<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span lang="DE-AT">Addendum to
natural intelligence<span></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span lang="DE-AT"><span> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">They always said, if you have to explain what the article
means, the article is badly written. They also said, such things mostly happen,
because one presupposes something fundamental that needs no explicit
mentioning; but, they said, it can be that you are used to the idea and believe
it to be known to any and all.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The main meaning of the mentioning of the asynchronicity in
natural computers is that where there is no synchronicity there is no
causality. This is self-evident, as cause and effect have a temporal
neighbourhood, which is ordered, one before the other. In a web of neurons,
there can be no common clock, because the physiological processes of creating,
maintaining and upkeeping the cells are subject to a wide range of external and
internal differences. One can feed beans to a company of soldiers more or less
on schedule, using a clock, but the discharges of farts can by no stretch of
imagination assumed to be synchronised. We observe the discharge patterns but
cannot connect any one of them to a clock in any other but a quasi-stochastic,
statistical fashion. This is different to the electrically powered system, where
one always knows exactly, which of the switches is when in which state. Lacking
such a central clock, we have to design a naturally intelligent system based on
local synchronicities, but not on a concept of global cooperation. No teleology
in biology, for lack of central clocks (aside Sun, Moon, seasons, tide, hunger,
etc.).<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">We may for each individual cell state – in a quadrivial
fashion - that discharge is an effect of the cause of flooding with nutrients,
because here <i>discharge </i>follows <i>flooding</i>. The group of cells that
creates and manages an image of the fly in the brain of the frog can, however,
not be assumed to work along the <i>cause </i>precedes
<i>effect</i> principle. We are not about to
point out, while the frog targets the fly, any 1 of its cells having been fed in
such a way to have caused 1 discharge at that millisecond: this would be a
senseless approach. The causality not being present in the parts of the whole,
it can hardly be present as we regard the whole. The <i>Gestalt</i>, said to be <i>more than
the parts of the whole,</i> is an illusion of the perception. Cause and effect
can be mixed up, therefore the idea of a rational causality to be the guiding principle
in biologic matters must be given up.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">The method Nature appears to use deals with a sufficiently large
number of individuals among which there are some types, each with a number of
clones. (One may imagine a grand dozen of things that can have a good dozen of
different kinds.) These are flooded with nutrients. The hypothesis is, that the
resulting collection of discharges will have a typical distribution, which is
descriptive of the kinds of nutrients, the modalities of the flooding and
anything extraordinary. The constant background noise generated by the discharges
has no specific attributes, other than being the standard noise, the etalon,
the Zero value of information. Any extraordinary nature of a flooding will
cause a specific deviation of the background noise from its most expected
varieties. The message is contained in the noise; the message makes itself
recognisable by the characteristics of the noise’s deviation from its most
predictable form. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Now to cause and effect: is it a consequence or a cause that
during a reorder of pairs (a,b) from order [b,a] into order [a,b] after 6 steps
a partial state of the collection is recurrent that has already been the case?
(You may propose better examples, e.g. for collisions, transformations,
impossibilities, etc.). Once the elements, their properties, and the properties
of the properties exist, the concept of “order” is an implication. What I try
to say here, is that an implication is neither a cause nor an effect. An
implication is a logical operation which lives in the moment, therefore outside
of the world of causation. Once we have 1,2,3,… and their relations among each
other in good standing, we have defined the term order. What if Nature is made
up of pairs, like Castor and Pollux, and many other argumentative examples, and
we represent the first few of her elements in the form of pairs (a,b)? Then,
questions of places and occupants of places inevitably turn up. Territoriality
being a mighty force in the deep roots of our intelligence and culture, it could
turn out to be helpful to see, how the natural numbers fight it out among
themselves. (Spoiler alert: <i>17 </i>carries
the day.)<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Rhythmonomia has uttered her first sentence: The sequence N
is a period of unpredictable length, where each of the segments spawn off a
cycle, which cycles each have 1 more element than the cycle spawned in the previous
segment. Isn’t she cute?<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Thank you for being pen-pals on a subject that is a
conversation-killer. Since a few decades, I have had not many successes trying
to engage clever people in a conversation about patterns to be observed while
one re-sequences things. This is not a subject people get excited about. <i>Au contraire, </i>usually people show
symptoms of unease, bewilderment, embarrassment and change the subject or leave
my company. I do not want to believe that it is my special training and
professional experience that allows me to access highly shocking, horrible
subjects, too. Aside a few juicy anecdotes, my normal clientele does not
necessitate a deep un-dressing of taboos, de-culturalising, contra-anthropomorphising,
prejudice-sensitivising trainings that were commensurate to the avoidance of
the subject by non-psychologists and psychologists alike. What is so reluctant
on the idea that one sequences and re-sequences logical tokens and watches the patterns
that emerge (which are neither cause nor effect, neither praemisse nor
consequence, but implications)? The hobby is not necrophilia, but rather clean,
and the pairs (a,b) may appear disoriented, almost everywhere or to be get lost
as they wander around while finding the ultimate order, but it is a tidy
workshop and not a revolting sludge of blood and gore. The subject is not <i>salonfaehig</i>, it appears. In polite
company, you do not discuss recurrent affairs, matters relating to places, one’s
own place, some minimal changes but otherwise all the same, one’s position in a
line, the expected places for many a person, one’s actual as opposed to
expected place, the rightfulness of it, how predictable it all was, what they
call order these days, is there an order at all, if only there was an order,
and related subjects. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Many thanks to Pedro for having made this possible.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0cm 0cm 8pt;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">Karl<span></span></p>
</div>