a href="https://e-aj.my.com/compose?To=fis@listas.unizar.es" target="_blank">fis@listas.unizar.es</a>><br>
Cc: <<a href="https://e-aj.my.com/compose?To=tozziarturo@libero.it" target="_blank">tozziarturo@libero.it</a>><br>
Ogg: Physical Phenomenology and Forms of Information Re: [Fis] NEW DISCUSSION SESSION--TOPOLOGICAL BRAIN.<br>
</font><br>
<font size="3">FIS Colleagues:</font></font>
<div><font size="3" face="Times"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font size="3" face="Times">The questions raised in this post are highly provocative. From the perspective of physical phenomenology, it is necessary to identify corresponding illations between the electric fields of brain dynamics (such as EEG patterns)
and the mathematics of electric fields / electro-magnetism. It goes without saying that such correspondences must associate the measured quantities with the theoretical quantities. In other words, the units of measurements of “brain activity" should be associated
with Maxwell’s equations. In the philosophy of science, this is the basic distinction between traditional mathematical narratives as pure abstractions and APPLIED mathematical theories of explanations of scientific facts. </font></div>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div><font size="3"><span style="font-family:Times">My responds to these questions are based on the propositional functions and the formation operators of applied (organic) mathematics. </span><br style="font-family:Times">
</font>
<div style="font-family:Times">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote style="font-family:Helvetica; border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid; border-left-color:rgb(133,175,49); margin:0px 0px 0px 10px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px">
<blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div>
<p style="text-align:justify"><b><span style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">TOPOLOGY AND BRAIN FUNCTION</font></span></b></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><b><span style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3"><br>
</font></span></b></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><b><span style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">Arturo Tozzi </font></span></b></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">Center for Nonlinear Science, University of North Texas</font></span></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><span lang="IT" style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">1155 Union Circle, #311427</font></span></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><span lang="IT" style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">Denton, TX 76203-5017, USA, and</font></span></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><span lang="IT" style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><a><font size="3">tozziarturo@libero.it</font></a></span></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><b><span style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">James F. Peters</font></span></b></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Manitoba</font></span></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><font size="3"><span style="line-height:23.11199951171875px">75A Chancellor</span><span style="line-height:23.11199951171875px">’</span><span style="line-height:23.11199951171875px">s Circle, Winnipeg, MB R3T 5V6</span></font></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">james.peters3@umanitoba.ca</font></span></p>
<div style="text-align:justify"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<p style="text-align:justify"><b><span style="line-height:19.260000228881836px"><font size="3">Questions.</font></span></b></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"><font size="3">1)<span style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span>Could we use projections and mappings, in order to describe brain activity?</font></p>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<font size="3">JLRC A propositional function is needed to associate the logic of the theorem with the physical phenomenology of brain activity. The bi-polarity of electrical particles that generate brain function make this task extra-ordinarily
unlikely.</font>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote style="font-family:Helvetica; border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid; border-left-color:rgb(133,175,49); margin:0px 0px 0px 10px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px">
<blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p style="text-align:justify"><font size="3">2)<span style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span>Is such a topological approach linked with previous claims of old “epistemologists” of recent “neuro-philosophers”?</font></p>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<font size="3">JLRC This question is not scientifically meaningful to me. But, see my comment on physical Kantianism below.<br>
</font>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote style="font-family:Helvetica; border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid; border-left-color:rgb(133,175,49); margin:0px 0px 0px 10px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px">
<blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p style="text-align:justify"><font size="3">3)<span style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span>Is such a topological approach linked with current neuroscientific models?</font></p>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<font size="3">JLRC<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>No. present-day neuroscientific models are all based on electrical particles and organized collections of electrical particles. </font>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote style="font-family:Helvetica; border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid; border-left-color:rgb(133,175,49); margin:0px 0px 0px 10px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px">
<blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p style="text-align:justify"><font size="3">4)<span style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span>The BUT and its variants display four ingredients, e.g., a continuous function, antipodal points, changes of dimensions and the possibility of types of
dimensions other than the spatial ones. Is it feasible to assess brain function in terms of BUT and its variants?</font></p>
<p style="text-align:justify"></p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<font size="3">JLRC<span style="white-space:pre"> </span>I do not find a propositional function in this interrogative, so I respond in the negative. Physical phenomenology associated with brain dynamics are discrete physical events, such as ion transport and
neuronal firings. But, of course, if anyone can find a way to associate continuous topological spaces with quantum electro-dynamics of angular momentum necessary for brain activity, then I would retract my opinion.</font>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote style="font-family:Helvetica; border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid; border-left-color:rgb(133,175,49); margin:0px 0px 0px 10px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px">
<blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p style="text-align:justify"><font size="3">5)<span style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span>How to operationalize the procedures?</font></p>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<font size="3">JLRC: Current theories of neuronal activity consists of several logical forms of physical sublations from the electrical particles to the mereological propositional functions of the whole. Which physical phenomena is the theory seeking to “operationalize”?</font>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote style="font-family:Helvetica; border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid; border-left-color:rgb(133,175,49); margin:0px 0px 0px 10px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px">
<blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p style="text-align:justify"><font size="3">6)<span style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span>Is it possible to build a general topological theory of the brain?</font></p>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<font size="3">JLRC Of course it is. It is just mathematics. One such general mathematical model was published and it appears to be mathematically sound. The [FIS] informational challenge is find correspondence relations between mathematical symbols and
physical symbols such that the mathematical theory can be tested. The scientific challenge is to find causal pathways for physical phenomena, whatever the mathematical structure of the theory is. </font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote style="font-family:Helvetica; border-left-width:1px; border-left-style:solid; border-left-color:rgb(133,175,49); margin:0px 0px 0px 10px; padding:0px 0px 0px 10px">
<blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p style="text-align:justify"><font size="3">7)<span style="font-family:'Times New Roman'"> </span>Our “from afar” approach takes into account the dictates of far-flung branches, from mathematics to physics, from algebraic topology, to neuroscience.
Do you think that such broad multidisciplinary tactics could be the key able to unlock the mysteries of the brain, or do you think that more specific and “on focus” approaches could give us more chances? </font></p>
<div><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<font size="3">JLRC: Perhaps the term “consciousness” should be substituted for the word “brain”? Extensive biological knowledge of information processing in brains from organisms with only a few neurons to very large organisms with upward of ten to the ninth
neurons exists. This information is generated from physical measurements. This information on the physical phenomenology associated with the physical methodology for measuring brain function (activity) is published in the open literature and available to
any scientist who is interested in analysis of physical phenomenology.</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">From my perspective, the deep premise underlying the hypothesis presented here is inadequate to describe the physical phenomenology of brain activity. Perhaps this premise rests on the a priori Kantian notions
of space and time rather than the systematic categories of Aristotelian causality. </font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">At it’s root, my view is simple. Any abstract mathematical theorem has meaning only within the mathematical symbol system. Any model of physical phenomenology requires symbolic quantities of physical units of
measure be associated with the symbolic mathematics. The meaning specified by the mathematical symbol is not the meaning specified by a physical symbol.</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">Given the theory of quantum mechanics and the critical role that angular momenta play in the organization of brain dynamics, I would conjecture that it is conceivable that electro-dynamic equations akin to Feynman
diagrams are needed to quantify brain phenomenon. Conceptually, one can speculate that such a hypothetical diagram for changes in angular momentum might take a conceptual form such as:</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">A + B —> [ACB —> A’CB’] —> A’ + B’.</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">where the alphabet symbols represent different collections of electrical particles.</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">Cheers</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">Jerry</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">Jerry LR Chandler</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">Research Professor</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">George Mason University</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3">Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study </font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
<div style="font-family:Times"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>