The Binding Problem - A New Interpretation

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Reiku, Oct 1, 2007.

  1. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    The Binding Problem actually covers many psychological and neurofunctional phenomena. We experience speech at the mouth of a speaker even though we might be listening through headphones, yet we can bind these two experiences together, creating almost the same information... And how is sound and touch invariantly bound to vision?
    Take brail. For blind people, it is a savior. If it wasn't for the Binding of reality, blind people could not touch the inscriptions and know the knowledge simultaneously.
    Smell is also directly linked to our understanding of vision. If we could smell a pot roast, and instead saw Ravioli, we would look for the pot roast because our senses are telling us that is not what we are observing. Even a rare disorder called synesthesia allows the subject to actually ''taste'' words... This bizarre phenomena also leads to the mystery of Binding. Though to be fair, we know that words don't have actual tastes, so the concept of it all isn't true to reality, but it is very real to the reality of the subject.

    From my investigation of the Binding Problem, I find that all the senses will produce [nearly] the same information, and these must be related to a type of symmetry, just like similar analogous symmetries found in Isospins developed by Werner Heisenberg.
    The brain must be mapped out as an in-put, processing, out-put system. All senses will be subjected through an in-put system. This will reach the neural networks where it will be processed. Once this information is processed, there will be an out-put. I interpret this as knowledge. Whatever the answer to the Binding Problem, each sensory perception will have to abide by this system... This obviously includes sight, touch, sound, taste and visual.

    But what if Binding can be answered with a state of conditioning? First, what conditioning am i talking about?
    Well, we can condition the mind to become pro's in certain area's with extensive training.

    Take calculations. We will all remember the days when we where children, given sums like 13 x 7... Then, it would have taken us to use our imaginations to calculate the answer... Nothing of a Binding nature there... But if we where to continually do this, there will come a time we will be able to just look at the sum, and know the answer... Is this a state of Binding? Sure it is. It is very like using visual perception to read written language, and process the information as an outcome.
    Might it be that we have conditioned our reality so that it seems smooth and continuous? Well, maybe in some cases... like smelling a pot-roast ebcause we have had it before, but this conditioning rule cannot surely be applied to all of them, such as how each frame of time presents to us a visual space unbroaken, and not presented in discontinuous flashes. Of course, i could be very wrong... But i'll stick to that hypothesis.

    There is another answer, but this answer will be very controversial and will be shrouded in mystery... This is my theory that we have all-information embedded in our beings... Dormant since birth, and it is based on two presumptions.
    I've always had a problem accepting the idea that information comes into our beings. I'm not exactly sure why. I have always thought of the human being, as being a gigantic memory unit, storing all information in a potential mixed state. Indeed, such an idea shouldn't be difficult to understand, based on two premises:

    1. That entropy, causing the distinction of past and future, makes our perception of the future as something we move towards, and when we do, it seems as though the future is already apart of our memories. For this reason, one must suspect that somehow thought and wishes exists beyond the observer.

    2. That information or knowledge about a system instantly becomes known to the observer upon measurement.

    Now, if we take premise one seriously, thought and memory exists beyond the observer. As much as this might just be a psychological illusory of the mind, we might even consider taking such an idea seriously. For instance, the human observer exists in the present, and we can have memory about the past. However, whenever we come to remember the past, we do no such thing as jumping backwards in time and recollecting the memory being asked for. Instead, we reevaluate an experience we had, and recreate the past in the present as memory. Thus, the real question is, when we do come to experience the future (in the present), how is it that the future already exists as memory? Does thought and wishes exist beyond the observer?

    I think so - but perhaps not in the way I’ve been making out. You see, one might think that the mind jumps into the future, and this is how thoughts can exist beyond the observer... memories of the future. However, as we have seen, the mind is bound to the present time. The only other way to explain this, is if we have a complete record of future events in our beings, just as we have a record of the past; but the record of the future must be seen as a record we can potentially remember, but cannot, because experience must activate these memories (just as the experience of the past activates our memories of a past event).

    Thus, the record of the past can be now put in terms of ''real'', and we can say that the future is a record that is ''virtual''; this is only an idiosyncratic method I am going to use, to distinguish the differences. I would like to note, that the past and future have no existence... the past makes up the present time as a record. The only difference with my interpretation is that the future also makes up a record in the present - but this record differs quite a bit from any other type of record we might suspect through subjective knowledge.

    It turns out, I believe, that both the past and the future is made up of conscious experience, which in turn, exists in the present time as a record of memory - one real and the other potentially real. We must be the perfect machines capable of storing these records, as one exists as memory, and the other is unfolded to us as memory.

    If we take the second premise seriously, then we might ask how we come to process information [almost] as instant as we come to measure something. One example, is how we come to analyze written language, and know it almost just as quickly? In fact, how can blind people touch brail, and equally know it just as fast? How do we bind optical and other sensory perceptions into the phenomena of knowing about it almost just as quick? How do we crystalize reality into a consistent set of frames running smoothly into each other, rather than horrid, discontinuous memoentary flashes? Simply because the brain must be recieving this information from a local source, similar to a hidden variable.

    The only way (I believe) consciousness can perform such tasks, is by saying that we do in fact have a record of all-information about spacetime... Thus, when push comes to shove, consciousness can process the knowledge of a system, because that information is already contained within us. Indeed, such psychic phenomena such as 'Deja Vu' might be explainable, if certain sensory perceptions are abnormal, and certainty get's mixed up with the uncertain realms of knowledge. In fact, psychic predictions of the future might be explainable, if we do indeed have a record of the future in embedded in our consciousness!
    Is this so hard to believe? Haven't we heard from many great physicists that everything is in fact predetermined in the universe? Even Einstein once said that everything plays to a mystical pipers tune. But to believe in such an idea, means that we must abandon certain psychologies. If we have every piece of information that [we] will ever come to know in a lifetime, why does it unravel its knowledge’s to us in the way it does?

    This question is a good question. It was first posited to me by my friend Brian. The only way I can explain this, is by saying we need additional information from another 'information carrier,' after all, that is what we are. We are information carriers, which we learned from our parents, the internet, the T.V., whatever source we learn this information from.

    Thus, one can say that information can exist within us in a dormant state, and becomes ''excited'' whenever we have an experience - here, we must recognize that information isn't only obtained from others, but we can piece together our own analysis of a situation - and because of this, there are two ways to obtain information. After all, there must have been a way for our ancestors to obtain knowledge without anybody there to tell them about this original knowledge. Keep this thought for a moment. Another problem is solved by saying that all information we will ever come to know is stored inside of us. How does self-obtained knowledge come about? By saying we have potential information contained within us, would allow us to understand even the most alien knowledge. But this knowledge must compliment our existences; and something inside of the mind can ''pop'' the question and the answer is excited within us.

    Ok... Here is an analogy. Computer systems can have blank spaces ready to contain knowledge. However, for this blank system to record information, there must be someone there to press the button, so-to-say. Who presses the button for us? Is this God? In fact, I believe this. I believe God is our programmer, allowing us to know absolutely anything we will ever come to know! But for this to happen, the space inside us, needs to be [programmed] exactly to contain this information. For instance, imagine a computer program needing 100 bits to process a certain flow of information. If this information requires 200 bits to process the information, how can it operate the function asked for?

    As far as I know, no one has made such a postulate, as to say we have information contained within us. Such information would answer not only everyday phenomena, but also the phenomena of the unknown. I'll leave you with one last thought. We can have any information about a future event, so long as the mind can jump into this record with quite an extent, considering how unconscious the mind is. The more unconscious the mind is, the more it can excite a time and event that has not yet come to pass. In fact, if consciousness actually means we are mostly unconscious, then we may be able to have such psychic experiences while we are awake! The only problem is for us to recognize when such a phenomenon is occurring.

    Thus, my conclusion of the Binding Problem is that the information we percieve is a local effect, and that information from the outside does not flow into our beings. However, this concerns the Binding Problem. I am open to theories suggesting that the mind receives information from the past and the future... Afterall, as far as physics knows, this is how the present is created.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    Well then just how do we gather information then? I've always listened, read or observed what was going on around me to gain knowledge as well as entertainment.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    As i mentioned in the thread... please do keep up...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    ''But to believe in such an idea, means that we must abandon certain psychologies. If we have every piece of information that [we] will ever come to know in a lifetime, why does it unravel its knowledge’s to us in the way it does?

    This question is a good question. It was first posited to me by my friend Brian. The only way I can explain this, is by saying we need additional information from another 'information carrier,' after all, that is what we are. We are information carriers, which we learned from our parents, the internet, the T.V., whatever source we learn this information from.

    Thus, one can say that information can exist within us in a dormant state, and becomes ''excited'' whenever we have an experience - here, we must recognize that information isn't only obtained from others, but we can piece together our own analysis of a situation - and because of this, there are two ways to obtain information. After all, there must have been a way for our ancestors to obtain knowledge without anybody there to tell them about this original knowledge. Keep this thought for a moment. Another problem is solved by saying that all information we will ever come to know is stored inside of us. How does self-obtained knowledge come about? By saying we have potential information contained within us, would allow us to understand even the most alien knowledge. But this knowledge must compliment our existences; and something inside of the mind can ''pop'' the question and the answer is excited within us.''

    Edit > I would also like to state that from the Bohmian intepretation, we find that all particles are on a preplanned course. Thus they have in mediation of a quantum potential, all information neccessery to accomplish their tasks. We too are a compilation of these statistical averages, and thus we must also have a quantum potential that has ''told'' every particle i am made of what to do, and collectively, what to think and say.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    What a TOTAL load of pure bunk!!! You would do well to spend some time learning about Occam's Razor - things are MUCH less complicated than you visualize them being.:bugeye: You waste a tremendous amount of efforts and words (!) on very simple things in a effort to make them as complex as you possibly can!!

    Tell us something: you say your occupation is writing - exactly what do you write?
     
  8. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    He writes allot!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Heh! THAT'S a fact!!!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Attack! Attack!
    Someone is challanging my thread!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    ''Read Only... You said...What a TOTAL load of pure bunk!!! You would do well to spend some time learning about Occam's Razor - things are MUCH less complicated than you visualize them being. You waste a tremendous amount of efforts and words (!) on very simple things in a effort to make them as complex as you possibly can!!

    Tell us something: you say your occupation is writing - exactly what do you write?''

    First, can i just say, i would like to leave my job out of this. It really isn't relative. If you are asking simply, what i write, then in response i write: A new age of physics concerning interpretations of the human psyche combined with physics...
    Right, as for making things more difficult, i do not believe i have. But suppose i have, this interpretation cannot be made any more simpler from a De-Broglie-Bohm Interpretation of quantum physics.
    As i already edited < I would also like to state that from the Bohmian intepretation, we find that all particles are on a preplanned course. Thus they have in mediation of a quantum potential, all information neccessery to accomplish their tasks. We too are a compilation of these statistical averages, and thus we must also have a quantum potential that has ''told'' every particle i am made of what to do, and collectively, what to think and say...
    The main principle asks... ''If all particles are on a preplanned course, then the wave function had made a collapse for [everything] during the first instant of big bang.''
    If this is true, then my body, composed of billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of particles have strived to create a whole unit... myself... but the predetermined nature cannot dissipate at my macro-level. I must also be a creature of determined action. If this is so, then so is the quantum information i will ever come to know.

    Reiku :m:
     
  11. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Just more nonsense! You are completely ignoring the Uncertainty Principle in your zany idea that "all particles are on a preplanned course." That's just plain nuts. Particles collide with one another and take off in entirely new and different direction contrary to their original paths. And then do it again and again.

    In your thread about melting ice you mentioned that perhaps you should stick with things you actually know something about. I respectfully suggest that you should apply that same thought to THIS and other topics as well. I'm almost overwhelmed by your sheer lack of understanding!:bugeye:
     
  12. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    You ignorant old man. I've already explained that the Bohmian Interpretation allows for preplanned particles. This does not defy the uncertainty principle.

    Yes i will stick to this. As i said, as you so incontravertibly mentioned, in my ice melting thread, i will stick to this. The Binding Problem is well-known in physics, and so long as physics investigates it, so will I. Can i offer you some advice? Before you go and dish this work, go and learn about the De-Broglie-Bohm Interpretation. You might not be soooo quick in the future.
     
  13. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Just watch it with the name-calling, Bub. Next time I'll report you for it.

    I already know about the DBBI - apparently more than you do. For example, the DBBI introduces a rigid trajectory on the minisuperspace without assuming an outside observer or causing collapse of the wave function. The bolded part is in direct contradiction to a claim you made elsewhere that without an observer there is no reality.

    So eat your own words!!!
     
  14. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Ah, but now you are clutching at straws. The observer is also intrinsic to to the very beginning. Wen the big bang happened, the information containing the observer actually streamed from big bang.
    Now don't get me wrong here. Whilst the observer is not given fantastic credit in the Bohmian Interprtetation, it goes without saying that we still don't even know which interpretation is the correct one.
    There is damning evidence to suggest superdimensional link between the observer and the observed. Though the Bohmian Interpretation will go through some changes i presume over the next 10 years or so. It has already been brought back into existence through superluminal information speeds according to the quantum entanglement theory.

    ''Just watch it with the name-calling, Bub. Next time I'll report you for it.''

    Hypocrite. Its no more insulting than what you said to me in the ice berg thread, so get over it, and eat your own words, bub.
     
  15. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Just a footnote here: I've never once insulted you personally - just your idiotic statements. There's a BIG difference between attacking people and what they say. Do you understand that?
     
  16. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    What observer?
    More speculation on your part.
     
  17. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Speculation?
    Oli... no... its not. If everything was predetermined, does that not also include us? Are you so ready to disconnect the observer from the whole?

    And yes Read you did insult me. You insulted my intelligence, and i'm sure there was a few sly digs in at my country... i'll just check it again, just to make sure...
     
  18. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I think you are making it too complicated. We seem to perceive things in the present, but actually we live in a virtual world just a fraction of a second behind reality.

    The mind is a computer, and certain structures can substitute for others, such as when blind people use their highly developed optical centers to process sound. Perceptions are processed information, in the beginning it's only information, which is why we can experience synesthesia. Information can get sent to the "wrong" location in the brain.

    "Binding" is when the brain makes assumptions about incoming perception, it does this to save time and effort. It fits perception into expectations, and allows us to detect patterns, especially ones we are conditioned to see.
     
  19. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    IF everything was predetermined?
    More speculation.
    And predetermination in and of itself isn't "an observer".
     
  20. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Probably the most intelligent, and diplomatic reply i have had. Thank you for that.
    I do disagree with the first statement though, and here is why.
    You are partially correct. The two dimensional image the retina obtains needs to go through processes before it reaches configuration into the three dimensional phenomena of the neural network.
    When a photon (a particle of light) hits off the retina, changes occur inside of the cells. A molecule called the Cis-Retinal changes into a Trans-Retinal; it isn't a chemical change, but rather a change in the spatial structure of the molecule. This changes a protein that is already present in the cells of the retina, and this protein attaches itself to another protein, because of a chemical change in the original protein. More happens.
    Molecules are cut in half, which in turn causes electrical channels to become closed off; and this series of events causes an electrical imbalance, which is then transported through electrolyte and nerve activity to the brain. This is all quite amazing.

    The process will take up to a fraction of a second, and thus our perception of the outside is according to the outside, a bit short.
    But let us consider that even though it took the mechanism such a fraction of a second, when the information is processed, it is still processed during the present time. Nothing can exist other than the present time. Nothing can get processed other than the present time; thus, the picture might be old... but the processing of the picture isn't, thus we are not really behind reality, from a time perspective... we are always here in the present... and if relativity is right, then this must also mean space.
    The rest was fine. I agree.
     
  21. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Yeah, make SURE you do that. And then we'll discover if you have any personal integrity at all - if you're man enough to report back your findings.
     
  22. Reiku Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,238
    Yeh... made a mistake. You never slagged the country off. Just me. Alright, that's fine to do that i suppose... whatever. Still a hypocrite.
     
  23. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Finally! An actual admission of a mistake - I'm nearly stunned!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Thank you.

    And no, the hypocrisy exists only in your mind - no where else. Perhaps even more re-reading is required. If you were to do so you'd discover you have made yet another mistake.
     

Share This Page