I became very connected with the characters. My heart went out to Tommy and all he had to endure as a child.
- Navigation menu;
- 'Shadows of the Mind'.
- NOTES DE DÉGUSTATION DE MILLÉSIMES LITTÉRAIRES ENFOUIS CUVEE N°3 (CRUS CLASSÉS ET DÉCLASSÉS) (French Edition)!
- Rob the Daemon (Chronicles of Rob the Daemon Book 1)!
- Shadows of the Mind (Shadow series Book 1) eBook: D.W. Neuman: theranchhands.com: Kindle Store.
- Search form.
I really wanted him to find some peace and happiness in his life. The story kept me on an emotional rollercoaster.
- Shadows of the Mind: D.W. Neuman: theranchhands.com: Books.
- Secondary menu!
- Follow the Author.
- .
- .
- The Carnival Of Cruelty.
- The Santa Claus Suit Weight Loss Plan.
- Chapter 005, Serotonin: The Central Link between Bone Mass and Energy Metabolism?
- 'Shadows of the Mind' | theranchhands.com.
This is a book that once you start it you cannot put it down as you just have to know what happens next. As this book ends, you know there are more exciting things just around the corner for Tommy and his family. Get to Know Us. Not Enabled Word Wise: Enabled Average Customer Review: Be the first to review this item Would you like to tell us about a lower price? Delivery and Returns see our delivery rates and policies thinking of returning an item?
See our Returns Policy. Visit our Help Pages. Audible Download Audio Books. Penrose's idea is a type of objective collapse theory. In these theories the wavefunction is a physical wave, which undergoes wave function collapse as a physical process, with observers playing no special role. Penrose theorises that the wave function cannot be sustained in superposition beyond a certain energy difference between the quantum states.
Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness
He gives an approximate value for this difference: When he wrote his first consciousness book, The Emperor's New Mind in , Penrose lacked a detailed proposal for how such quantum processes could be implemented in the brain. Subsequently, Hameroff read The Emperor's New Mind and suggested to Penrose that certain structures within brain cells microtubules were suitable candidate sites for quantum processing and ultimately for consciousness.
Hameroff's contribution to the theory derived from studying brain cells neurons. His interest centred on the cytoskeleton , which provides an internal supportive structure for neurons, and particularly on the microtubules , [5] which are the important component of the cytoskeleton. As neuroscience has progressed, the role of the cytoskeleton and microtubules has assumed greater importance.
In addition to providing a supportive structure for the cell, the known functions of the microtubules include transport of molecules, including neurotransmitter molecules bound for the synapses , and control of the cell's movement, growth and shape. Penrose's views on the human thought process are not widely accepted in scientific circles Drew McDermott , [7] David Chalmers [8] and others. According to Marvin Minsky , because people can construe false ideas to be factual, the process of thinking is not limited to formal logic. Further, AI programs can also conclude that false statements are true, so error is not unique to humans.
Another dissenter, Charles Seife , has said: As a counter-example, Searle cites the assignment of license plate numbers LPN to specific vehicle identification numbers VIN , to register a vehicle. According to Searle, no mathematical function can be used to connect a known VIN with its LPN, but the process of assignment is quite simple—namely, "first come, first served"—and can be performed entirely by a computer. Penrose and Stuart Hameroff have constructed the Orch-OR theory in which human consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in microtubules.
However, in , Max Tegmark calculated in an article he published in Physical Review E [12] that the time scale of neuron firing and excitations in microtubules is slower than the decoherence time by a factor of at least 10 Tegmark's article has been widely cited by critics of the Penrose-Hameroff hypothesis. But I do feel that Penrose has done a good job in conveying the gist of things, and can be sensitive to readers' different backgrounds sometimes suggesting an uninitiated reader to skim a certain part.
I would say that prerequisite knowledge for the book would be prior familiarity with at least concepts of quantum physics ,computation, and Godel's theorem. That aside, I find the subject fascinating, and could very well identify with the "mysteries" Penrose details in the final chapters.
Relating to consciousness as just another soon to be mastered field as treated by the so-called "strong AI" proponents seems presumptuous to me, and I find myself more identifiying with Penrose, who treats the subject with a lot more gravity. I'm no authority, but I would definitely recommend taking in other views though, from the strong AI perspective Kurzweil maybe and Godel, Escher Bach by Hofstadter. Oct 18, Andreas K. He concludes that mathematical understanding, and consciousness in general, is not computational.
One possible candidate for non-computational physics is quantum gravity. This OR is claimed to be non-random and non-computational.
Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness by Roger Penrose
Penrose's highly speculative idea is that cytoskeletal microtubules maintain large-scale quantum coherence through portions of brain, and when a critical threshold is reached the OR takes place. Such processes give rise to the non-computational behavior of the brain. Jun 02, Don Rea rated it it was amazing. The central argument is not as airtight as it should be, being written for a general readership and not for mathematicians, but I'm just in love with the idea of a mathematical proof that the human mind can't be algorithmic.
I wonder if Penrose has published a proper version of the proof? The second half of the book, in which he speculates on what kinds of computation or processes might be the underpinnings of the working of the mind is also fascinating though, again, I don't find his arguments n The central argument is not as airtight as it should be, being written for a general readership and not for mathematicians, but I'm just in love with the idea of a mathematical proof that the human mind can't be algorithmic.
The second half of the book, in which he speculates on what kinds of computation or processes might be the underpinnings of the working of the mind is also fascinating though, again, I don't find his arguments necessarily persuasive. For instance, he basically waves away the "many worlds" interpretation of quantum uncertainty because he simply doesn't like it. He's not quite as good a writer for the non-specialist as Sagan or Feynman, but he's a bona fide genius and his speculations are well worth the trouble to read and understand. This is the first book that I have read that attempts to determine the existence of the mind mathematically scientifically and it is interesting how Penrose, argues for both and against various points, maps out logic mathematically and links quantum mechanics to the working of the brain, thus generating the phenomenon of the 'mind'.
The book is heavy on maths and if you are like me, most of it will just go over the head, despite Penrose's claim that it's just basic maths. Ignoring the maths is This is the first book that I have read that attempts to determine the existence of the mind mathematically scientifically and it is interesting how Penrose, argues for both and against various points, maps out logic mathematically and links quantum mechanics to the working of the brain, thus generating the phenomenon of the 'mind'.
Ignoring the maths is possible at times, but in certain cases you have to wade through.
Special offers and product promotions
The only motivation to do so, is to see the light at the end of the figurative tunnel - to know what Penrose's conclusions are. It is a page-turner though I mostly, skipped the maths and for the person with a serious drive to understand consciousness and the mind, this would be one of your text books. Feb 05, George Hohbach rated it really liked it. The three key insights I took away were: The mathematical, timeless Platonic world contains all of math 2.
The connection between superpositions when, e. How can there be both deterministic processes and processes that appear to be happening randomly? What is the deeper connection so that these opposite processes can occur in one and the same universe? Aquel libro finalizaba con una serie de conjeturas sobre el posible modo en que funciona el pensamiento. Jun 15, Rob Springer rated it liked it. He gives the barest outlines of a new approach to physics he thinks is necessary to bring Mind under the prevue of science. Sep 02, Ronny rated it liked it Shelves: This book's value is in exploring the question of the nature of consciousness and in dismissing the easy answers.
Unfortunately, its ending is very weak as the author poses some kind of biological structure as the reason for consciousness. I found this ultimately unsatisfying, although I wonder if it's just me Mar 10, Unnikrishnan Rajan rated it liked it Shelves: This was my introductory book to Roger Penrose. But the book was very intimidating, even for a computer science graduate.
Only consolation was that exploration of the high level concepts of Turing machine was not the only theme of the book. Which pop-science enthusiast would understand both Goedell theorems and their proofs! So, I can justify myself. Consciousness explained by coherent quantum states within microtubules in the cytoplasm. There, I just saved you a lot of reading time.
Product description
Still very interesting reading. One example is the binary star, one of which is a pulsar - 20 kilometers across, 1. One of the hardest books I've read in a long time, mayhaps its because of the fact that Penrose used methamatical and academic explanation method rather than simplifying facts and me bieng an illiterate and haven't finished middle school yet had its own turmoil reason why this book was a bit heavy on the reading experience, but rich with information never the less.
Penrose proposes that quantum mechanics are at the heart of human consciousness, and the human reality. It leaves the reader to assume that the brain is nothing more than a bio-chemical-electrical computer that has been tinkered with by evolution. Marvelous and thought-provoking illustrations leave little room for doubt about this theory.
Aug 25, David rated it it was ok. Much of this book was a bit too hard on the mathematics for a grade C GCSE underachiever like myself, but I persevered and read through much of the work. However, I just thought that there wasn't much of an argument, nor much of a solution put forward by Penrose. Too much thinking in terms of absolutes, and not enough thinking in terms of a theory of consciousness. May 22, R. O'Connor rated it really liked it. Extremely thought provoking and a real wake up call for those assuming we will achieve the singularity in a few short decades. The theories espoused here are truly amazing, and if shown to be true will change the way we think about just about everything.
Apr 16, Ian Murray-Watson rated it really liked it. Great as far as it goes. Like many scientists - though it would be more accurate to say like most people - Penrose has his blind spots and prejudices. Someimtes you wonder why they refuse to see what's in front of their noses cf. Hidden in Plain Sight. Sep 06, Marco Bitetto rated it it was amazing Recommends it for: This book is substantially better written than Dr.
Penrose's first book on the subject of consciousness and artificial intelligence. I would recommend this book to anyone that wants to understand the limitations of mechanized intelligence vs the power of the human mind. There are no discussion topics on this book yet. He has received a number of prizes and awards, including the Wolf Prize for physics which he shared with Stephen Hawking for their contribution to our understanding of the universe. He is renowned for his work in mathematical physics, in particular his contributions to general relativity and cosmology.
He is also a recreational mathematician and philosopher.
Books by Roger Penrose. Trivia About Shadows of the Mi No trivia or quizzes yet. Quotes from Shadows of the Mi The particular arithmetic that we may happen to choose to work with would, accordingly, be defined merely by some arbitrarily chosen formal system. Godel's theorem shows that none of these formal systems, if consistent, can be complete; so-it is argued-we can keep adjoining new axioms, according to our whim, and obtain all kinds of alternative consistent systems within which we may choose to work.
The comparison is sometimes made with the situation that occurred with Euclidean geometry. For some 21 centuries it was believed that Euclidean geometry was the only geometry possible. But when, in the eighteenth century, mathematicians such as Gauss, Lobachevsky, and Bolyai showed that indeed there are alternatives that are equally possible, the matter of geometry was seemingly removed from the absolute to the arbitrary. Likewise, it is often argued, Godel showed that arithmetic, also, is a matter of arbitrary choice, any one set of consistent axioms being as good as any other.
This, however, is a completely misleading interpretation of what Godel has demonstrated for us. He has taught us that the very notion of a formal axiomatic system is inadequate for capturing even the most basic of mathematical concepts. When we use the term 'arithmetic' without further qualification, we indeed mean the ordinary arithmetic which operates with the ordinary natural numbers 0,1,2,3,4, We may choose, if we wish, to explore the properties of formal systems, and this is certainly a valuable part of mathematical endeavour. But it is something different from exploring the ordinary properties of the ordinary natural numbers.
The situation is, in some ways, perhaps not so very unlike that which occurs with geometry. The study of non-Euclidean geometries is something mathematically interesting, with important applications such as in physics, see ENM Chapter 5 especially Figs 5. There is a difference, however, in that what a logician might refer to as 'Euclidean geometry' can indeed be specified with some reservations in terms of a particular formal system, whereas, as Godel has shown, ordinary 'arithmetic' cannot be so specified. Rather than showing that mathematics most particularly arithmetic is an arbitrary pursuit, whose direction is governed by the whim of Man, Godel demonstrated that it is something absolute, there to be discovered rather than invented cf.
We discover for ourselves what the natural numbers are, and we do not have trouble in distinguishing them from any sort of supernatural numbers. Godel showed that no system of 'man-made' rules can, by themselves, achieve this for us.