1
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
2
The 45R9 Hypothesis
Version 2
© 2018
M. Brewster Abele
ISBN: (not yet assigned)
You are free to copy and redistribute this material in any medium or format
remix, transform and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensee will not revoke those freedoms as long as you follow the license
terms:
You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the licensee, and indicate if
changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way
that suggests the licensee endorses you or your use.
This attribution form of copyright was selected because to test a hypothesis it is
necessary to allow contributors maximum flexibility and freedom.
3
Acknowledgments
W. Ross Ashby
In 1957 W. Ross Ashby published a classic titled “Introduction to Cybernetics.” In it
he introduced three fundamental concepts. The first was that we live in a complex
environment and that we need to address the complexity issue per se. The second was
an introduction to a new math to deal with complexity that he called cybernetics. It
classifies complex change similar to the way that geometry classifies space and
shapes. Finally, Ashby showed that principles from Shannon’s Information Theory
may open the door to an improved understanding of the brain.
Although in certain communities the book was well received, the fundamental
significance of cybernetic math was not well recognized.
In 1957 communication tools (for explaining cybernetic math) were limited in
number. That has changed dramatically. We have the Internet, very powerful word
processing, digital video and photography, online dictionaries and Google to name a
few. This hypothesis attempts to take advantage of those communication tools and
make a second attempt to introduce those concepts and associated ones to society.
Claude Shannon & Warren Weaver
The concepts from Shannon and Weaver's Mathematical Theory of Communication
published in 1949 have played a major part in the ongoing information revolution.
The implications to understanding the mind, though clearly recognized by his
coauthor Weaver, have not been widely accepted.
Much of Shannon's work stems from the concept of entropy and its relation to
improving electronic communication. For this hypothesis his clarification of very
basic communication concepts is more important.
Eric Kandel
Dr. Kandel was a recipient of a Nobel Prize for his research on the physiological basis
of memory storage in neurons. My view of neuroscience stems heavily from his
empirical research particularly that described in his book In Search of Memory: The
Emergence of a New Science of the Mind.
4
Valter Martins
Because of an almost universal populace with beliefs that appear inconsistent with the
hypothesis being presented in this document, it has been difficult to find anybody
who could even begin to contribute. One exception is a person in Brazil with the
internet name Valtermar. He provided me with a number of URLs that were valuable
in understanding neural behavior and structure. More important he has provided
valuable feedback on many of the communication experiments on this subject.
Valter once did a brief technical analysis of human communication. It is his
familiarity with the communication process that helps make his contributions so
useful.
Kenneth Robinson
Kenneth, an internet friend, clearly has an inquiring mind. The fact that his
philosophy, at least on the surface, appears diametrically opposite to the concepts
presented in this hypothesis makes his comments particularly valuable. They were
appreciated.
The title of this hypothesis was changed as a result of his thoughts.
What is important is that we are both searching for understanding. You don't find it
by listening only to those with whom you agree.
Mihnea Moldoveanu
Mihnea is Vice Dean of Learning and Innovation, Rotman School of Management,
Toronto CA. He has a background in electronic communication which was valuable
in making several modifications to the 45R9 Hypothesis
5
Table of Contents
Preface 7
Clusters 8
neural label 8
word cluster 10
visual cluster 11
Preliminaries
Complex environmental situations 12
Basic concepts
hypothesis 13
homeostasis 13 communication 14
Information Theory 15
varieties of communication 16
stream of signals 17 sets 17
multiple coding 18
multiprocessing 18
variety 19
infos 19 redundancy in electronic communication 20
associated 20
consistency examples 22
consistency in the brain 22
noise 23
Neurological Structure and Behavior 24
neurons 25
connection specificity 26
clusters 26 credibility 27
glossary 28
Semantics
clusters and associations 29 contexts for "prediction" 29
predicting the consequence of 29
credibility of consequence of 30
meaning of credibility 30
6
truth 30
assess, not recognize 31 difficulties with assessment of credibility 31
understanding 31
measuring 32
science 32
communication/regulation 33
Communicative Understanding of the Thinking Processes 34
the thinking processes 34
prediction 34
assessing credibility 35 recognition 36
remembering 36
analysis 36
crafting a communication, technical 36
crafting a communication, psychological 36 unknown clusters 37
word clusters 37
multiple labeled clusters 37
Conclusion 38
7
Preface
The human brain consists of approximately 83 billion neurons dynamically
interconnected by approximately 100 trillion neural switches called synapses. That
network alone is able to provide thinking processes that can deal with the
extraordinary complex situations that we as humans commonly face.
We do not need to understand the physical structure of that network in order to see
how it performs that task. Instead we need a deep understanding of communication
principles that have been around for some time.
The purpose of this document, along with the associated video, is to provide a
communicative structure for that understanding.
.
8
Clusters
Communicative Understanding of the Thinking Processes
The title of this document, The 45R9 Hypothesis, has no meaning. It was selected as a
result of a multiyear search for efforts similar to what is being presented. Nothing
even close was found. What that means is that any title with meaning is not going to
guide the reader in the right direction.
The subject of this hypothesis is the examination of two fundamental functions of the
neural processes. Specifically, they are (1) predicting the consequence or impact of
what is sensed and (2) determining the credibility of those predictions. That
exploration will in turn create an improved view of the thinking processes. It will be
referred to as COMMUNICATIVE UNDERSTANDING of the THINKING
PROCESSES
What differentiates this examination from others is that it stems from
COMMUNICATION principles in contrast to physical, chemical or biological
ones. Those communication principles were introduced by Shannon and Weaver in
their classic Mathematical Theory of Communication and later clarified by W. Ross
Ashby in his classic Introduction to Cybernetics.
We will start with an introduction to a neurological concept that will then be given a
label. For reasons that will become evident as you read this hypothesis the concept is
not one you can understand with a written explanation. You must first experience the
following thought experiment.
The Thought Experiment:
Identify a subject, an action, a person, something of immediate or general interest, a
word, a phrase, a concept, anything that has affected your life, anything you can think
about.
The subject can be a complex combination of stimuli such as the excitement, noise,
cold, and uncomfortable seats at a football game. It could be physiological such as
cramps or knee pain or it could be neurologically based such as anger or depression.
It can be a specific set of stimuli such as leg cramps that affected you on a given night
or general such as those muscular contractions that affect many individuals. It can be
very general such as the law of conservation of energy. The elements can be
dynamic such as the movement of a colony of ants or flames in a fireplace. The
magnitude can vary, being as large as the evidence of global warning or as small as a
minor itch.
We will call that item the neural label
9
Next, make a mental list of everything you can think of that is ASSOCIATED with
that neural label. Many of the associations won't have labels; they cannot be
documented; they can only be remembered as a set of stimuli, for example
combinations of smell, noise, pain, anger or something visualized.
Now take those associations and for each do the same thing, namely make a mental
list of everything associated with the association. Recalling some of those
associations may take some time.
That hierarchical network that includes all remembered associations stemming from
the original subject, first level, second level, third, etc. will be referred to as a cluster.
Communicative Understanding hypothesizes that clusters are the fundamental unit
the mind uses to predict both the consequences of or characteristics of what is
sensed and to determine the credibility of those predictions. Those predictions and
their credibility are essential for survival.
The 45R9 Video introduces clusters slightly differently, as groups of associated
synaptic changes. That seems to be different from the above exercise where the
elements of clusters were sensory specific, in other words combinations of senses and
with what caused their actuation. Both concepts are correct and consistent with each
other. Hopefully it shows the extraordinary breath of these concepts.
10
Cluster, Word Level
The photo is a way of showing that all that’s necessary for the elements of the cluster is a
collection of stimuli. Words are not necessary.
Smell of bread
Owner was going to
rent my apartment
Local bread store
Rather
expensive
Bought bread
Religious
Overweight
Aunt Peg
Son good at
making
Aunt Peg rolls
11
Cluster, Visual Level
The pixels, the little squares, in the above photo have been enlarged roughly 40 times.
So normally instead of seeing 16 pixels across the top edge you see the effect of over
600. You would not able to detect the individual pixels.
Visual clusters are similar. Each eye simultaneously sends the results of
approximately 100,000 sensors to the brain. There are various types of visual sensors
for example those that sense red, green or blue and others that detect motion. Like the
photo pixels the elements for visual clusters are so small and abundant that they
cannot be recognized directly. They are associated which makes them a cluster.
What is important is to realize that cluster detail can vary dramatically from the
unrecognizable of the visual type to the simple associations created from a brief
new experience.
It is easy to determine the existence of cluster, just take any subject and think
what is associated with it. You can't see clusters, you can't sense them. They are
a characteristic of what might be called the neural-associative aspect of the
mind. They are a common characteristic of ALL neural behavior.
The cluster concept should show two things: an introduction to a fundamental
aspect of our thinking processes and that there are principles about neural
behavior that can't be sensed, that can only be detected by a mental experiment.
12
Preliminaries
Complex environmental situations
Fundamental to this hypothesis is the recognition of commonly encountered
COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL SITUATIONS.
A complex environmental situation exists when for a PARTICULAR
INDIVIDUAL the factors for a DESIRED OUTCOME are LARGE IN
NUMBER, HARD to DETERMINE, HARD to DETECT and or HARD to
CONTROL
Factors are anything that can or does affect the human decision process. Factors can
and often are affected by other second-level ones that are also hard to detect and
difficult to manage with a high level of credibility.
Complexity depends on an individual’s background, experience and the problem he is
facing. A plumber would not consider the replacement of a hot water heater as a
complex situation. For those who don’t know how to join copper tubes it would be
complex. A three-year old learning to ride a bike faces a complex situation, though
two years later for him it is not. An individual trying to get new software operational
when the instructions are missing or incomplete faces a complex environmental
situation. The communication concepts being presented in this document exemplify
complex environmental situations. For most individuals attempting to make
fundamental changes in somebody's behavior, including their own, should be
recognized as dealing with a complex environmental situation. The lack of perceived
complexity makes it easy to start a project; its existence makes it hard to finish.
There is a common tendency to hide complexity with language. Saying or thinking
it's simple doesn't wipe out real world complexity.
Complexity is like the dark matter of the cosmos. You can't see it; you can't
sense it. You can only deduce its existence. However, unlike dark matter it has a
significant and direct effect on our lives, on our survival.
Mankind has invented some general techniques that in a complex environment can
help attain the desired outcome. Organization is one, the problem being that
everything cannot be organized.
13
Computer algorithms or models such as those that deal with the weather are also
helpful. The problem is it is almost impossible to capture all the factors that affect the
outcome.
By treating groups of factors in a common manner (science) one can simplify an
environment. To find that commonality it is necessary to isolate the variables. Though
obviously useful there are limitations to the process. The variables cannot always be
isolated; it is difficult to determine the credibility of the isolation and implementing
the results in the real world often brings back complexity. That individuals
commonly face complex environments in their everyday dealings is
fundamental; science is merely one way to deal with those situations.
None of these techniques provide complete answers. The bottom line is we
CANNOT HIDE from complex situations; we need to recognize their existence
and consider modifying our reasoning and communication to deal with them
realistically. That is what this hypothesis is all about.
Communicative Understanding helps to see and deal with complex environmental
situations.
Basic Concepts
The subject being presented is based on a number of concepts usually recognized by
those involved in the appropriate fields, but not always by the general public. There
are touched on below.
Hypothesis
A hypothesis, as used here, is a concept for which the credibility has not been
established. At one level, such as the recognition of something sensed like a horse or
the fact that you're hungry, the credibility is so fast that it is not recognizable. At the
other end establishing the credibility is so difficult that it is never firmly established.
Example, how to deal with someone's inappropriate behavior.
Homeostasis
Homeostasis is the concept that human activity is ultimately driven by an attempt to
keep one's physiological variables within their critical limits, in other words to
survive. Again, there are extremes. Natural homeostasis, for example if you were
tossed into a freezing lake you would attempt to get out, no analysis would be
required. At the other end is complex homeostasis whereby we use the thinking
processes to deal with complex environmental situations, such as a job situation that
ultimately may affect our physiological variables, our ability to survive. At that end it
is easy to make mistakes.
14
Back in the early fifties W. Ross Ashby built a homeostat, a mechanical / electrical
device that performed the homeostatic function for a robotic turtle. The objective was
to show that complicated physiological / neural behavior generally thought to be
beyond understanding could be duplicated "mechanically," that it could be explained,
that it could be understood.
The homeostasis concept is far from universally accepted, often for psychological
reasons. Evidence to support homeostasis can be hard to detect. In a highly complex
environment it is easy for individuals to be influenced to make decisions not good for
their survival. Extreme examples were Japanese kamikaze pilots in World War II. Not
so dramatic, but more common, are those that occur in financial, political or domestic
relation situations.
One objective of Communicative Understanding is to show how easy it is in a
complex environment to make homeostatic mistakes, actions that do not provide
homeostatic benefits.
Communication
Communication is the same as regulation. In other words, it describes the process of
making environmental changes for homeostatic survival. Some are minuscule, poorly
selected, and or ineffective. This will become clearer as this document develops.
15
Information Theory
Seeing the link between Communicative Understanding and Information Theory is
the first and most difficult step in understanding its broad implications and benefits.
Information Theory is not easily understood because it requires learning a small new
language thru experiments similar to that of the cluster concept. The reader should
test the credibility of these concepts particularly as they relate to human
communication. It's not easy, but it's part of the process.
This section will show several critical points.
• The first is that communication is a system in itself, independent of the content
being communicated.
• The extraordinary importance of what Claude Shannon calls redundancy, (latter
referred to as associations or consistencies), how redundancy is used to determine
the truthfulness of a situation and how Information Theory concepts relates to human
reasoning and communication.
16
Information Theory cont.
Technical context of information
Shannon's concepts are applicable to all forms of communication. Below are listed a
number of different types. However, be aware that all utterances are not
communication, all utterances do not have a communicative function. They could be
called ramblings. For example: ouch, damn wow or scribbles on a piece of paper
Sample Varieties of Communication
Human to human An advertisement, talk, a book
Human to computer Entering data
Computer to human Error message
Real world to human Fox running across the street
A human creation to human Watching a football game
Human to real-world Cussing, prayer
Spiritual to human From priest, rabbi or divine book
Neurotransmitter to
brain
Hunger, thirst
Computer to computer Internet banking
Human to animal To my dog: sit
Animal to human By door: bark
Human to real world Turn on light switch
There are two contexts to information (or communication): the everyday
understanding and the rarely understood technical. It's the latter that affects
Communicative Understanding of the thinking processes.
17
Information Theory cont.
Technical context of information
Stream of signals
We start with the concept that communication is a stream of signals. The signal can
be as elemental as a relay that is either open or closed, or for person-to-person
communication a word. The mechanics of that process, to be covered later, will
clarify how that works.
Sets
A signal is always associated with both a set of values and something that reduces
the set (usually referred to as the message). For an electronic communication the set
consists of the values on or off (1,0). For typing, it would be any of the alpha-numeric
characters.
For person to person communication the set would contain the values implied by the
situation or by a particular word. For example, in the phrase “red car” the word red
indicates the set of possible car colors. In person to person communication the signal
can be as large as phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs or larger. For example, the
signal “Dinner is ready” has two values: Dinner is ready or Dinner is not ready. What
is important is that the signal is always associated with a set of values. To keep it
simple we will explain at the word level. The complexity can be overwhelming at
higher levels
Recognition of the set often comes from the communication environment or from an
implicit understanding of the situation. For example: the set (of what) in "Mine is
red" might be identified just by knowing the communicator. However, it is often not
clear. This characteristic is tricky to recognize because for certain forms of
communication the set stays constant, while for person to person communication the
set is constantly changing at word level throughout the communication.
18
Information Theory cont.
Technical context of information
Multiple codes
There are almost always multiple codes or labels for identifying the various values of
the set. For example, the values in the set color of car used earlier can be coded with
multiple set of labels. Four possible sets for labeling the color of the car might be:
Example: Color of car:
Words red, white, silver
Bits 1001, 1011, 1111
Neural coding 2 firings network3, 5
firings network8, 3
firings network8
Unusual sound grunt, siren, bang
Restated, when we think of a particular value, for example the color white, we should
recognize that that set of stimuli may be coded in a variety of ways. It is dangerous to
consider the stimuli white solely with the code “white.” There is nothing profound
about the code "white." It is better to think of the set of stimuli (from “white”) as an
array of codes one of which is a combination in the mind of neural firings and
networks.
Communication is better thought of as a CHAIN of TRANSLATIONS than
transmission.
Multiprocessing and testing
The brain processes a large number of information streams, particularly visual, at the
same time. It is called multiprocessing and it is major contributor in providing the
associations that make up clusters.
19
Information Theory cont.
Technical context of information
Variety
In the following set of 13 characters there is a variety of eight different characters (A
B B X A Z T B X Y Q Q R). If you are communicating, selecting from a set of eight
values, for example the possible colors of a car, you need a code set with a variety of
eight to communicate that selection. In other words, whatever code set is used must
have a variety as large as the number of values. The common denominator between
different code sets that stem from the same set of stimuli is variety.
Variety is commonly expressed in bits, mathematically expressed as log to the base 2
of variety (log2 (variety). Logs are a convenient way of expressing very large
numbers. For example, a variety of ten million is equal to 23.25 bits.
In this document we will continue to use the more basic variety. Both refer to the
same thing, just a different way of expressing quantity.
There can be confusion in the use of variety. A photo with 3 meg pixels has variety in
the relative position and state (the sets represented by) of each of the 3 meg pixels.
For our purposes the interest is on the variety of codes possible for a particular pixel.
When there is potential confusion the former will be referred to as set variety, the
latter as code variety.
Infos
We use far more than words as communication tools. Punctuation, body language,
speed and manner of articulation, and even the sound of a starting pistol or the
reading from an odometer are examples of codes (or labels) for various values. The
catchall label for these codes is INFOS.
20
Information Theory cont.
Technical context of information
Redundancy in electronic communication
Shannon and Weaver point out that redundancy performs the extraordinary basic
function of improving credibility, of reducing the set. Here is an example of how it
works in electronic communication.
Assume you are transmitting a block of numbers such as a 10 digit customer number.
The sender would create an error detection code from that block of numbers. That
code might be merely the sum of the digits. The error detection code is transmitted
along with the customer number and is re-calculated at the receiving end. If it is the
same as the transmitted one, it is believed (electronically) that the customer number is
credible, (reduces the set) that it is the same as what was sent. If not, a retransmission
is ordered.
There is an important clarification. All that is necessary is that the error detection
information, the redundant information, be ASSOCIATED with the message. It does
not have to be sent at the same time. That broadens the applicability of the concept to
human communication. There is more. Another synonym for redundant which is
accurately used in everyday parlance is consistent (along with the opposite
inconsistent). In other words, for the electronic example the error detection code is
either consistent or inconsistent with the base or customer number. Replacing
redundant with consistent clarifies even more the generality of those concepts.
There are other synonyms for consistency. In the accounting world controls are
consistencies created specifically to improve credibility. Ashby uses the more precise
synonym constraints defined as the relation between two sets which exists when
associated with a particular condition cluster and the variety of one is less than the
other.
In Information Theory redundancy is used to determine whether what was sent is the
same as what was received. In Communicative Understanding, redundancy
(referred to as consistency or more broadly as associations) is used to determine the
credibility of the hypothesis that what is being sensed is the same as what is being
hypothesized. It makes it possible to assess the credibility of a communication.
21
Information Theory cont.
Technical context of information
Associative with humans
The associative concept plays a major part in understanding how the mind predicts
the consequence of or the characteristic of a particular pattern and how it determines
the credibility of a hypothetical patterns it senses.
Those functions are fundamental to survival.
There are grammatical and vocabulary problems to their understanding which is why
they are not commonly recognized. First a broadening of the term
redundancy/associative. In the beginning of this hypothesis it was pointed out that the
fundamental unit of human communication is a cluster. Here is an example of how it
works.
After a visit from relatives I am discussing my cousin Bill with my wife. I do not
need to mention a number of associations with that individual: that he is bald, married
to Mary, is a cousin, uses a cane, likes good food, is fun, etc. because the label Bill is
adequate to trigger those associations in a cluster in her mind.
Redundancy relates to those associations, those consistencies, that make up the Bill
cluster. It is those consistencies that make it possible for humans to determine the
consequence of, for example to understand that if I ask Bill to enter in a 5K race the
consequence will be that he will decline. It is those associations that make it possible
to determine that if I hypothesize that an individual I see in the distance with bushy
hair is Bill that the credibility of that prediction is poor. Bill is bald.
The consistency principle has broad everyday applicability. Here are some everyday
examples:
Shopping: You are asked to purchase several items: Item 1: $10, Item 2: $15, 6 of
Item 3 at $2 each, and Item 4: $16. You understand ahead of time that the total will be
$53. At check-out you find the cost is only $43. The associated $53 is inconsistent
with the check-out total of $43. There appears to have been an error in the
transmission of what you were asked to purchase and you are likely to ask for a
retransmission.
Spelling: A spell corrector compares a typed word to a table of words. If it finds a
match it is consistent with the hypothesis that it is what was intended. (that does not
guarantee credibility). If not, it is inconsistent and indicates a second try is necessary.
Shannon would say that the dictionary is redundant. The better term would be
consistent.
22
Information Theory cont.
Consistency, everyday examples
Accounting: In a manner similar to the above shopping example, the net worth on a
balance sheet should be consistent (referred by accountants as controls) with the
detail of assets and liabilities. It provides credibility in a noisy environment. (keeping
track of the financial status of an organization)
Why, make sense, reason, cause: We often ask why, or what is the reason for a
particular behavior. That "why" or "reason" is either consistent or inconsistent with a
suggested hypothesis. When we say that doesn't make sense we are saying that it is
inconsistent with other information known (or transmitted) about the situation.
Measure twice: If the second measurement is the same, is consistent with the first it
helps establish the credibility of the first measurement. In this case the
communication is between the real world and one’s mind.
Elephants can fly: If a small child has restricted experiences watching only Dumbo
the Flying Elephant on TV he will believe that elephants can fly. He will not see any
inconsistencies with that hypothesis. Restricting access to inconsistencies is very
common, particularly in dictatorial governments and religions. (censoring the use
of certain words with terms like it is sacrosanct) It creates a state of mind I call
neurotic censorship.
Common sense: That term means that the concept being discussed is either consistent
or inconsistent with everyday observations or experiences.
Consistency in the brain
As you will see in the next section the brain has an effective mechanism for assessing
the truthfulness of communication with the real-world environment. What we call
experience develops associations in the brain. These associations provide the
consistencies necessary to determine the credibility of a hypothetical pattern.
In addition, those linkages provide the tools (sub-consistencies) for determining the
credibility of the supporting lower level consistencies as one's moves down the
hierarchy.
There is a major exception. In contrast to information sensed directly, the brain’s
checking mechanism can easily fall apart with information communicated between
humans. That is because human communication can commonly be distorted. It is
much harder to check because the credibility of the consistencies and inconsistencies
per se are frequently weak, often many steps away from the real world.
23
Information Theory cont.
Noise
Noise is variety that does not contribute to the message. It can be snow on the TV, it
can be static on a phone line, or more commonly it can be words or symbols that do
not relate to the message (either the signal or the set). It plays a major part in
hindering communication.
Background chatter is noise because it hinders your ability to understand a message
from a friend. However, for others at that gathering your communication is noise
because it interferes with their communication.
Noise increases the set, in contrast to redundancy that reduces the set.
24
Neurological
Structure and
Behavior
This section is a brief introduction to neurological structure and behavior. It shows
two things:
• How the mind uses redundancy (now referred to as associations) for determination
of credibility along with the ability to predict the consequences of what has been
sensed.
• An introduction to the neurological aspects of clusters.
25
Neurological structure and behavior
Neurons
Neurons are a type of cell found in the brain. They have a single tentacle called an
axon which can send out signals. In addition, each neuron has multiple dendrites
which can accept signals from other neurons. Connections between axons and
dendrites are chemical/electrical switches called synapses that can vary in
conductivity. There are about 83 billion neurons each with an average of about 1000
synapses making a total of about a 100 trillion possible synaptic connections.
There are a number of types of neurons. Particularly significant are sensory, motor,
and interneuron.
At any given moment, a nerve cell in any network is bombarded by signals, both
excitatory and inhibitory. It has only two options: to fire or not to fire. The firing of a
nerve cell depends on integration: it sums up the excitatory and inhibitory synaptic
potentials it received from presynaptic neurons and generates an action potential only
when the total of excitatory signals exceeds the total of inhibitory signals by a certain
critical minimum.
26
Neurological structure and behavior
It is that integration of signals that is the foundation of Communicative
Understanding of the Thinking Processes
Connection specificity:
Connection specificity describes the principal that each sensory neuron communicates
only with a set of specific post-synaptic cells, in other words a specific part of the
brain. This has been confirmed by neuroscientists who have discovered that when a
particular part of the brain is damaged a neurological function is disabled.
Those characteristics, connection specificity combined with the neural capability
to fire makes possible the large variety of coding in the brain, variety that
Information Theory tells us is necessary for remembering the large number of
clusters accumulated from life's experiences.
clusters
A cluster is the mind’s most basic module of reasoning; it is a basic module of
communication and is the module the mind uses to predict the consequences of
and to determine the credibility of those predictions.
From an everyday point of view, as explained earlier, a cluster is a hierarchal cloud of
associated neurons networked together. Not all associations within the cluster have
the same network strength; they are not bound together equally. Some are stronger,
others not so.
Those clusters are networked downward in a hierarchical manner to other sub-
associations. In other words, each association has sub-associations and each of the
sub-associations has sub-sub-associations and so on.
From an Information Theory point of view the cluster is merely a network of
redundancies, redundancies being just a different word for associations (or
consistencies). From a functional point of view, they are the same thing, the brain
using them to predict (1) the consequences of what has been sensed and (2) to
determine the credibility of those predictions.
27
Neurological structure and behavior
Recognize that we have an embedded belief that we reason, that we communicate not
with networks but with things, objects, actions. That is wrong; that belief hides
understanding. The basic unit for reasoning, communication, predicting the
consequences of, and for establishing the credibility of those predictions is clusters of
neurons networked together.
Restated: We reason, we predict the consequences of and we determine the
credibility of those predictions, of those communications, with hierarchal
networks of clusters.
Credibility
Determining the credibility of a prediction (with the consequence of context) has
limitations. The problem is the availability of credible consistencies
In a real-world to human communication such as a recognizing a tree there are
thousands of consistencies tightly networked together. Once the mind detects one
visual consistency, for example a leaf, other consistencies such as trunk, bark, stable
location come to mind quickly. Nature almost always provides numerous highly
credible VISUAL consistencies along with an absence of inconsistencies.
Sometimes the consistencies are spread apart in time (such as symptoms of a medical
condition or climate change). When there is additional variety (noise) it is often
difficult to discern whether the consistencies relate to the original hypothesis or a new
one. Example: global warming.
As mentioned earlier the cluster process is seriously impaired when applied to
complex human-to-human communication. The problem is a lack of a network of
consistencies, the credibility of which can be easily assessed. That inability to
effectively determine the credibility of a communication is not broadly understood
and has significant social implications. The reasons will become clearer in the latter
part of this hypothesis that deals with the mechanics of human communication.
Summary
This description of neurological fundamentals is an over simplification of an extraordinarily
complex mechanism. What this explanation does, however, is to show the applicability of
cluster structure to that field. Fundamental to every science is the disciplined use of a
precisely defined vocabulary. The communicative hypothesis is extreme in this manner being
applicable, not to just one field but to all thinking and all human communication. It
necessitates a disciplined use of a new vocabulary. Cluster understanding is elemental for
that function.
28
Neurological Structure and Behavior
Glossary
neuron The structural and functional unit of the nervous system
dendrite Treelike extensions of a neuron that accept information
axon A long slender projection of a neuron that typically conducts
electrical impulses away from its cell body
synapse A switch that permits a neuron to pass an electrochemical signal to
another cell
neurotransmitter A chemical substance released at the end of a nerve fiber that
enhances the transfer of an impulse to another nerve fiber
connection specificity The principle that neurons communicate only with specific
postsynaptic cells
action potential
A large transient electrical signal about 1/ 10 of a volt and 1 to 2
mms in duration that propagates along the axon to the neurons
presynaptic terminal without failure or flagging. At the presynaptic
terminal, the action potential triggers the release of
neurotransmitters onto target neurons.
1) Many of these definitions come from Eric Kandel's In Search of Memory
29
Semantics
It was stated early on that the major problem with the Communicative Understanding
hypothesis is one of communication, not one of discovery. That is because of two
things: (1) there is generally a lack of understanding of the mechanics of
communication and (2) a lack of a commonly recognized vocabulary broad enough
to deal with the subject.
Clusters and associations
Clusters are merely synaptic connections that are associated. They can represent
either elements of the real world (internal or external to the body) and or words /
phrases.
A cluster can be archived in memory, or newly created or modified as a result of a set
of stimuli.
Contexts for prediction
The word prediction has two contexts. The more common refers to what will happen
in the future, for example that the Dow Jones will be at 19,000 in 2020 or that cost of
oil will be seventy dollars a barrel by the end of the year.
The other context, the one used here is predicting the consequence of what is
sensed, the consequence of an action, the consequence of a change, the consequence
of a communication or the consequence of a characteristic. For example:
• The consequence of sensing bread baking is the desire to have some.
• A consequence of the action of setting tire air pressure a couple pounds over
recommended will be a reduction in gas usage.
• The consequence of changing a light switch is that it will go on or off.
• The consequence of a communication, for example the firing of a starting
pistol is that runners start the race.
• The consequence of the characteristic of being Thursday is that rubbish will
be picked up and school and businesses will be open.
30
Semantics
That predictive ability to determine the consequence of comes from a cluster.
Without that predictive capability, without that ability to determine the
consequences of, you could not survive; you could not keep your physiological
variables within their critical limits.
The credibility of consequences of:
Clusters, made up of associated synaptic changes, also give one the ability to
determine the credibility of a prediction. For example, you may have discovered that
a particular light switch works only intermittently. For that particular switch “working
only intermittently” is a cluster (or part of one) valuable in determining the
credibility of the consequence of flipping the switch. A cluster linked to the
credibility of “the rubbish being picked up on Thursday” is that “it doesn't always
happen.”
The importance of this natural way for the brain to both predict and determine
the credibility of those predictions cannot be over emphasized. It is fundamental
to all thinking processes, to survival.
The meaning of credibility.
Credibility describes the attribute that further investigation will provide results
consistent with the hypothesis. For example, over the years Newton’s laws of
motion have continued to provide consistent results. That means they are highly
credible. The credibility of the message “Dinner is ready” is that when I go to the
dining room there is food on the table.
It is also important to note that for hypotheses dealing with complex environmental
situations credibility is on a scale, it is not a dichotomy. A significant sociological
problem is that in complex situations our legal system attempts to force a dichotomy
with guilty or not guilty.
Truth
It should be evident that in a complex environment there is no such thing as
absolute certainty; there is no such thing as absolute truth. We are attempting to
determine the credibility of a hypothetical cluster and we do it by making an
assessment of associations and absence of inconsistencies the credibility of those
consistencies per se (and inconsistencies) is subject to the same
31
Semantics
assessment so on down the hierarchy align the word truth is workable in a simple
environment such as the recognition of a tree, a car, or a dog the difficulty is that it is
often used in situations that are complex.
Assess not recognize
Another language problem is that for complex environments we do not recognize, we
assess credibility (of the hypothesis). Consider that you are thinking of buying a stock
recommended by a financial advisor. He shows you several charts and describes some
things happening in the company that would appear to provide (to be consistent or
associated with) a good outcome for the stock. On the other hand, from previous
experience you have learned that what looks good in the financial markets is often the
exact opposite. In addition, you are aware that the ability of a financial advisor to
predict (the consequences of) is somewhat akin to throwing a dart at a chart.
For these complex situations, you do not recognize, rather you assess the situation to
see if there is a cluster that is somewhat credible. The problem with the word
recognize is that it implies a dichotomy, either you recognize or you don’t. Recognize
is workable for simple situations, it is not for the complex.
So, in complex situations Communicative Understanding is similar to comparing two
clouds of information; there is not a definitive answer; credibility being a process of
assessment. In this document when recognize is used it will refer to the broader
concept of assessment.
The process of comparing what-was-sensed, to what-was hypothesized is
referred to as assessment of credibility.
Difficulties with assessment of credibility
Effective use of assessment of credibly is not without its difficulties. Associations
need to be understood, their credibility assessed and finally used. It takes time and
experience.
Understanding refers to the amount and depth of associations.
An example: Consider a simple what-was sensed-earlier, your pet cat. The
associations that make up understanding) are that she likes to sit in one's lap,
32
Semantics
she often purrs, she has a white spot on her nose, chases mice, likes fish, etc. Your
understanding of the cluster cat is considered strong if you know many associations
about her. It's weak if you know only a few. Understanding affects recognition.
A second example: A top notch football announcer can recognize plays, penalties,
player characteristics and for each of these will have background (lower level)
associations on down the line. That is depth.
Consider something complex, specifically an attempt to change an aspect of
someone's behavior. It is a two-step process. The first is understanding (that you
know the associations) of that aspect of the individual’s behavior. That can come
from a long-term relationship, from many carefully structured questions, or from
behavior experiments. Without that understanding, not knowing what response will
occur means that the results of any “solution” are pretty much random. It is a little
like trying to fix a computer problem by just pressing a few keys. The likelihood of
success is very low. The difficulty is in understanding the behavior, not in
implementing a solution.
Conclusion: For credible results in complex situations the emphasis should be on
understanding rather than on a solution.
Measuring
A measure is merely a specific type of association that improves the credibility of a
communication. A measure is formally established, clearly defined and universally
understood. There are exceptions but that's the goal.
Science
Science describes a type of cluster communication characterized by high credibility,
meaning that further exploration will create results consistent with the hypothesis.
There are different types of science. One is carefully recorded observations such as
the redheaded woodpecker has a red hood, white belly, black wings and is rarely
found in New England.
Another is the result of experimentation, for example that fresh water freezes at 32°F
regardless of air pressure or gravity. (there are some rare exceptions)
33
Semantics
Communication
Homeostasis suggests that we are constantly attempting to make changes to the
environment, ultimately for survival. That process is called regulation. In simple
situation such as hunger the changes are obvious. However, in complex situations not
only are the changes frequently mistaken but their applicability is difficult to detect
from an outside observer.
Communication is defined here as an attempt to make a change in a recipient. That
recipient may be a human or an object. Secondly that change ultimately is thought to
benefit the communicator. In a complex environmental situation there are many cases
where the benefit is either infinitesimal or because of mistakes nonexistent. It's also
called regulation
As mentioned earlier there is always a set associated with a communication, with
regulation. It is reduced by the message (or redundancy) and it is increased by noise.
Here are some examples:
You are cooking a meal and you want the pan hot so the message is turn on the stove.
It is not a verbal message; it's accomplished by turning a dial. The set is the various
stove dials and its reduced when you turn on one if it works.
You are not particularly hungry and you communicate that to your wife. The set is
hungry or not hungry, and the change is to her state of mind in relation to preparing a
meal. The message reduces the set to "not hungry".
So, the hypothesis here is that communication is a form of homeostatic regulation.
The credibility of that hypothesis is not a dichotomy; it is on a scale. It is a
fundamental element of understanding of the 45R9 hypothesis. Understanding will
improve credibility.
34
Communicative Understanding of the
Thinking Processes The 45R9 Hypothesis
The Thinking Processes:
As mentioned above the brain has 83 billion neurons along with approximately a
hundred trillion synapses. Combined with that is the ability to create new
synaptic connections or adjust the strength of existing ones. That network
provides the tools for some extraordinary functions. Those connections create
"associations” the fundamental tool for the thinking processes.
Note that the two fundamental thinking processes are prediction and assessing
credibility. You will see later that the others are merely combinations of those two
basic ones.
Prediction
This term is being used very broadly to describe the consequence, impact, or
characteristics of what has been sensed.
At the simple end of the process you smell supper, and you predict the consequence
of that sense that it will be ready shortly.
You have been told (sensed) to expect a big drop in the market and you want to know
if it will affect (predict the consequences of) a particular stock that you own.
Your son has not shown much interest in chemistry and you want to predict the
effect of various ways of creating that interest.
Depending upon age and experience you have built a database of clusters that may
help identify the factors affecting those predictions. The effectiveness will depend in
part on the complexity of the desired prediction.
35
Communicative Understanding of the
Thinking Processes
Assessing credibility
We assess the credibility of predictions with associations.
The process is often subjective (processed subconsciously). For example, if the smell
of supper came at 10 o'clock in the morning (the association) we would recognize that
the prediction supper will be ready shortly is not credible
In addition, it's important to note that only in simple environments is credibility a
dichotomy. In other words, for complex environmental situations credibility is on a
scale.
All assessments of credibility, all assessments of the degree of truthfulness
ALWAYS come down to associations.
Associations very in their ability to affect credibility. First and foremost, they need to
be credible in their own right. To assess that level of credibility the process is the
same. It can go down multiple levels.
Secondly, the associations need to be uniquely associated with the hypothesis. If you
are looking for your car in a large parking lot the association, has four tires will not
be helpful because it is not uniquely associated with your car.
Applying this principle can sometimes be very tricky. Determining the credibility of a
news report using "substantiated" can be misleading. Does substantiated indicate the
credibility of the event or of the messenger. It is a very complex situation and should
not be taken lightly.
Both of these concepts require considerable thought in order to recognize their broad
applicability
36
Communicative Understanding of the
Thinking Processes
Recognition
Recognition describes the process of comparing what was sensed to what was sensed
earlier. Associations can improve the credibility of a recognition. Noise (unrelated
associations) can do the opposite.
Remembering
Remembering always starts with an association. For example, you trying to remember
the name of a singer (the association). Remembering may be a physical sense or it
may be a mental one. Memory can be improved with associations, specifically those
that are uniquely associated with the hypothesis and are credible in their own right.
They can be hurt with noise (non-associations).
Analysis
Analysis is the process of examination of the elements of a situation as they relate to
known principles. Known principles are associations. They are elements of a cluster.
Technical side, crafting a communication,
The objective is to make it possible for the recipient to receive the same message that
was sent. For person-to-person that means the same understanding, the same or
similar cluster.
The 45R9 Video showed a variety of ways of connecting infos to clusters, some that
were effective, some not so. The quality of those clusters–infos is fundamental to the
technical side of a communication. You can improve it with associations and the
minimization of noise
Psychological side, crafting a communication,
There are an amazing variety of human communication situations some simple and
others so complex that success is close to impossible. At the simple end are
communications such as “Please pass the salt” or “Can you pick up some cauliflower
at the store” referred to as everyday jargon. At the other end such things as creating
interest in organic chemistry or quitting smoking.
37
Communicative Understanding of the
Thinking Processes
A vital element for the psychological side of a communication is getting the attention
of the recipient. We are constantly bombarded with environmental situations that can
affect us. The recipient needs to select what gets his attention. Your communication is
just one of them.
What you do for any complex situation, including a communication, is first learn as
much about the situation as possible and then in light of that understanding run
experiments. It can be a lengthy process with no guarantee of success.
It is helpful to recognize that there are communications that require different
approaches. There is not always a clear demarcation between them. A few are listed
below.
Unknown clusters
For example, changing deeply embedded habits or beliefs requires a thorough
discovery of the neural structure supporting them. It can be difficult to accomplish.
Examples: changing political beliefs or an individual’s level of orderliness.
Word clusters
Another important category is converting beliefs remotely supported by sensory
perception.
Multiple labeled clusters
An example is this 45R9 hypothesis. It deals with concepts hidden by multiple labels.
The common denominators are difficult to define because they deal with neural
"associations" that can only be detected with neural experiments.
Again, what is significant is that there are a variety of cluster communication
situations. It is important that they be recognized and dealt with accordingly
38
.
\
Conclusion
As mentioned earlier the brain consists of roughly 83 billion neurons inter-connected
with up to a hundred trillion synaptic switches. That ever-changing network provides
the fundamental structure for our thinking functions. Understanding the workings can
improve the effectiveness of those thinking functions, particularly in complex
environmental situations.
It is unlikely that either this PDF document or the 45R9 Video can completely
provide that understanding.
Among the population there is an incredible variety of states of mind, (remember the
100 trillion synapses) many diametrically opposite to these concepts. In addition, few
have background in electronic communication, cybernetic math or other fields helpful
for understanding
To deal with that communication environment I think it is necessary to get feedback
at word level both on meaning and credibility of the concepts. Then it's necessary to
adjust the communication for that situation. Even then, there's no guarantee of
success.
i
Index
Index
Symbols45R9 Hypothesis, 2, 4, 8, 33–34, 37
AAbele, 2action potential, 25, 28algorithm, 13analysis, 4, 13, 36Ashby, 3, 8, 14, 20associated, 3, 7, 9, 11, 17, 20–21, 26, 29–31, 33, 35–36
Bbits, 18–19
Ccause, 22clusters, 8–9, 11, 18, 24, 26–27, 29–30, 34, 36–37communication, 3–4, 7–8, 12–23, 26–27, 29, 32–33, 36–38communication principles, 7–8communicative understanding, 8–9, 13–16, 20, 26, 29, 31, 34–37communicative understanding of the thinking processes, 8, 16, 26, 34–37complex environmental situation, 12–13, 30, 33, 35, 38complex homeostasis, 13connection specificity, 26, 28consequence of, 21, 27, 29–30, 34consistencies, 15, 20–22, 26–27, 30consistency in the brain, 22consistency, everyday examples, 22controls, 20, 22credibility, 8–9, 12–13, 15, 20–22, 24, 26–27, 30–36, 38credibility of prediction, 35
Ddepth, 31–32
Eelephants can fly, 22error detection code, 20
Ffactors, 12–13, 34feedback, 4, 38
Hhypotheses, 30
Iinconsistent, 4, 20–22increases the set, 23information theory, 3, 15–23, 26infos, 19, 36
KKandel, 3, 28
Mmeasure, 22, 32mechanics of communication, 29mental experiment, 11Moldoveanu, 4multiple labeled clusters, 37multiprocessing, 18
Nnatural homeostasis, 13neural label, 8–9neurological structure, 24–28neurons, 3, 7, 25–28, 34, 38neurotransmitter, 16, 28
ii
IndexINDEX
noise, 8–9, 23, 27, 33, 36
Oorganization, 12, 22
Pphysiological variables, 13, 30pixel, 11, 19predicting the consequence of, 29prediction, 8–9, 21, 26–27, 29–30, 34–35psychological side, crafting a communication, 36
Rreason, 8, 14, 22, 27recognition, 12–13, 17, 31–32, 36reduces the set, 17, 20, 23, 33redundancy, 15, 20–21, 23–24, 26, 33regulation, 14, 33remembering, 26, 36restricting access to inconsistencies, 22Robinson, 4
Sscience, 3, 13, 27, 32sets, 17–20Shannon, 3, 8, 15–16, 20–21stream of signals, 17synapses, 7, 25, 34, 38synapses, 7, 25, 34, 38
Ttechnical side, crafting a communication, 36thinking processes, 7–8, 11, 13, 16, 26, 30, 34–37thought experiment, 8truth, 30–31
Uunderstanding, 3–4, 7–9, 13–17, 20–21, 26–27, 29, 31–38
Vvarieties of communication, 16variety, 16, 18–20, 23, 26–27, 36–38
WWeaver, 3, 8, 20Why, 21–22
Related Documents
