Natural Freedom
http://www.naturalfreedom.info/

We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise
http://www.naturalfreedom.info/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=4991
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Hineini [ Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:24 am ]
Post subject:  We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

You guys are going to love this... especially Grinus :lol:

https://www.fitmind.co/podcast-collecti ... cPiTEH1B0g

Steven Hayes is amazing. A lot of things on this forum fit into ACT (Acceptance and Commitment Therapy).

Jump to the 56min.. for the MATRIX.

Author:  peregrinus [ Mon Oct 26, 2020 2:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

Hineini wrote: *
Jump to the 56min.. for the MATRIX.
Listened from 56

Some similarities and complimentary ideas, interesting listen.

Author:  Hineini [ Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

There's a book that I'm going through now that its based on: The Case Against Reality, Donald Hoffman.

Some really interesting similarities. Evolutionary and cognitive psychology. Supports Marquee Value Theory from a fitness perspective.


The fascinating aspect to me is that for the sake of efficiency, we only notice that which is relevant - this is on a sensory level.

Depending on our focus, we actually filter some sensory information out completely.

Author:  peregrinus [ Thu Oct 29, 2020 6:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

To Pay Attention, the Brain Uses Filters, Not a Spotlight

https://www.quantamagazine.org/to-pay-a ... -20190924/

Author:  Hineini [ Mon Nov 02, 2020 4:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

The video in that article is a PERFECT example of how you can miss the most OBVIOUS things in the world when you're so focused on something else...

8-)

Author:  TheDude [ Tue Nov 03, 2020 3:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

That's a really interesting article and topic.

The attentional searchlight metaphor was backward: The brain wasn’t brightening the light on stimuli of interest; it was lowering the lights on everything else.
From an evolutionary perspective this makes a lot of sense. It sounds like it's more efficient to lower the light (energy) on specific stimuli than it is to increase the light on a specific stimuli (could cause burn-out).

Sometimes I worry about all the science of the brain and what bad it could lead to.

The Matrix talk is always interesting.

Yesterday I was chatting with a women who was recently divorced and she was sharing how she recently met someone. To her it felt like it was a coincidence and it was meant to be (not saying it wasn't), but something popped up for me when I was listening to her.

A lot of what she was sharing sounded contrived, like she brought it into existence, because SHE WANTED it, not because it was there and it happened.

It reminded me of the talk here about women telling people their new born looks just like the father, when in reality it's really hard to notice distinct features in a kid at that age.

I don't really know why the last thing reminds me of what the divorced women shared. I do notice it comes a lot when I'm listening to women.

p.s. good to be back on here again. re-organized my schedule to spend more time here. :D

Author:  peregrinus [ Tue Nov 03, 2020 4:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

TheDude wrote: *
That's a really interesting article and topic.
The attentional searchlight metaphor was backward: The brain wasn’t brightening the light on stimuli of interest; it was lowering the lights on everything else.
From an evolutionary perspective this makes a lot of sense. It sounds like it's more efficient to lower the light (energy) on specific stimuli than it is to increase the light on a specific stimuli (could cause burn-out).
Found it very thought provoking and it brought up many memories.

Things fading away, tunnel vision, only hearing very distinct things..

Saturation comes to mind with increasing. So does targeting to increase.
Reducing the rest is an elegant solution, you are not altering what you leave behind.

Also brings to mind, you could filter some things out, filter more out, filter more out, maybe turn that one back on, filter something else out and quickly hone in on what you are looking for.
What you are looking for would still be at the same level when you found it, whereas stacking increasing filters would leave a much distorted signal/value. Probably requiring some compensation or saturation.

Interesting.
TheDude wrote: *
she brought it into existence, because SHE WANTED it, not because it was there and it happened.

women telling people their new born looks just like the father, when in reality it's really hard to notice distinct features in a kid at that age.
Read the first two sentences, as I posted them.. They are the same.

Cherry picking, confirmation bias [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias], filtering ........

so many ways and so striking when you start seeing it.
TheDude wrote: *
I do notice it comes a lot when I'm listening to women.
:D

Author:  TheDude [ Wed Nov 04, 2020 2:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

peregrinus wrote: *
Also brings to mind, you could filter some things out, filter more out, filter more out, maybe turn that one back on, filter something else out and quickly hone in on what you are looking for.
What you are looking for would still be at the same level when you found it, whereas stacking increasing filters would leave a much distorted signal/value. Probably requiring some compensation or saturation.
That's an interesting way to look at it too. Things would seem to get more complicated when there's more going on. Less is more.

peregrinus wrote: *
TheDude wrote: *
she brought it into existence, because SHE WANTED it, not because it was there and it happened.

women telling people their new born looks just like the father, when in reality it's really hard to notice distinct features in a kid at that age.
Read the first two sentences, as I posted them.. They are the same.
It's a woman's world! :lol:

Author:  TheDude [ Wed Nov 04, 2020 2:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

peregrinus wrote: *
Also brings to mind, you could filter some things out, filter more out, filter more out, maybe turn that one back on, filter something else out and quickly hone in on what you are looking for.
What you are looking for would still be at the same level when you found it, whereas stacking increasing filters would leave a much distorted signal/value. Probably requiring some compensation or saturation.
Peregrinus, does that relate to Schrödinger's cat at all? The part about adding things could/could distort what's actually there. It just came to mind.

Author:  peregrinus [ Wed Nov 04, 2020 2:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

TheDude wrote: *
Peregrinus, does that relate to Schrödinger's cat at all? The part about adding things could/could distort what's actually there. It just came to mind.
In the sense that, if you are increasing/amplifying bits of the signal.. Once you observe it, it is altered in some way. so merely trying to isolate it would change it in some way.
In this way, what you observe would not be what is there, rather your altered version, you would then have to re-adjust it to compare it to other similar things, altered in different ways.

Going the route of not touching the source signal, beyond removing things, ie only lessening, not increasing.. you are changing the signal, however the aim is to leave the part you are looking for unaltered.
In this way, you could compare it to other instances fairly easily and quickly.

My thoughts keep bringing me back to saturation and lowpass/highpass/bandpass filters.

{think about this in relation to audio signals, amplitude, frequencies, harmonics... also video signals, how much is encoded in the signal for an individual pixel, not just colour, brightness, alphaness etc.}

e.g. think about how you would isolate a voice (or an instrument) from an audio recording containing many overlapping sounds. or an image of an object from a complex scene.
An example of this would be animals who have vision based on movement, effectively they are filtering out anything that did not change, leaving those things that did change, then processing them to figure out what is going on, what it was that moved and if they have to react to it.

Author:  GoldenBoy [ Wed Nov 04, 2020 6:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: We Only See What's Relevant - MATRIX and Informational Noise

Reading all of this made me think of the "we only use 10% of our brain" debate...

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC+01:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/