RE: Mathematical Neuroscience and The Spirit
February 28, 2013 at 7:51 pm
(This post was last modified: February 28, 2013 at 7:56 pm by oanghelidi.)
Quote:How could you even claim to know this?
That's what I keep saying. I do not know. But that I know: that if the main assumption is wrong then consciousness is not what is supposed to be. And it is supposed to be about information processing in the brain. Well... that ain't the case.
Quote:If you can't define something, you can't test it.
If an assumption is invalid the opposite is true.
Quote:The simple fact of the matter is that our current technology is unable to create a computer simulation of the human brain.For sure... What is missing is the computer power. (eyes rolled...)
What most neuroscientists lack are theoretical models. I on the other hand I got that.
Quote:You are taking information from somewhere and bending it to fit whatever wacko idea you happen to be ruminating on. This is not science. This is hardly even a good parody of science.I am using the same neuronal models available in literature. That's where I take them. But I do add to that my theoretical findings.
Quote:This is not science.So you say.