X-Message-Number: 25902
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 02:09:11 EST
Subject: Re: To Donaldson

Yes, I am not a PERIASTRON reader, so anything I can tell has no value :-(

What I have published is on modeling methods: that is, mathematical model, 
you counter me on electronics devices... May be it would be good if you could 
read what you answer to, so that you have at least an idea of the content...

Before looking at neuron creation, you would have to look at the hour to hour 
dendrite spines creation, destruction or change of state as I have argued.

Your problem is the one depicted by John deRivaz in another list: (Cryonics 
Europe): You can't accept any new technology, two generations ago you would 
have argued against conpact disks, personnal computers and the like...

Some questions:
Did you know about the work of N. G. van Kampen ?
Did you know about Langevin equation ? Its two interpretations ? (I know you 
are mathematician, so here must be no problem for you).
Have you "Neuron" on your computer ?
If not, sorry, but you are not in the pack. Please update your opinion.

> Am I claiming that an ARTIFICIAL brain cannot be built? Not at all.
> But it had better have components which act like neurons, and doing
> so with solid electronic circuits doesn't look to me like an good
> way of doing it. Bluntly, it's a piss poor way of doing it.
You are mathematician as noted before, so why have you not don't do what I am 
doing now: Making a mathematical model for uploading? Why have you nothing to 
say about that model and how I chose the elements ?  Not inspired by the 
Hindmarsh-Rose work or van Kampen equation ?

Yvan Bozzonetti.

 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=25902