>Deborah
>
>..what if you used the same method to compare them?
>I would probably also throw in another test: matching the two
>ontologies (brainwaves and vegetables) looking for patterns of
>similarity.
>
>...what if you also looked for opposition and contrast?
>
>I hope you will join the team!
>
>
>
>
>Rick
>
>
>BTW - I will be attending Tucson VIII (aka. "Towards A Science of
>Consciousness") this year. If anyone else is going, you'll find me
>tracing the footsteps of Carlos Casteneda and Don Juan Matos ;-)
>
>
>
>I guess I am in a state of inbetweeness tongue in cheek and dead serious
>It's an experiment applying quantum logic principles,
>
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness_causes_collapse>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness_causes_collapse (01)
Yeh, yeh. I few years ago I had a long debate with Henry Stapp about
this stuff. I remain totally unconvinced. And BTW, the quotes from
Heisenberg and d'Espagnat given in that article refer only to the
Copenhagen interpretation of QM. There are now interpretations of QM
which treat the world as an objective reality, cf (my favorite) (02)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation (03)
In this account, there is no 'collapse', so its a hard stretch to
posit that consciousness causes or results from it. (04)
BTW, an 'interpretation' of QM is a story that one tells to try to
make some kind of sense of the observed QM phenomena, and which (one
way or another) conforms to the actual equations of QM, which are now
empirically verified to an extraordinary degree of precision, I think
something like 14 places of decimals. That is, these are not rival
*theories*: they all make the very same empirical predictions, but
they tell a different story about why one gets those predictions. The
much-publicized Quantum Wierdesses about wave/particle duality,
Schroedinger's cat, wave-function collapse, etc., are all part of the
first QM interpretation, the Copenhagen one: but there are many other
possible stories one can use to understand QM with. You choose your
favorite scientific mythology at this point. (05)
>
>BTW - what tools can I download other than protege to view rdf (rdf
>viewer is not accessible for download from here) (06)
You can try COE, our graphic viewer for RDF and OWL, available from here (07)
http://cmap.ihmc.us/coe/?page_id=4 (08)
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (010)
|