Why are you, you?

[Cyclone]

I know what you mean, but it always comes down to comparing things, even multi input logic chips boil down to binary gates, we are no more technologically advanced.

 

That's because we can only build binary logic gates. Your brain isn't made from silicon though.

[Obelix]

Can we?

 

http://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-3-invert.html

[Cyclone]

is it built using multiple binary components?

The big barrier to beyond binary computation is actually the memory I think, although we have tried it before, I've read articles about it in early computing.

[spooky3]

Measurements might be done by something analogous to (but not truly) a binary tree. You will be able to find other binary equivalent decisions, but I wasn't trying to prove that they don't exist, merely that not all our decisions are so simple.

How do I choose what to write in reply to you, it isn't from a simple choice of two options is it! There are millions of different replies I could have made.

 

I'd say you decide on a goal from memory (however well defined) (e.g. choice from a set), then start on a path towards that goal, making decisions from sets along the way. In the process you'll use a feedback loop to correct and alter your response until you decide to finally post.

 

Q. How can you see a decision as anything other than absolute? (to do or not to do!)

[spooky3]

Cyclone, did you actually watch this?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00pv1c3/The_Secret_Life_of_Chaos/

 

I've only just got around to it. But it was worth it!

 

To start with it enlightened me to some work one of the few people I could call my inspiration, Alan Turing, did.

 

I thought from 50 mins was particularly interesting, exactly concerning this part of out thread.

 

I also thought 37 mins was somewhat spooky!

[spooky3]

Why do we believe things if they are not tangible facts?

[MadnBad]

This year, I found out I actually was!

 

Why is no one else interested in how this happened.

[Cyclone]

I'd say you decide on a goal from memory (however well defined) (e.g. choice from a set), then start on a path towards that goal, making decisions from sets along the way. In the process you'll use a feedback loop to correct and alter your response until you decide to finally post.

 

Q. How can you see a decision as anything other than absolute? (to do or not to do!)

 

You're only concerned with decisions about actions, and you refuse to consider anything that has a sliding scale but prefer to pretend it's a series of mini decisions each of which can be simplified to a binary choice.

[spooky3]

You're only concerned with decisions about actions, and you refuse to consider anything that has a sliding scale but prefer to pretend it's a series of mini decisions each of which can be simplified to a binary choice.

 

No I don't refuse to consider a sliding scale, but I do quantise it. See this thread as to why... http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=686740

 

It's still a scale, but there is reasoning as to how a choice is made.

 

You've simply denied my suggestions, but haven't provided any suggestion even as to how it happens.

 

That last programme I referenced to you, it states that you can have a perfect system but if it's susceptible to chaos then it will produce what looks like random outputs. After watching that i'd suggest you go back to early in this thread and find the link to the degree module on psychology by Berkeley university, the first 4 or 5 lectures are all about dissecting the brain and looking how it works as a system.

[purdyamos]

Why is no one else interested in how this happened.

 

 

If all goes well I'll be able to reveal all after Twelfth Night.