3 ms·

The field may or may not have progressed dramatically. However, ironically your claim of a lack of evidence, is not evidential itself, and I suspect the dismiss

by wamatt 14y ago

The field may or may not have progressed dramatically. However, ironically your claim of a lack of evidence, is not evidential itself, and I suspect the dismissal is unwarranted. Tor Nørretranders[0] was expanding on the work of German engineer Karl Küpfmüller[1]. Furthermore Kupfmuller,Nørretranders are not alone in this regard: "We can therefore conclude that the maximal information flow of the process of conscious sensory perception is about 40 bits/second -- many orders of magnitude below that taken in by receptors [nerve endings]." -- Manfred Zimmermann. "Neurophysiology of Sensory Systems" in Robert F. Schmidt ed., Fundamentals of Sensory Physiology (1986) p.116 "... If we do not act in the way we think we do, the reason is partly to do with the bandwidth of consciousness - its ability to transmit information measured in terms of bits per second. [...] The bandwidth of consciousness is around eighteen bits." --John N Gray (2002) [3][4] First prize would be evidence for a refutation of the 'consciousness operates at a low information rate' hypothesis, as opposed to conjecture or speculation. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_N%C3%B8rretranders http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_N%C3%B8rretranders [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_K%C3%BCpfm%C3%BCller http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_K%C3%BCpfm%C3%BCller [2] http://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Sensory-Physiology-Springer-Edition/dp/0387158707 http://www.amazon.com/Fundamentals-Sensory-Physiology-Spring... [3] http://www.amazon.com/Straw-Dogs-Thoughts-Humans-Animals/dp/0374270937 http://www.amazon.com/Straw-Dogs-Thoughts-Humans-Animals/dp/... [4] http://books.google.com/books?id=k5PkZXJEQqoC&lpg=PA45&dq=The%20bandwidth%20of%20consciousness%20is%20around%20eighteen%20bits&pg=PA45#v=onepage&q=The%20bandwidth%20of%20consciousness%20is%20around%20eighteen%20bits&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=k5PkZXJEQqoC&lpg=PA45&#...

pygy_ 14y ago
I put the number in question because the people who made these estimations didn't have a proper grasp of what consciousness may be. That being said, I didn't read the papers in question, and they may have a valid argument. However, I don't understand how you can encode in 16 per second the evolution of your current experience out of all the possible states your brain may be in and go to. There is a lot of compression due to expectations, but I still find it hard to believe that it is so low. Edit: For serial tasks (say, reading, listening to someone speak), the 16-40 bps range makes some sense, but I don't think that visual experience can be reduced that much. Edit 2: Take, say, music. You can encode the audible note tones on 6-7 bit. You can easily listen 4 notes chords played 4 times per second. We're already in the 100 bps ball park, and we haven't taken timbre and loudness into account.

by wamatt 14y ago

pygy_ 14y ago

I put the number in question because the people who made these estimations didn't have a proper grasp of what consciousness may be. That being said, I didn't read the papers in question, and they may have a valid argument. However, I don't understand how you can encode in 16 per second the evolution of your current experience out of all the possible states your brain may be in and go to. There is a lot of compression due to expectations, but I still find it hard to believe that it is so low. Edit: For serial tasks (say, reading, listening to someone speak), the 16-40 bps range makes some sense, but I don't think that visual experience can be reduced that much. Edit 2: Take, say, music. You can encode the audible note tones on 6-7 bit. You can easily listen 4 notes chords played 4 times per second. We're already in the 100 bps ball park, and we haven't taken timbre and loudness into account.