网范文：“ Classical Probabilistic Computer Model of Consciousness” 我们表明,人类意识可以建模，量子计算机没有意识，关于取决于普朗克常数,这也是量子现象的警示信号。这篇哲学范文讲述的是对于意识的概念。意识是描述所面向对象设计与动态定义的类和对象。经济理论也都是如此，英语论文题目，我们认为意识也有冗余。有许多对于意识的观点，其中的一些观点试图区分意识,思维和大脑等。思想是意识模糊的形式。然而意识似乎被赋予了神奇的能力,许多难以完全基于大脑的属性。
人类的大脑在某种意义上是一个电磁错觉。在现实中大脑是一样脆弱的。我们看到大脑的大杂烩电磁电路，英语论文范文，基于神经元和其他大脑结构。然后我们把人的内心,它的团结、清晰、逻辑略论、和其他功能组成一个巨大的实体。下面的范文进行详述。
ABSTRACT
We show that human consciousness can be modeled as a classical (not quantum) probabilistic computer. A quantum computer representation does not appear to be indicated because no known feature of consciousness depends on Planck’s constant h, the telltale sign of quantum phenomena. It is argued that the facets of consciousness are describable by an object-oriented design with dynamically defined classes and objects. A comparison to economic theory is also made. We argue consciousness may also have redundant, protective mechanisms.
A View of Consciousness
There are numerous views of Consciousness. Some of these views attempt to make distinctions between consciousness, the mind, and the brain (body). The mind is the nebulous thing we associate with consciousness, feeling and thought. The body – in particular the brain – is obviously connected to the mind and supports the mind’s activity. Yet Consciousness seems endowed with miraculous abilities that many find hard to base entirely on the properties of the brain. The human brain is in a sense an electromagnetic illusion. The brain is just as insubstantial as consciousness in reality. There is a general lack of appreciation of the power of electromagnetic circuits to create illusions. We see the brain as a hodge-podge of electromagnetic circuitry based on neurons and other brain structures. We then view the mind, and its unity, clarity, powers of logic and analysis, and other features composing one great entity. It is difficult to reconcile the unity of consciousness of the mind with the brain that implements it. Yet it is more difficult to deny that the mind is based entirely on the brain. Modern research1 clearly shows the dependence of the properties of the mind on the features of the brain. Consider the effect on the mind of brain diseases or of injuries to the brain. Modern computer technology actually offers a very clear analogy to the relation of Consciousness and the brain. Consider a modern Personal Computer, a PC. If we open it up we see an ugly hodgepodge of chips and computer circuitry. By only looking at the innards of the PC we have no concept of what this electronic menagerie can generate. Then we turn on the PC and see the fabulous graphics of a modern computer operating system: lots of windows containing exciting.
Consciousness: Quantum or Classical Probabilistic
Our studies of space, time, and matter – the Cosmos – have led us to nothingness. Consciousness itself is not material. It is also nothingness. Both Consciousness and the Cosmos are given shape by laws. The laws structure the “nothingness” and provide the “nothingness” with features and properties. In the case of the Cosmos we have made a case for a Quantum Computer formulation of the fundamental theories of Physics. In the case of Consciousness we propose that Consciousness be best viewed within the framework of Classical Probabilistic Computers. A Classical Probabilistic Computer is a purely classical computer (no quantum effects) that produces a variety of different outputs from a given input to the computer. Each possible output has a certain probability of occurring. The probabilities are all strictly classical – they are not of quantum mechanical origin.
The Problem of Consciousness – The Lesson of the Conch
After determining that Consciousness is classical physics and chemistry and best treated as a statistical probabilistic phenomenon we confront the overwhelming complexity of Consciousness. We also confront Nature’s protective mechanisms that may obscure our understanding of Consciousness. Consider the conch Strombas gigas. Ninety-nine per cent of this giant pink conch is made of a mineral called aragonite that is a form of calcium carbonate that breaks like chalk. Yet the shell of the conch resists fractures a hundred to a thousand times better than the mineral of which it is formed.
Nature has developed a microscopic structure for the conch that surrounds each aragonite crystal in its shell with a protein that changes the toughness of the shell by enabling fractures to spread without breaking the material. In addition the shell has three layers with the “grain” of each layer perpendicular to the grain of adjacent layers. This composite cross-grained material gives the conch shell extraordinary strength. If Nature expended such effort during evolution to protect the humble conch, then what effort must have been expended to protect the workings of the Consciousness of Man? Coincidentally the brain has three main neuroanatomical arrangements. First there is the thalamocortical system that networks the thalamus, the cortex and cortical regions. Secondly, there is a network of long polysynaptic loops that extend between the cortex and the cortical appendages. Thirdly, there is the diffuse network of projecting value systems (the noradrenergic locus coeruleus) that extends over the entire brain. The projecting value systems network appears to fire (react) whenever an important event happens such as a loud noise. When it fires it causes the release of neuromodulator chemicals that appear to influence the resulting neural response to the event. The projecting value system may be a way of protecting the brain against over-reacting to major disturbing events.
The Current Theory of Consciousness
Realizing the complexity of the phenomena of Consciousness and the added complexity of protective mechanisms that Nature might have built into the structure of Consciousness it is no surprise that we do not have a satisfactory Theory of Consciousness. This situation is not without precedent. Similar situations have occurred in the “hard” sciences and in the social sciences. For example, George Uhlenbeck, the co-discoverer of electron spin and one of the outstanding physicists of the mid-twentieth century, spent many years trying to develop a satisfactory theoretical framework for understanding Statistical Mechanics from a microscopic point of view. He told this author (about 1970) that he felt he did not succeed. Uhlenbeck had the advantage of a completely known theory of microscopic particles and a well-known theory of the Statistical Mechanics of large numbers of particles.
Despite these advantages he was not able to relate the microscopic theory with the theory of the Statistical Mechanics of a large number of microscopic particles. Relating different levels of theories such as a microscopic theory and a macroscopic theory is difficult. The situation of theories of Consciousness and theories of the brain is much less favorable. We know the overall neuroanatomy (structure) of the brain. We have a pretty good idea of how some features such as vision map to specific brain areas. We have a decent understanding of brain neurochemistry. We have a lot of data on features of Consciousness and some ideas on how these features map to brain features. But we do not have a detailed understanding of the brain. And we do not have a complete understanding of Consciousness. In particular we can usually only make qualitative statements about Consciousness. We don’t even know what the relevant variables are for conscious phenomena. Who can say how to quantify emotions such as fear or anger? We need at least a Richter scale for emotion. Given this state of affairs a detailed theory of Consciousness similar to a theory of Physics or Chemistry is no where in sight. We can only expect qualitative descriptions and rules for most phenomena of Consciousness. We can only expect general relationships between brain activity and phenomena of Consciousness. We can expect certain specialized (simple) phenomena of Consciousness to be based on detailed brain activity.
A Similarity between Theories of Consciousness and Economic Theory
The study of Consciousness is plagued by the lack of a quantitative framework to describe phenomena. We don’t know the relevant variables that describe a phenomenon of Consciousness. We usually don’t know what to measure, and, in the cases where we do find something to measure, we don’t know how to measure it or how to interpret it or how to relate it to brain activity quantitatively. This state of affairs is reminiscent of the situation of the Economics of a country. At the microscopic level we can in principle trace every transaction, aggregate all the transactions in the country’s economy and thus obtain a complete view of the economy. We can also trace the evolution of the economy in time. However we do not have a detailed complete quantitative theory of Economics. As a result we can only make predictions based on extrapolations of trends. If we change the pattern of financial transactions in the country we cannot unambiguously predict the effects on the economy. We can only create models based on assumptions. Some models are quite good. But they are no replacement for a complete theory of Economics. The modern theory of Economics was born in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries in the work of Adam Smith and others. It started with general qualitative statements based on simple observations.
网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文作品权归所有；未经官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯作品权现象，保留一切法学追诉权。()
更多范文欢迎访问我们主页 当然有需求可以和我们 联系交流。-X()
|
