An Hierarchical Turing Test for AI

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/CP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014
 .
Have been following Jeffrey Hawkins’ work with some interest, and note work in visual systems. It’s likely that Jeff Hawkins has the closest working model to creating a good simulation of AI.
.
These insights which may help facilitate creating AI & can be explained in  detail using concepts of comparison process and comparison methods, structure/function relationships, least energy, complex systems thinking, and related methods.
.
Using structure/function relationships (clinico-pathological correlation) traditionally, we can generate & create unlimited information about how the brain works, and its corresponding outputs, vision, language, motor/sensory thinking, memory, and so forth. These tools which have seemed to work for me to create higher brain functions right off the cortex, the mind brain interface, (cortical columns of Mountcastle), are S/F relationships, found by the millions in clinical comparisons between lesions in brain and functional deficits, & are self evident to us all. However, using a comparison process model, which largely operates in the CC’s, a very much better understanding can be found.
.
The model is both elegant, simplifying, as well as highly fruitful. Because a comparison can be made between or among most every event in existence both inside brain and outside (in the various permutations), it’s part and parcel of the structure/function method. And appears to be a universal tool. Least energy is also a comparison process, comparing energy, resources, time, and efficiencies of different methods, to find new insights. & likely universally applicable, too.
.
For instance, How does it happen that the brain is organized upside down & reversed right for left in humans, and very likely most normal primates, as well?
.
Right hemisphere controls left body and vice versa, in both motor and sensory homunculi. This is well known from teh time of Wilder Penfield and numerous published cases. The toes are at the top, & in the interhemispheric fissure. Then moving down the cortex of the motor strip comes the instep, the arch, the ankle, and the ankle is connected to the leg bones, & those to the knee, then the thighs, etc. The face is at the bottom, and the trunk and arms fit in between in a smooth transition. Why is this so? In addition, the visual system is also reversed right for left and upside down, with the sup. visual fields functions processed in the inf. occipital lobes and the inferior fields from 3 to 6 to 9 o’clock in the top parts of the visual cortex. & again, left field from 6 to 9, to 12 on the right visual cortex, & vice versa for the right visual fields.
 .
And there is the optic chiasm which takes the right visual field to the left, and vice versa, and the inferior fields to the superior cortex in a smooth transition of reversed upside down & right for left. & the decussations of the pyramids of the inf. brain stem take right sensori-motor afferents from the limbs to left brain, the same way as do the cortical efferents are taken right hemisphere to left body, also. So wherever we find the decussations of the pyramids, we know the brain is most likely upside and right for left oriented. and not just in humans & primates, but likely for most mammals, including the ancient marsupials, the platypus and echidna.
 .
Why & how does this arrangement come about? We hear of the top/down models which were fashionable a few years back, but were somehow not clearly satisfying, either. Somehow incomplete.
 .
The best, most efficient answer, & the key to understanding human/primate/mammalia brain neuroanatomy is quite simple. When we take a magnifying class, and hold it at arm’s length, comparing the images of the room around us, the image thru that double convex lens is reversed right for left and upside down. This is the visual comparison which shows us what’s going on. The eyes have it!  The brain is organized visually, and never in my years of study and work has this simple correlation/comparison been described nor discussed. It’s a deep and universal observation, spanning most higher animals. The ability to create new insights using visualization methods is highly human, and species specific. Altho some primates can copy our actions, the meaning of many actions, as in cargo cults, oftimes eludes them.
 .
Quite simply, we are visual creatures, & our brains are organized largely upon the images of events upon our retinas, and very likely least energy, as well. We have stereoscopic vision, different from other species whose visual fields rarely overlap, but for our cousins, the primates. The evidence is also in the internal capsule’s organization, that of the massive connections of the white matter to the cortices, and the internal mirroring deep structures of the globus pallida and the thalami as well. A truly universal structure/function comparison.
 .
But not only does this occur in humans and land mammals, but also in the dolphins, where the same decussation of pyramids are also seen. We don’t have to dissect these creature to see it, but simply image their nervous systems to find it. & thus we know their hypertrophied sound cortices also are organized in the same way, to highly and efficiently coordinate with the older visual systems. This is basic neuroanatomy, and although the top/down, old at bottom and younger at the top is interesting, it doesn’t have the depth, profundity & universality of the right for left, upside down features.  Even our cerebellum is organized the same, as well.
.
The comparison process when generally applied to data both within and and outside of us, gives us the ability to see events in new ways and relationships which we have missed. For instance, colour vision. How does this come about, this model of events in existence? We can compare our brains’ color system with the EM spectrum for new knowledge. We know that orange is a frequency of light in the spectrum. But not in the visual cortex. It can be generated by mixing yellow & red pigments, but still we perceive orange! Blue green, by mixing blue and green, where the blue-green, real and existing frequencies are there, but not a mix. And then purples by mixing blue and red. And browns, a highly significant colour for some colour blind persons, are red/green in combined EM frequencies. Show us by comparison the “brown” frequency in the spectrum!! It’s not there. Thus our rhodopsins interacting with photons’ black/white continuum, create the colours simply and elegantly by mixing. But they cannot convey to us the existence of the spectrum based upon frequency, even tho, in fact, it may use the energies of colours to detect those.
 .
Another insight is the rainbow, by which Newton was able to see frequencies of light by creating them from refraction. The rainbow is rare, or is it? In fact, it’s a daily phenomenon. Part of a Kuhnian revolution is “new seeing”. New comprehensions created by a new model. As Einstein once stated, “Every advance in physics is preceded by an epistemological advance.” This might also be true of neurosciences. Where IS the daily rainbow seen? Sunrise and sunset. First, it’s black, hardly any colour, then it’s IR with black/red. Then red, then orange, yellow, a bit of green, and then finally blue sky. We see the greens from the plants, and the browns as well, seeing bark and branches. & with the black and then shades of greys with clouds, the colour palette is set for us everyday. And at night once again with the sunset rainbow, too.
.
Consider that our eyes see colours at the brightest and most common frequencies which the sun creates, yellow/green, the center of our visual sensitivities. If an eye needed to detect light best, it would have highly receptive colour sensation for yellow/green. Which eyes do. Those frequencies, which the sun creates at its highest numbers of photons, thus brightest, give the greatest amount of information. It’s efficient, least energy. If we lived on a planet whose sun were yellow to slightly orange, our photopigments would be most sensitive at those frequencies, would they not? So our eyes are clearly attuned, evolutionarily & structurally to the sun. So is the rest of our nervous attuned closely to other common events in existence. As will be shown shortly. These are but a few of the  of the many kinds of insights which comparison process thinking can give.
.
These insights have been missed, for want of the comparison process and least energy tools. & perhaps, we can still see a lot, by just watching, to paraphrase Yogi Berra. Observation still trumps most all models, and creates, corrects, and extends them, too. & so the sciences are self-correcting by carefully observing repeating events in existence.
.
Thus do we find this comparison process which creates many methods to be useful. At your UC Berkeley campus, Dr. Paul J. Stark, PhD, Statistics chair, has a lovely video in which he discusses, “How do we know treatments have effects? The Methods of Comparison.”
.
.
“the effect is ubiquitous.” That is, universal in application. and he’s worked it out rather well, though he’s likely talking about methods, plural, rather than one. The comparison methods create information, and as Dr. Karl Friston states, regarding least energy (LE), it’s “consilient”. Crossing many fields in application, as Dr. Stark also writes. Pieces of this model are all over, but not yet fully integrated and developed. This is yet again more evidence of near universality.
.
Dr Friston’s works on connecting least energy to how brain functions is pretty well spot on and well worked out over the last 25 years. My work on evolution from the comparison, LE approach, pretty well confirms his, and that of others who’ve also seen those relationships when applying LE.
 .
 .
This is cutting edge evolutionary biology, but few have realized it. & at the heart of it lies LE and comparison processing.
 .
 .
When the comparison process and least energy are added in, we get a very great deal of information back out. The inputs and outputs of our CC’s can do this repeatedly, and even input outputs to create the hierarchies of our understandings. Essentially, our language and modeling systems are built upon this. Cognition psychology taught us a very great deal, but hasn’t progressed enough yet, tho intuitively  they realized that recognitions are basic & the case. But what is behind recognition? Clearly, it’s comparison process. When we perceive events in existence, we at once compare those to our long term memories, and if we find a match, we recognize it, that is we “re-know it”. The language, etymology reflect the structure which gave rise to it. and this is another key to understanding understanding and thinking about thinking.
 .
The constant calls to LTM for recognition and the learning which establishes those memories are very clearly related. Events in our universe repeat themselves multiply. Those which are important to us, reinforce themselves into LTM. These are the CC’s modeling the repeating events by reinforcement. & then we create our landmarks & so forth upon those perceived events. This is essentially the behaviorist model, but it’s missing big pieces, neurochemically and neurophysiologically. It’s incomplete, which will be shown below. The highly repeating events in existence, are yet another basic clue to AI and how it can be created. Plus they weigh in heavily with respect to confirmation of events in existence by the sciences.
 .
But when we want to understand description which is largely verbal, we also can find the quantitative version of description, measuring, most useful. When we take a ruler or tape to measure length, we compare the set, stable length standard to the event to be measured. This creates data, or information of length. & when we compare to a word standard, we describe relative to that standard, say a colour among the ROY G BIV standards. Is it red, or yellow, or green, or blue, etc.? So it’s likely that our descriptive measure of events, using words, which are primary, are intimately related by comparison processing to measuring standards as well. They both are comparison methods. Virtually all we do to create information & understanding is thus rooted in comparison processing in our cortices. Again, essential to creating AI.
 .
 .
Most words are likely descriptive standards which we compare to events in existence to understand those events. That is we relate them to events. and this is the point, it’s the comparison which creates the information and knowledge, as the measurement creates the data and information also. Ideas/Words are relatively arbitrary standards by which we measure events and describe them, qualitatively.
 .
For instance, “son”. We know how he is related to his parents, mother and father, his siblings, and his parent’s sibling as his aunts and uncles and his parent’s sibling. The “relatives” of the son are clear. This builds up the hierarchies of genealogies and how we are related to others in our families. The son has a father, as his father was a son, and can have a grandfather, too, or grandsons and so forth. Each comparison creates an hierarchy. Each relative has set specific relationships created and read by comparison processing. In order for AI to be able to function, it MUST be able to understand, create, and navigate the hierarchies of our understandings with simple facility. This could be termed a “hierarchical Turing test” for AI.
 .
And we see the hierarchies all around us. Comparison process both creates the hierarchies and navigates among them. The hierarchies of the dictionaries in alphabetic order, for instance.  Every word ordered by alphabetic comparison processes using trial and error, and dictionaries read by same process. It BOTH writes and reads, & is thus LE. It does lots with a little. The taxonomies of the species, in the millions; the taxonomies of the languages, both current and extinct, each finding its relationship to the others by hierarchic relationships among comparisons without limit of the words in each language (&/or dialects), and how those are related by “comparative linguistics” to the other. The Teutonic are clearly related by comparison, massively. The next hierarchy of the Indo-european. The Ungaro-altaic related to Suomi and Magyar, as well. Each, massively compared by words to the others. The Semitic languages, of ancient Egyptian, Arabic, Amharic, Coptic, Aramaic, etc., are all seen by massive comparison of words to be closely related languages. Each comparison combines to create a huge amount of data supporting the ubiquity and limitless use of comparison process, innate to our cortices. 34 millions of elements & compounds ordered in the IUPAC hierarchical listing, alone; all of them comparison process created, placed and read.
.
This is Einsteinian epistemology as well, because there are NO absolute measures or times or spaces, or much else. Most all that we measure is “relative”, that is, a comparison standard, which Einstein believed was arbitrary, but in fact is not likely that arbitrary. Thus does comparison process tie in neatly with the established facts of relativity, and explain it as well.
.
For instance, he stated that one could use any planet, or any position in our solar system as a fixed point to which we could relate everything else in the universe. But he missed this crucial point. Newtonian physics puts the sun at the center, because of least energy. Orbits about the sun are least energy. Orbits around the earth are not. Least energy rules, yet again. And this is the point. our linguistic standards, and the means by which are brains operate are NOT unlimitedly listings of complexities, but related to least energy rules as the standards. Thus our measuring systems, Hands for horse heights at the shoulder, and feet for length, are least energy. & based upon comparison to human anatomies, at first. Least energy rules are often the means by which we cut the Gordian knots of complexity.
.
For our senses we feel hot and cold. Hot, hotter, hottest, and cold, colder coldest. Hot, more hot, most hot, and cool, more cool and most cool. Notably, the central “hotter” words, etc., ARE the comparative forms!!! Again, language shows us the way, but we did not see those clear clues. Those scales are most all comparisons!! These are many instances of linear temperature scales.
 .
But put a warm object on a cold hand, and it will feel hot. Put a cold object on a cold hand and it will seem normal. or a cold object on a very warm hand? Extreme temperatures again. Sensation is thus largely comparison process, too. And we compare the relatively fixed standard of our temperature scales, based upon the STP boiling point of water and its vaporizing points, do we not? Simple, ubiquitous water, becomes the basis of human temperature scales. An efficient, stable standard is thus created by simplicity and the commonality of water.
 .
Hardness is the Moh’s relative scale to talc which is soft, limestone harder, corundum (sapphire) and diamond, hardest. Thus hardness description is also comparison process. Now we use GPA’s, but that is relative to a more standardized and thus more efficient hardness standard, is it not?
 .
And for visual images? Why should we think that the visual system uses our geometries for modeling the universe of events? Non-euclidean models the real universe, and neither do we see perfect circles, right angles, squares and triangles very much in the natural world, either. Instead, more fractal types of features, which are clearly NOT Euclidean, even as our space/time maths use non-euclidean geometries. And so for shapes the visual system uses curves and roundness, because those are the commonest features the occipital lobes detect. The mother’s face is marked by roundnesses and curves. That likely sets the standard for shape processing in our visual cortex.
 .
Thus, we see optical illusions, some of the commonest of which involve seeing straight lines as curved. Esp., the two straight lines drawn through a series of nested circles. This optical illusion is illustrative of all the others. and how to show those lines are NOT curved, which our visual systems insists they are? Take a clear plastic straight edge ruler and lay it down next to the straight line. and the illusion disappears at once. & generalizing, for nearly every optical illusion there is a comparison correction, or more than one, which will show the illusion. Again, recalling the colour generation of our visual systems, the comparison shows the illusion and the comparison correction(s) which fixes it. THAT is significant evidence again how the comparison process creates sensations of all sorts through central processing.
 .
 .
I referred this article to the Euro Radiological Society and am STILL getting hits after 2 years. & this is how we can further investigate how the visual system creates images, by the misfires of comparison processing in creating the whole, unlimited panoplies of optical illusions. Among those illusions lies the structure/function relationships about how our visual systems work. and not just ours, but most all animals with eyes, too.
 .
Radiology is simply reading images and reporting the findings. But how is this “reading” done? Simple, just like description and measurements are done against fixed standards to create meaning and insights, and new data/information. Each medical specialist, & the more so radiologists, have relatively fixed, efficient standards by which “normal” is judged. By comparing those standards by which they have learned efficiently to read images, they know using a set routine, if AP and lateral chest X-rays, by massive comparisons, are normal or not. The same for all MRI, fMRI, EEG’s, MEG’s, ultrasounds, arteriograms, etc., massive, standardized comparison processing. The same for lab data of patients which is compared to normal standard. How many more instances of comparison processing do we need to realize it’s ubiquitous & universal, and thus proved to exist? It’s self evident.
 .
What of the plate tectonics model in geology? It’s complex system, largely visual thinking, too. Setting up the standards of upwelling zones, or mid-oceanic rift zones, subduction zones, etc. If AI can learn to understand tectonics, and its hierarchies, and how those all interact and work, as well as recognize its features, WITHOUT previous specific training in new examples it hasn’t seen, then General AI is upon us. My work has shown some of this water. But it’s likely there are many more wellsprings of our humanity’s creativity, understanding, and much else.
 .
& there it is. The mind/brain interface of the cortex, which in the CC’s of Mountcastle, a simple, single, repeating process creates the outputs of the mind, including languages, sensations, creativities, the many, multiplicit functions of consciousness, as well as the moral conscience. The latter of which can be imaged at this time.
 .
.
Thus language is easy to generate, from the simple repeating “dada, mama” to the complex. And math as well. Take the linear, number line of counting, 1 + 1, 2 +1,. etc. We can count up and then down. From 2 to 8 there are six counts and vice versa. From that we know there are 4 two’s in 8, and vice versa. By subtraction the same, and by division the same. The we get the exponential both base 10, natural and logarithmic methods.
.
And the hierarchies are again there, the 1’s place, the 10’s, the 100’s, the 1000’s, 100’s of 1000’s, millions and so forth. And the counting, 1st hierarchy; addition/subtractions, second hierarchy; 3rd hierarchy, multiplication and division; 4th, exponentials, etc.
.
For geometries and algebra, we see that when we compare the circumference to the diameter, we derive Pi, as a ratio, a proportion. We get constants, and speed in the same ways. Thus do we get algebra, which is essentially ratios and comparisons, too. And we get trigonometry which are the precise ratios of idealized right triangles by comparing their 2 sides, and angles, to derive the other side, Most all comparison processing, is it not?
 .
And yet it’s far, far deeper than that. When we value items against each other by barter, a bushel of grain is worth some silver, or some copper. Or we create money which measures values of items against a relatively stable, set constant called, for instance, a dollar or pound. Its costs and values, and each currency, each value can be compared to all others by “conversion factors”, or constants, derived by, you guessed it, comparison processing. And when we shop for the best items, for the best costs, we use both massive comparison processing as well as least energy to get the best for our bucks, too.
 .
Most all of our brain higher cortical outputs are comparison processes. Again as some AI experts have stated, “a single repeating principle in the brain which creates predictive control.”
 .
This is how predictive control is obtained:
 .
Comparison processing creates classifications, indices, and social classes among humans as well as the flocks, herds, schools, and so forth. “Like knows like” through universal recognitions created by comparison processing, that is thinking. IQ also becomes easy to define and measure, and not only in humans, either.
.
Communication becomes translation & lots easier, because of
.
Ich bin hier.
I am here.
Je suis ici.
Estoy ahi.
Sum hic.
 .
Most translation is comparison processing, tho context is also CP and is not easily recognizable to a computer. It cannot recognize as easily as we can and with high facility, that we talk differently to bosses, employees, lover, parents, and so forth. Thus context is comparison process, easily seen once we begin to apply CP.
 .
.
“It’s beautiful.” he said to her later in the day.
“It surely is.” she replied. Computers will have a hard time recognizing the sunset context here, let alone the others which are social.
.
& how to communicate with dolphins? What do we recognize in common with them? By the rule of commonality, fish, sharks, bubbles, colours, and so forth. Recently it’s been claimed dolphins have names for each other. because they observed that specific whistles often in a pod attracted the attentions of single members. & when those were played back, only the one whose “name” was broadcast showed interest. Trial and error, comparison process.
.
& when we go into space and meet other species space faring or not? How did our trading ancestors do it?
.
This is wood, this is water, this is meat, and what’s your name for those? Those events in existence which we have in common, those events in existence which create recognitions by continuing reinforcement because similar events repeat themselves. We show the aliens ice, liquid water, and water vapour. Give them our names for those, and at once we have 3 phases of matter and water, which is the commonest life giving element, & must be ubiquitous, as well. Commonest standards, commonest used, even for weight as the 1 cc. gram of water, too. and densities, yet another comparison of mass over volume? The rest flows easily from there. Universal understanding, at a stroke. Simple, easy, elegant, highly fruitful.
.
.
Have gone on way too long, but the model is highly applicable to most everything. Without limits. The universality of the CP and the LE models is notable. It can even, where Hawking’s “The Grand Design” lamented, we cannot integrate the classical models of thermodynamics, relativity and QM, while he missed biology, which also isn’t consistent with two of them, either. The commonalities of understanding can likely create a Unified model of most everything. Defragmenting the sciences, as well.
.
ER equals EPR. Some of your physics colleagues will see this relationship as part of unifying physics of relativity and entanglement, as this model predicts. There are many, many other bridging concepts which can be used, of which LE is key, too. Esp. in solving the complexities of Quantum wave equations. There are approaches possible to achieve even that. Well past renormalization, which is a specific app of a more general solution kind.
.
The implications for AI of where the hierarchies of our understanding come from, how to both create and read and extend those using creativity are thus almost at once apparent. The system can even model neurochemistry, using Dopamine and its ancient and central, 10+ receptor sites, which both create motion and Emotion (D1 and D2, largely). DA can be compared against most all the other neurochemicals such as serotonin, to create sleep/wake cycles, why we dream & even how to better treat migraine headaches, using complex systems thinking. Or how to make Viagra 50 mg. last about 3 days, where its normal duration is 6-8 hours. Then there’s Cialis.
.
Bacterial resistances to antibiotics, which are very easily overcome, as well, using this new paradigm & epistemology of comparison process and least energy, structure/function, and complex systems thinking. Thus we do more with lots less. The secret of growth of all kinds.
.
Hope you found this interesting. I can answer a LOT of questions, including how and why events go viral, fashions/fads & where humor comes from and how to create professional vs. amateur skills for improving education across the board, without limit. It’s behaviorism on super charge, largely extended, because the internal brain source of the classical & operant conditioning model has been found, too.
.
The facts that human think visually is well known. The above alignment of our brains to visual images is no accident and shows that we are visual creatures. In Sagan’s “Cosmos” he showed how Einstein was using “visual thinking” in order to create his relativity model. Einstein asked what it would be like, using a visual thought experiment, to be “riding on a photon”. Also used was the image of picturing a person in a gravitational field and then comparing that to a person in a rocket which was constantly accelerating. The person could not easily know the difference!  And these two visual and sensory insights were basic to creating relativity.
.
Thus, if there is to be TRUE AI, then it must be able to think visually as we humans can. It must be able to solve the problem of where to place an insect in the hierarchies of the beetles, for instance. And if presented with an unknown, to know where that critter must be placed in the established hierarchies of living species.
.
In addition, if it were to hear a language, it must be able to place that language into the hierarchies of the taxonomies of Slavic, Teutonic, romance, and Indo-european, languages, not to ignore the Eastern Asian language as well. It must also be able to create new categories from data, and make sense of that data, thus understanding the relationships of the categories in our hierarchies, upon demand. It must understand the IUPAC, and hnow to place, read and add new categories to that hierarchy as well. Thus, the HIerarchical Turing test, will, if AI can read, understand and creatively add to it, be a solid test for actual, real existing general AI.
.
These methods can answer many questions about AI, and how to get to the Promised Land of general AI. Half the problem of getting there is solved if we know WHERE we are going. And if some go by trial and error, in all its combinatorial complexity, compared to those of us who know WHERE to find our goals, that is we know better & more completely what we are trying to simulate, the win goes to the best model because it’s swiftest & most efficient.

Melding Cognitive Neuroscience & Behaviorism

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/CP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014

Cognitive Neuroscience and Behaviorism can now be significantly joined by using the models in the previous articles. Comparison processes, Least energy, Complex systems, and Comparison methods which exist without limit, can be combined in a more comprehension model of the higher cognitive functions. lastly, the Structure/function relationships which allow us to identify areas in brain which subsume the higher abstractive functions, such as language/math, thinking and reasoning; vision, and other senses, motion and skilled acts;, etc. Essentially, the many higher cognitive functions which create and make up when combined and integrated, our consciousnesses, i.e., how we structure and understand events around us and within us..

.
Comparison process is a universally applicable function, and virtually everything within and without the nervous systems can be compared and contrasted to other events as well. The CP creates the comparison methods, which were widely and well described by Dr. Paul J. Stark, dept. Chair, Statistics, Univ. Cal. Berkeley, and has been referenced numerous times before.
 .
 .
Dr. Stark writes of the “ubiquity” of the comparison method(s), which are available, and cut across most fields, making the CP consilient, and virtually universally applicable worldwide.
 .
 In addition, when we look at our adjectives, which are used to describe most all events, as well, we find the series “high, higher, highest, low lower lowest; cold colder coldest, hot, hotter hottest”, without limit, from the base forms, some, more, most. The first base form is that. The last the “-st” forms, universally used in English worldwide, is the superlative. And the middle form, the “-er” form? The Comparative. There it is again. Very likely all those 3 basic forms are comparison methods as well, with the first setting, then to the highest, or lowest and the rest being comparatively used, universally and applicable to most all descriptive uses. It’s bigger than a breadbox, or hotter than hell, or colder than a freezer, to give some idea of the widest ranges of these comparative terms within our language, called adjectives. Unlimited, as well. Comparison is ubiquitous, it’s universal in our languages, and most all have forms of these same meanings, as well. These are the comparison methods at work in our adjectives, which we use to describe, and measure as well.
 .
Have previous discussed how the comparison process (CP) is a kind of logic which does NOT use the negative. And have discussed how the negative arose as a specific, likely over extension of the exclusions seen. This insight into the negative as a near universal exclusive form Hofstadter shows how the incompleteness of Godel’s Proof arise from this inconsistency, of “This statement is false.” or “I am a liar”, among all the limitless permutations.
 .
In contrast, the CP is the original logic, and it’s a logic of exclusion, which is NOT like formal verbal logics and because of this is naturally self consistent. Exclusion is a highly limited form of the negative. And from this logic likely arises what has heretofore been called “inductive logic.” But it’s lots more than mere induction, too.
 .
The CP does a very great deal as it organizes information in many ways, as well. This was discussed in alphabetization of dictionaries, indices, maps, hierarchies, taxonomies, the IUPAC listing of all known compounds, and elements and their characteristics. & the periodic table of the elements. Also we see the family trees of genealogy, which naturally relates to the taxonomies of both life (Kingdom, phyla, class, order, family, genera, species, and variants of species), and languages, a la the romance languages, the Slavic languages, the Teutonic, Semitic, as well as the overall hierarchy of the Indo-European languages, & those of Asia, as well. All massively CP of the similarities of words to each other, which finds those relationship/associations of words and organizes languages into a genetic order, as well.
 .
 It’s also the root and method of trial and error. CP does a VERY great deal with a little. Creating, writing our dictionaries, as well as reading them, all by trial and error.
 .
 .
Please peruse section 8.
 .
It’s also the origin of data, information and knowledge, and can be very, very easily shown to be the case by this simple, but easily expandable proof using measurement, which is a numerical form of description.  This discussed in the article:
 .
 .
By measuring, using the epistemology of Einstein’s relativity (relationships), we compare a relatively fixed, stable, useful and efficient scale, such as a meter stick. And compare all lengths against that numerical standard. The output is numerical data, and information. So every time we measure something we are creating new information, be it degrees (comparing to the boiling and freezing points of water in both Centigrade and Fahrenheit scales), or weights (against 1 cc. of water at STP, the gram). Or volumes (against a cc. of water). Or pi as the comparison of the lengths of the circumference and diameter. Or algebras as the ratios & proportions, viz. the Comparisons. Trigonometry compares the angles of the sides of the right triangle, as is a form of algebra as well. It’s endless in mathematics & measuring, endlessly useful and repeatable, as well. A comparison method of immense utility.
.
Many concepts and constants in nature are found this way, viz., Pi, the gravitational constant, density, which is gm./cc. ratios, and speeds/velocities, which are km./hour, or minute or second as the case may be. Each of them specific and repeatedly applicable evidences of the wide use of the CP operating in our cortices, producing our mathematics, as well.
 .
Now examine the verbal descriptions we use, as above with the quasi numericities of high, higher and highest, or short, shorter, and shortest Thus showing how verbal descriptions are converted, translated by comparison process into numericity of the scales arising from our senses, long/short, hot/cold, warm/cool, big/little, etc., without limit. There are 10K’s of these adjectival forms in English and they can be created at will without limit. And in each case of them, these trios are specific and unlimited evidence for the existence of the comparison process repeatedly and provably working without end (La Chanson Sans Fin) in our cortices.
 .
Observe how we describe colours, ROY G BIV, by COMPARING those universal standards of colour, against which we describe new events by comparison to our standards. & thus create new information/data. Each word, by clear, logical extension  can be seen & understood, as an efficient comparison standard, which when applied to each new event seen, can describe it relatively to those ideas/words which already exist. Description and measurement are two differing methods by which we describe, but both act, at their root, using comparison processes, arising from the cortical language centers.
 .
Ideas/words most often reinforce each other. The idea is connected intimately to the word, both spoken and now with writing, spelled. Ideas are thus grounded, and reinforced by words, both written & spoken. Ideas become more stable, more usable, more memorable, in these cases. Thus does description using words, act in its own way, as does numerical measuring, to describe events in our existence, both internally or externally. But verbal descriptions are the older system and far, far more flexible. & mathematics as Ulam stated, needs to be much more developed and advanced in order to describe what our words do easily, more flexibly and more universally.
 .
The cameos of how we think, a guy sitting in the sun. It was a cold day, breezy, so to stay warm, he found a place in the warming sun, out of the wind, and kept warm. The animals know the same, and use it intuitively, such as insects warming in the sun, the seals laying on the beach in sun to warm up from the cold water, & even Dimetrodon whose sail like back structures allowed it to warm up more quickly as ir ran blood thru the sail on is back, and thus warmed up more quickly, too. Thus showing how ubiqutous this is. Altho those animal use, but cannot express what they are doing as we can.
 .
So the chap thought about it, and this created creativity, by finding through trial and error, methods to warm up and stay warm, too. It’s universal in how we think, as well. CP shows us how to look inside of the brain and see how the mind orders itself and works.
 .
CP is also the source of how our memories are ordered. Hofstadter has a list of 100’s of words which he’s used erroneously, but which were VERY similar to each other, as evidence of his analogy model of brain processing. But at the root of the analogy, is the comparison process of the entire word cluster of Analogy, metaphor, story, parable, fable, aphorism, koan, etc. All fundamentally comparison process methods, differing modestly, but like the moral laws, the civil/legal laws, the universal scientific laws, and the rules and regs organizing and governing all human groups from the family units up to the means of running schools, churches, corporations and indeed all forms of human groups and associates. The same, massive CP among rules and regs and how we, and events in the universe, behave, and are to behave. From whence comes the moral Conscience as well. All forms all CP methods with the same roots.
 .
At the roots of mnemonics, most all of them are the comparison processes. The word associations, the tricks of memory, because most all words are, as Hofstadter intuitively saw, are organized by what he missed, the comparison process. Universal, ubiquitous, as Dr. Sharp showed, consilient, La Chanson Sans Fin.
.
But how are our verbal memories organized? Clearly not by logic, nor by numbers, but by Sounds. For instance, when we want to use the form, “word”: we can mistakenly use world, or work, as all 3 start the same way. Thus most all words are stored in this hierarchical way, with wor- being a starting form, then we check by T&E for the k, or -ld, or d which we need to find. Because we are searching by T&E we will occ. make a mistake, but as the words are very closely organized, and resemble each other greatly, the information in each allows us to find the right one. Again, information in our “mistakes”, which are not totally wrong. Thus most all words are stored by such sound alike hierarchies, at least at first.
.
As we grow older we begin to attach many new relationships and information to each word. As these categories become more complete, reasoning begins to occur about age 12 or so. But take Ohio, for instance. At first it’s simply the 3 syllables, with the 2nd accented. The we learn there are counties there, geographical regions, and that Ohio borders on Michigan to the N, Indiana to the W, PA to the East and Kentucky to the south, on the Ohio River, and W. Virginian to the SE. Then we learn the cities and major counties, the capital, and that it’s on Lake Erie, one of the whole collection of
Great Lakes, too. So when we think of Ohio, all of these connections are available for our thinking. And just as we select what we want to find the words stored by sounds since childhood, so do we create hierarchical chains of memory tracing tying all of these facts together around, Ohio.
 .
Another example outside of the two ways in which that chap stayed warm, and how he created solutions of staying out of the wind and in the warming sun, synergistically operating. & both which minimize by comparison of outcomes, i.e., trial and error, comes “A mother’s wisdom, the putting together, making connections, the roots of our creativities in most all fields, as well.
.
IN addition, there is yet another basic way of using this information. Most of us have had that time when we could not recall a name or word, but we had something close to it, such as when looking for a name we think of Lewis. as stated before, there is information in our mistakes, which is the beauty and value of the CP. Even our mistakes have the information within them to correct those. So we do a permutation search, knowing we are close to the right name, but not on the money. and we see the name Bruce, and it complete it. We were looking for Willis, and we see thus how close it was to Lewis. Just switch the first 3 letters around and there is the answer. There are endless kinds of these queries we can use to find the words/names we want. Just by being aware of it, is often enough to eventually by T&E finding the right combo to lead us to the word searched for.
.
Clearly, because words are organized by CP this is how both mnemonic systems work and how we store as well as find the words we seek, tho in a very facilitated way, which of course, is called verbal fluency in language.
 .
Now combine the comparison processes  and CP methods with least energy, which is a comparison process as well. All actions take energy. We can compare the energy cost of each action against those similar, and find the one which is least energy. That’s the winner. This is a creativity aspect as well, and as stated before, any systems which can be translated to thermodynamic methods ARE very likely to be real. Least energy methods are real, as the source of tgrial and error outcomes of advantage. As the sources of figuring out good solutions to problems, that is decision making. As we compare outcomes, a la Dr. Sharp, we learn which is most effective, and which has least side effects. & which has the least energy costs, least money cost, least wastage of materials, and least time to perform. Least energy, least energy, least energy. Simplify, simplify, simplify outcomes of Henry David Thoreau. As well as  Occam’s Razor, which states, that the model which explains the most, with the least is the most likely to be right. Least energy again. Creativity again. Do you see? CP, CP, CP, LE, LE, LE, outcomes compared to each other for maximizing benefit with minimal costs.
 .
This article shows how this creates growth from LE processes:
 .
 .
Having established the fundamental basics of mental processing of information and creation of same, it’s necessary to look at behaviorism and meld this with the cognitive neurosciences. Essentially, behaviorism seeks to explain human actions based upon stimulus/response, the comparison process form very similar to cause/effect, input/output, structure/function, etc., being most all CP forms.
 .
And this is an extension of behaviorism into the complex system, structure/function model of CP and least energy. In our environment there exist endless numbers of repeating stabilities. Days, hours, sunrises/sunset, trees, grasses, stars and constellations. All fo this are easily and readily seen, recognized and known again and again without limited. The repetitions of events in our existences, the stabilities.
 .
 .
And how this related to the reinforcement and learnings of behaviorisms is at once very, very clear. Each time we see the same, similar and repeating event, it’s reinforced. We see each stability/event enough times, our long term memory stores it by this constant reinforcement of being sense, again. Be it a word/idea, a kind of bird, a building, a morning/evening star, and so forth. The repetitions of events reinforces those events into our LTM, and this happens naturally and spontaneously. & the more we see any event the faster it’s going to be stored, is not? And is this not learning?  Repetitions of events promote reinforcements of Long Term Memories.
 .
Now consider these, the neurophysiology of dopamine, the growth and spread of humor and memes, the going viral on the internet, or the creation of fads and fashion. All spread and are created by the same, repeating means. The dopamine boost, as has been described before an an internal reinforcing process driven by dopamine (DA). IN fact, DA will preferentially facilitate laying down of LTM, as well. For instance, we most all of us easily recall the first time we had sex with another. We recall the momentous events in our lives, those wedding, that first child born to us, the dreadful accidents and injuries we had. In each case, there was a huge DA boost, in cases of injuries the flight or fight response, created by release fo DA, adrenalin(DA originated, metabolically), cortisone, anandamide, etc. This forced us to lay down deeply ingraining information into our LTM. DA and catecholamines facilitate us to recall those events. And as such, DA also creates growth, in the same was a the Growth and development article above shows.
 .
So not only does Least Energy create growth in brains, with fads, fashion, and the spread of humorous stories, memes, and going viral on the Net, but it Synergistically acts with DA to create growth of our ideas, & actions, as well. These are the two brain systems both in competition with each other, but capable of working together. The physical and the emotional (DA drive). DA creates both the Motion and Emotion in our bodies and brains. & when combined with LE processes can substantially promote growth of both sorts in humans, as well. & it applies by easy extension to the animals and plants, and even the creativity of the DNA itself. Because the laying down of LTM is protein synthesis driven and that means DNA activation by DA without question via messenger RNA to create the physical LTM, mediated by neuronal synapses, rather permanent Long Term Memories.
 .
These internal events have been missed. The external reinforcements of Pavlovian classical conditioning as well as the behavorist discovery of operant conditioning, BOTH operate using LE as well and DA boost. The external conditions effects, are in fact, very likely reinforced and made to work by the DA boost, acting as the final common pathways in learning of most all kinds. The person who is motivated to learn. The pleasures of Philosophy, as Aristotle states, are dopamine boosted. The mother who gives her child sweets while he’s learning so he will be reinforced to learn and LOVE learning, again, internal DA boosting. Thus the DA boost is the internalizing  event of the exterior, visible conditioning events. and not only simplifies our understanding of behavioral reinforcement, but this comparison process explains behaviorism, as well. Providing a cognitive, neuroscientific process which underlies behaviorism and thus in a deliciously efficient, elegant, and simple way, shows how learning occurs.
 .
The “Eureka” moment of Archimedes. The thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. The mountaintop experiences, and discoveries, all driven simply, easily understood both by LE in tandem with the highly reinforcing and remembering, dopamine boost euphorias.
 .
Curiosity is likely the same. I recall when my son brought in a lizard in a bottle. and he was very excited. “Daddy, daddy, look what “I” found!” And it passed into his LTM because it was exciting to him, via DA boost. Cognitive activation methods in teaching in school are of the same kind, easily explained by DA boosting of the teaching methods. The “AHA”, again, you see?
 .
And this is how both cognitive neuroscience AND behaviorist methods can be brought together in a fruitful melding of ideas, Now systems are joined together by the deep connectivity of the comparison process acting within brain/mind.
 .
And how in “Towards Universal Understanding” the thermodynamics, relativity and QM, when combined with  complex systems thinking, CP and it’s methods, LE, and structure/function relationships can create, potentially, Universal models, which by using the universally applicably Comparison processes and methods, plus Least Energy (universally applicable, too), can unite most all knowledge, and explain most all which is within &  without  our brains/bodies and the universe of events in existence.
 .
 .
Universal models. The logic of the comparison process.

La Chanson Sans Fin: Table of Contents

1. The Comparison Process, Introduction, Pt. 1
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/02/14/le-chanson-sans-fin-the-comparison-process-introduction/?relatedposts_hit=1&relatedposts_origin=22&relatedposts_position=0

2. The Comparison Process, Introduction, Pt. 2
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/02/14/le-chanson-sans-fin-the-comparison-process-pt-2/?relatedposts_hit=1&relatedposts_origin=3&relatedposts_position=1

3. The Comparison Process, Introduction, Pt. 3
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/02/15/le-chanson-sans-fin-the-comparison-process-pt-3/?relatedposts_hit=1&relatedposts_origin=7&relatedposts_position=0

4. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 1
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/the-comparison-process-explananda-pt-1/

5. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 2
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/02/28/the-comparison-process-explananda-pt-2/

6. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 3
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/comparison-process-explananda-pt-3/?relatedposts_hit=1&relatedposts_origin=17&relatedposts_position=1

7. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 4
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/the-comparison-process-comp-explananda-4/?relatedposts_hit=1&relatedposts_origin=38&relatedposts_position=0

8. The Comparison Process, The Explananda 5: Cosmology
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/cosmology-and-the-comparison-process-comp-explananda-5/

9. AI and the Comparison Process
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/03/20/artificial-intelligence-ai-and-the-comparison-process-comp/

10. Optical and Sensory Illusions, Creativity and the Comparison Process (COMP)
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/03/06/opticalsensory-illusions-creativity-the-comp/

11. The Emotional Continuum: Exploring Emotions with the Comparison Process
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/04/02/the-emotional-continuum-exploring-emotions/

12. Depths within Depths: the Nested Great Mysteries
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/depths-within-depths-the-nested-great-mysteries/

13. Language/Math, Description/Measurement, Least Energy Principle and AI
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/languagemath-descriptionmeasurement-least-energy-principle-and-ai/

14. The Continua, Yin/Yang, Dualities; Creativity and Prediction
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/04/21/the-continua-yinyang-dualities-creativity-and-prediction/

15. Empirical Introspection and the Comparison Process
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/04/24/81/

16. The Spark of Life and the Soul of Wit
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/04/30/the-spark-of-life-and-the-soul-of-wit/

17. The Praxis: Use of Cortical Evoked Responses (CER), functional MRI (fMRI), Magnetic Electroencephalography (MEG), and Magnetic Stimulation of brain (MagStim) to investigate recognition, creativity and the Comparison Process

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/05/16/the-praxis/

18. A Field Trip into the Mind

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/05/21/106/

19. Complex Systems, Boundary Events and Hierarchies

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/06/11/complex-systems-boundary-events-and-hierarchies/

20. The Relativity of the Cortex: The Mind/Brain Interface

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/the-relativity-of-the-cortex-the-mindbrain-interface/

21. How to Cure Diabetes (AODM type 2)
https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/07/18/how-to-cure-diabetes-aodm-2/

22. Dealing with Sociopaths, Terrorists and Riots

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/08/12/dealing-with-sociopaths-terrorists-and-riots/

23. Beyond the Absolute: The Limits to Knowledge

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/09/03/beyond-the-absolute-limits-to-knowledge/

24  Imaging the Conscience.

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/imaging-the-conscience/

25. The Comparison Process: Creativity, and Linguistics. Analyzing a Movie

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/03/24/comparison-process-creativity-and-linguistics-analyzing-a-movie/

26. A Mother’s Wisdom

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/06/03/a-mothers-wisdom/

27. The Fox and the Hedgehog

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/06/19/the-fox-the-hedgehog/

28. Sequoias, Parkinson’s and Space Sickness.

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/07/17/sequoias-parkinsons-and-space-sickness/

29. Evolution, growth, & Development: A Deeper Understanding.

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/evolution-growth-development-a-deeper-understanding/

30. Explanandum 6: Understanding Complex Systems

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/09/08/explandum-6-understanding-complex-systems/

31. The Promised Land of the Undiscovered Country: Towards Universal Understanding

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/09/28/the-promised-land-of-the-undiscovered-country-towards-universal-understanding-2/

32. The Power of Proliferation

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/10/02/the-power-of-proliferation/

33. A Field Trip into our Understanding

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/11/03/a-field-trip-into-our-understanding/

34.  Extensions & applications: Pts. 1 & 2.

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/05/17/extensions-applications-pts-1-2/

(35. A Hierarchical Turing Test for General AI, this was deleted after being posted, and it’s not known how it occurred.)

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/05/17/extensions-applications-pts-1-2/

35. The Structure of Color Vision

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/06/11/the-structure-of-color-vision/

36. La Chanson Sans Fin:   Table of Contents

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2015/09/28/le-chanson-sans-fin-table-of-contents-2/

37. The Structure of Color Vision

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/06/16/the-structure-of-color-vision-2/

38. Stabilities, Repetitions, and Confirmability

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/06/30/stabilities-repetitions-confirmability/

39. The Balanced Brain

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/07/08/the-balanced-brain/

40. The Limits to Linear Thinking & Methods

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/07/10/the-limits-to-linear-thinking-methods/

.

41. Melding Cognitive Neuroscience & Behaviorism

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/11/19/melding-cognitive-neuroscience-behaviorism/

42. An Hierarchical Turing Test for AI

 

https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2016/12/02/an-hierarchical-turing-test-for-ai/

 

 

The Limits to Linear Thinking & Methods

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/CP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014
.

Largely the old ways of linear thinking are coming to an end. This can be demonstrated in many ways, but the Procrustean mythos of the old Greeks was about this real, limiting problem. The false dichotomies, ” A —> B only” mentality of machines where pushing a button yields only one outcome, whereas as in complex systems (most of the universe of events, 99.99+%) can do much with little. Linear logic and methods have reached their limits to growth. We are clear about this because of the rule of diminishing returns of incompleteness and oversimplification. The simple logics and methods are becoming obsolete and being replaced by far, far better methods which can do more with lots less, and thus grow faster, and do what linear methods cannot even dream of. This change of epistemology and paradigm marks the end of the machine age, in short.

That logic and forms of math which use those recursive logics are not complete as Godel’s Proof shows, more accurately called Godel’s Incompleteness theorem. And it’s easy to see how this works. If everything is either A or not A, and there is no excluded third, as formal verbal logic demands, then this is refuted greatly by the statements that events are either White or black. This is but the fallacy of the false dichotomy, which misses the unlimited variations of shades of greys between the two. Thus our logic eats itself like the Ouroboros snake. It’s intrinsically not logical. Or using another approach the koan of Ulam who stated, calling the universe “non-linear” is like calling biology the study of All non-elephants. It misses millions of species. And those are why linear methods are incomplete, and we are reaching the end of the machine age. It’s simplifying, but too much so. It’s to some extent an easier way of looking at things, but it misses too much to be very complete. & that’s the problem. Light speed measurements, which contrast greatly with QM interpretations of the same events which also elide over and cover up this fallacy will be addressed below.

.Another example is that of graphite reactors, which are complex system at low power due to small areas of fluctuation which propagate from chain reactions beginning at some sites more than others and create instabilities, which can blow up, compared to more sustained, more even linear fissioning processes at higher power outputs.

.The same kind of widely varying rates of fissioning at low power are unstable because some areas will rapidly grow by input/output mechanisms. As a few neutrons hit a few atoms those fission, releasing more neutrons, creating the very quickly rising, notable chain reaction. But in fact, those take place at the onset of fissioning at random areas, where more or less fissioning at low power takes place. This arose from input/output effects, where by chance chain reactions grow exponentially simply by random events, and in other places not so much, due to variations in purity and interactions of fissioning centers as they coalesce and become more even, pretty much homogenous fissioning areas at higher power. The instabilities come at shut down, and powering up. This is what destroyed Chernobyl’s reactor block 4, to the destruction of the USSR, and continuing dreadful radiation contamination problems existing widely over central Europe, today. It’s a complex system being ignored by linear thinking which likely created the problem.

.Very likely had the first nuclear pile, created by Fermi and Leo Szilard, the latter who first realized the possibility of the nuclear chain reaction and patented it for himself, was a similar kind of graphite moderated reactor used at both Windscale’s disastrous events, and Chernobyl’s, the RBMK-1000 models. Had Fermi and his team been less lucky, they could have blown up several city blocks in Chicago and essentially badly damaged or destroyed much of the University of Chicago and even that great city. But nothing is gained by not trying out new methods, although hopefully, as in Alamagordo which was way out in the middle of vast empty areas, showed they’d learned their lesson, at least in part. Those are how complex systems can be applied, as well.

.

As another example of linear thinking ignoring complex system effects & events, look at a weather vane, turbulent flow and plane crashes to see the aspects of complex systems being missed by the forced linear, Procrustean bed approach of eliminating most of what’s going on. For simplification for sure, but still, yields wildly and serious incomplete methods and models. A weather vane generally shows wind direction. But let’s take a complex system, more complete look at what’s much more likely going on. Compare the direction of the wind using a heavier weather vane versus a much lighter one. (Wind socks are ever much more so linear, too!) The heavier weather vane weighs more, uses inertia of matter to even out all of the other directions of turbulent flow of wind. So do wind tunnels, for that matter. Both are highly linearized methods which ignore what’s much more likely ongoing.

.
For instance, the light weather vane on a breezy day will point generally in wide ranges of directions, but on the other hand, it varies its directions a LOT more due to the real, turbulent flow of the wind currents. Thus it can move, literally in any direction as does the turbulent flow of wind, which is the case, & will create vortices, eddies and other features developing from normal wind flow, so that the lighter vane can point even oppositely at times compared to the heavier. & light vanes can even spin about whereas the heavier vane will not be so likely to do that. Thus the heavy weather vane is linearizing wind events and creating a false output, which while it simplifies interpretation, is in fact not the case and thus not a very complete description of wind flow.
.
Further, Turbulent flow is growth capable, which is why a butterfly’s wing flapping can create via growth processes the outcomes of Tropical Storms to typhoons. & the same growth capabilities of complex systems, create the transforms relative to emergence in complex living systems as well. Turbulent flow is created by this constant adding up and proliferation of events.
.
This omission of real data, ignoring existing events has serious implications for aircraft  flight. As mentioned above, wind tunnels give a highly linearized kind of flow, which is NOT what’s seen in the real life of turbulent flow, i.e., winds. Thus the efficiencies of such wings are just about ONLY seen at higher velocities, rather than the lower. As the fixed wing planes fly slowly, the wind flow over wings is necessarily more turbulent. As they speed up, it becomes more linearized. This creates a problem at lower speeds, too, because the fixed wings are designed for high velocity. But, and this is the key point, slowing down and landing and speeding up from stopped to lift off and beyond are NOT as linear. That’s largely what creates the most crashes which are very often seen at take off and landings. These observations should have  very profound effects upon wing and aircraft design, as well. And are why it’s also good to fly into a head wind when landing and taking off, not just because in the latter it slows the craft down, but in the former,  it rapidly increases the linearity and diminishes the turbulent flow, too!! It’s not just a linear phenomenon, we see. & with VTOL’s was an early problem with acceleration and take off, too.
.
This is important because it’s at lift off and taking off, as well as at landings that MOST crashes take place. That is, during the not linear wind flows around those fixed, linear wings, where down and up drafts, cross currents, and other normal wind phenomena of turbulent, chaotic wind flow, easily and provably observed takes place. Thus many plane crashes are a result of wings and lift which mostly work best in linear flows, and tend to crash at other times. Even at higher speeds, hitting the jet stream, or a cross current flow of two intersecting weather systems can do much the same thing, the so called, “clear air turbulence”.
.
And there is that turbulent flow problem again.and this is the real point. Birds don’t use fixed wings, and they use moving, complex systems to fly by flapping, changing their wing aned body shapes and movements in many different ways. As those are complex system they have much more capabilities to adjust to cross currents & turbulent flows by adjusting automatically in ways which trial and error systems have found to be effective. & they can even create & perform the most amazing flight acrobatics, as well. As our vector thrust aircraft still being developed, can do a lot of it as well. Thus VT is a more non-linear way of flying because of the unlimited combinations  two thrust vector engines flows can create.
.
These VT create non-linear, complex system flight paths which linear jets cannot begin to do, nor compete against. The 90% and 99& kill rates of the vector thrust Indian MIG’s and Sukhoi’s, seen against US F-16 advanced fighters in a mock air battle showed this back in 2004-5. And those have been carefully hushed up and not widely broadcast, because it showed, among other things, that complex system approaches were far, far more capable than linear, fixed wing methods so long used. Similarly, thrust vector missiles and torpedoes also have such capabilities, because they are not subject to linear flying and sailing which their target must be. & can outfox anti-missile systems which expect inertial and linear flight paths.
.
But how can we deal with turbulent flow? & that’s been the problem of solving and understanding turbulent flow problems. It’s rather simple in fact, and goes to the heart of how we know what we know, that is, our epistemological assumptions. Our cortices can solve those problems by a simple series of methods using comparison processes. They find the stabilities in complex systems, those repeating events which can be seen again & again, recognized, remembered and recalled without limit. Those observations, which the birds have made with their 220 millions years of gliding and flight and have passed into their instinctual complex system of flight skills created by their nervous systems. Those modify wing shape and movements to minimize the interruption of flight every 5-10 ms. or so. Which linear system, fixed wing aircraft cannot possibly do. That’s the secret. Our complex system brain outputs ignore linearity and looks for stabilities (most often created by least energy effects) and patterns which they can recognize, and within those create a working, practical, trial and error driven model of efficient flight. Surely it takes longer to develop and use, but they don’t crash that often as do our aircraft and are at home in flight through turbulent conditions because rather than trying to linearize it, they take advantage of all of the unlimited options to fly with greater safety, skills and abilities than fixed wing, mere machines can do.
.
This is what a consideration of weather vanes can show. And once we realize those facts, find the appropriate answers/solutions, then the crashes at take off and landing due to turbulent flow will simply disappear, largely. These are the practical benefits of complex system thinking replacing highly limited, incomplete and not very capable linear thinking.
.
Weather is also complex system of multiple factors of wind speeds and directions,  of humidity, density and temps of air, and their complex interactions. As a result the huge numbers of weather of all types cannot be understood very well using linear methods. Thus we have found, that like the simpler complex systems of dice, and the more complex systems of quantum mechanics, that we must use probabilities, which find more of the stabilities and repeating events which lead to understanding. Once again, our ability to input the outputs of events to find the higher order and relationships, which creates our hierarchies of understanding our weather. The seasonal temp changes, the more rain in the spring where cooler and warmer more humid weather creates rain, thunderstorms, even hail, lightning and tornadoes, those attendant dangers, which weather forecasting can develop and use to more cleanly predict what’s going on. Thus we can better guard ourselves against flooding, lightning strikes, powerful storms, wind & hail damage and so forth. Probabilities are one way which we can better deal with, by trial and error outcomes, bad weather and good, heat and very cold weather, as well. It introduces more predictability using math probabilities, than is possible with linear methods. Using the far, far older and still workable comparison processing of recognition and then pattern recognitions. Indeed most math models are developed from the earlier recognition and pattern recognition models as has been shown in Relativity, which was first created by recognition systems, and THEN mathematized after the fact by Minkowski and Einstein. This is where our sensory information has been converted to mathematical forms, although highly linear methods, which also miss a lot of the complex systems details, too.
.
With respect to the linearization of complex systems in which medications/drugs are used, this also shows this same kind of epistemological shift from linear systems, that is, drug “side effects”, which are in fact complex system effects. & calling them side effects, simply ignores, oversimplifies, and misses the outcomes needed to increase understanding without limit. Have discussed this before in:
.
Peruse about 1/2 way down the article to the paragraph beginning:
“Lets use a clear, medical application of complex systems thinking….. “
.
But suffice it to say, the linear method of “take the pill” and ignores the “complex system effects”, is best replaced by complex systems thinking, a far, far better way of doing things, & is leading to a new pharmacology, where multiply active drugs, have far, far more beneficial effects, that just one, linearized pill, & with fewer side effects. More likely, it uses widely those “side effects” & can be our friends. & as current research shows bacterial drug resistance is being attacked by using just those methods. Understanding the deeper ambience, the myriads of milieus of complex systems, allows us to give a dual drug, which blocks the beta lactamase used by resistant bacteria against the highly effective class of penicillins and cephalosporins.
.
Thus the PCN starts to work again. & there are other mechanisms which can be used, such as triple therapies, long used in TB and Staph infections, among the more common and earlier forms of drug resistant bacteria. Using 3 antibiotics together in different combinations can create a kind of complexity of interactions, most notably, that the bacteria will have a very hard time figuring out and adjusting to. The trinary method creates, as N = 3 or greater, a complexity of such vastnesses, it’s all but impossible to overcome, therefore. We use complexity against bacterial resistances, in other words. We make the combinatorial complexity too great for bacteria to very easily overcome!! Thus complex systems thinking, extending our models well past the linear “take the pill” with the least side effects (ahem!) approaches.
.
This is also how sildenafil can be made to last 3 days. And how drug resistances of most all types can be attacked and blocked. By using 3 or more meds which attack HIV, much more is attained, as well. Complex system approaches, which have been created by trial and error. & sadly those using them haven’t any kind of good model to understanding WHAT they are doing, and why and how to expand greatly with this complex system knowledge to create unlimited amounts of further, useful approaches & work. This is the power of complex system understanding and knowledge and why this can go & grow, without limit, too.
.
Largely, though, what we create is what we are looking at. We mistake the “precision” of our figures for something which actually does not exist!  We linearize the outputs by least mean squares, and then admire the accuracies we achieve. This is false reasoning and not the case. The linear points from which we artificially create a line from, by “least mean squares” methods. The measuring of high exponents numbers of events, which we then create a very tight, supposedly highly accurate figure, which disappears when we only measure a few of those points. We sum up endless measurements and get a very tight figure for “cee”, but if we measure only a few photons, we find that those photons are travelling both below and above light speed.  Gleich discussed much of this in his “Chaos” book. The scatter of points so often found in experiments, and then linearized using a lest means square line drawn through all those point is omitting, ignoring and missing actual events.
Extending this further, this is the light speed problem in a nutshell. When 10 exp.30 photons are measured, a very, very tight, linear speed of light is obtained. But this is an illusion. When 10-20 photons ONLY are measured, the velocities will likely be both FTL and slower, too. There will be a distribution of photon veolocies, NOT each photon traveling at ONLY Cee!.  This is the source of the illusion which linear methods create. When Eugene Wigner in his article published in 1955 showed that helium atoms tunneling out of a radio-isotope did not ALL stay below light speed, but that some were transluminal, his findings were ignored and physicists refused to come to grips with the Procrustean bed linearizing of events in existence, which they were doing.
.
The summation is not real, the certainty and precision are created by our methods, which hides the awful truth that at the quantum level of events, such precision is NOT possible. This has been shown before when we measure events of specific types again and again, with more and more precise methods which cost more and more to do. Eventually we reach the limits of our precision, but we fail in finding that last digit. The Law of diminishing returns kicks in, as it has in particle physics, trying to reach the end of the exponential barrier of light speed, and we miss what’s going on. We are looking at the forced results of our methods, not necessarily at events in existence. We are looking at the outcomes, the limits to our methods, not necessarily events in existence. We create the Procrustean bed of linearity, forcing events of all sorts into a straight line, when in fact, those events are not likely so.
.
Let’s carry this further. By measuring each event with the series of measuring methods, as has been stated before many times, we at first eyeball the length, and get an approximation, say 8 inches. Then we use a good tape measure or rule and get the length to say 8 1/4 in. Then we use a very fine metal draftsman’s rule, and get it to about 8 9/32ths. Then a finer metal rule to 8 & 17 64ths. Then we use a micrometer and get it to 8.25773. But at each level, no matter if we use a light microscope, an electron scope, or use light interference to measure down to nanometers, we still have in each case of meauring, the +/- error of measurement, and each method costs more and more. We are aproaching the rule of diminishing returns, the exponential barrier limit of most all measurements. There is NO final digit possible to be found. There is always a limit to our measurement! Events in existence are not likely to be measurable to any final digits. Further with changing temps and pressures physical characteristics of objects will, at microscopic levels, change shapes & sizes as well. Most all events are very likely irrational numbers due to these limits in our measuring methods, intrinsically.
.
And this is the point, linearizing events in existence imposes a Procrustean bed of unreality upon them. Colors are NOT a visible, linear spectrum of wavelengths and energy and Planck’s constant, and energy, AKA E=h times nu. Walk into a paint store and look at their huge collections of color palettes, which mix up all those wavelengths with combinations of colors NOT seen in the EM spectrum, nor even hinted at. And the unlimited gray scales between black and white, all of which create the unlimited vastnesses of colors which are detectable by our eyes. The realities of what colors are much more likely to be. Mixtures of spectra of light photons of varying numbers at many frequencies, combined with both white to black and all the unlimited shades of grey, fixed by the quantum emission events of electron levels, and in some cases nuclear gamma radiation, too.
.
This is the problem. Photons making up colors are much, much more than a linear scale of light frequencies. They are in fact combinations of photons of many frequencies, which we can both see, detect and often not detect. Our eyes see at a macroscopic level, which sums up and misses most all of this unimaginable detail and indeed created synthetic colors, such as brown, and mixes red with blue and gets violet, and blue and green and gets aqua & various shades of turquoise, too. Colors are constructs of our brains. We miss most of the details in terms of the numbers photons of light at each frequency, and in fact we cannot begin to measure that complexity, either. And there is NO final digit to brightness, nor the mixtures of frequencies, either. Light is NOT a linear scale but saturation, numbers of photons, and kinds and numbers and intensities of photons, you see. And none of those have ANY final digits, either! Events are essentially irrational numbers at a deep quantum level.
.
But understanding this, we can see beyond the highly simplified, linear series  of low and high frequencies of light. Just as we can see beyond linear number lines, to the more complex events which lie behind temperatures, which are essentially simplified down to speeds of particles and atoms. Near absolute zero, which we cannot EVER reach, characteristics change. Bose-Einstein effects take place which are NOT predicted by classical physics. Near light speed, characterizations change, too. In either case our reality is within a well at either end between an exponential barrier of Cee and the same at absolute zero. Whence come these events? There is something beyond absolute zero as well, which our linear methods do not account for, too.
.
But cee can be exceeded, because measurement of photons and QT of alpha particles, helium atoms from radioisotopes, shows FTL, which creates the average of light speed, does it not? We are summing not ONLY up from below light speed, but above it, to create the statistical exact light speed.  Cee is a tight figure because we use so many orders of magnitude of repeated measurements to make it that way. But on either side of cee, there are still photons moving both below and above. Accordingly, QM states that cee is a statistic, NOT an absolute. Thus we get “beyond the absolutes”!! Our models are not complete!!
.
.
The same is true of pressure measurements. At normal STP we see solids, liquids and gases, all of this on the linear scale of pressures and temps. But it’s complex and is temp and pressure dependent, and NOT linear. At very high temps we see plasmas, and not gasses. And at very high pressure we get this hierarchy, which is quantized, of solid, compressed solids, including the unusual compounds not seen at earth surface pressures. The white dwarf star matter, then neutron stars, and then finally black holes. The latter two of which likely evaporate due to quantum fluctuations of neutron –> proton, energy, electrons and antineutrinos. And the black holes which evaporate by violations of the fact that some particles and photons will escape from the black hole in pairs, when they exceed cee. Compare and contrast this with evaporation of radioisotopes, which also Qu. Tunnel particles out of the highly compact nucleus, where high densities slow down processes such as neutron decay times. Within many isotopes, the neutrons are not limited to about 15′ of life, but as far as we are concerned, an unlimited life span, within a high gravitational field.
.
Yet another limit is the way our cortical columns (CC’s) process information. We read, and count and speak, linearly, because that’s the way the CC’s work. Thus linearity is built into the system. But by using hierarchically ordered means, we can figure out complex systems by looking at stabilities, and linking those together by CP. This creates & writes the hierarchies of our understanding, and also how we read and speak, linearly. But it gets around linearity by allowing us to understand the patterns, relationships, and associations of those groups of events, by thinking about them visually, and not just by using linear speech, thinking and so forth. These visualization and hierarchical methods, using both taxonomies and hierarchies to order information works a lot better than simply induction and deduction. Thus our recognition systems driven by the higher logic of CP get around the linear to create understanding of complex system by this means.
.
In addition, we can parallel process in our minds. It’s built into the system, because we know that some persons can multitask. It’s a skill, tho not common. We know that Julius Caesar was dictating to one scribe while riding, at the same time thinking about what he was going to dictate to the other, and so composed at twice the rate. & because the two groups of composition, they could interact with each other, this allowed a deeper analysis of events to take place. The two dictations were interacting, and the whole becomes more than the two apart.
.
In the same way, a chemistry prof could not only lecture to us, but also plan what he was going to do in the lab that coming afternoon, at much the same time. & he could integrate the two when needed, also. As our CC’s DO operate rather independently of each other, although many are connected in real time, this also is a way of rising above the limits of linear thinking and data processing. Indeed we are thinking in real space, while walking down the street; we can be listening to music while writing; and we can also be seeing, while hearing, while talking, much at the same time, too. This vast integration, which might be very possibly creating a complex system of outputs, may in fact be creating the non-linear, complex system which we call consciousness. This then, might be a series of solutions to the problems, of rising above the limits of linear thinking and forward flowing information processing, too, in the CC’s. And sounds a good deal like what the many brain functions going on inside our heads are doing all the time, too.
.
We can be aware of our breathing and controlling that, tho it falls back to brain stem, sub-conscious control much of the time. For instance we learn subconsciously to control our breathing while speaking, and must. It’s essential to talking normally, too. Talking means we are moving air thru our vocal chords to make normal speech. Thus, much is being done, as well as lip, tongue and other movements of the palate. These combined activities, multitasking in other words, which we do all the time while playing 10 fingers on a keyboard, show this multitasking capabilities of brains. & not only that, but the player of the keyboard, can simultaneously  listen to the orchestra around him, while playing as well, as do the other member of the orchestra, band, choir, and so forth. All of these events, imply  innate, multitasking, simultaneous activities, which can produce, much, much more by working together, than alone. &  shows thus that the normal brain is likely operating as a complex system, and NOT linearly. Thus we must learn to understand how these multiple tasks are done together, and then extend it in our normal brain activities. Then learn to facilitate it and then teach it to others. This represents yet another way in which we can use visual thinking to extend our understanding of complex systems, too. The unlimited options given us by normal brain, operating well out of the forced, linear methods we can grow far, far too accustomed to, as well.

The Balanced Brain

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/CP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014
.
There are a few basic concepts to understand more completely the complexities of neurochemistry. First of all, dopamine is the oldest and most central neurochemical of primate brains. It has upwards of 15-20 receptors with which it interacts, and thus must likely be very ancient to have so many. The D1 and D2 receptors, which largely, respectively mediate Motion and Emotion. In addition, DA is the parent compound of the catecholamines, the precursor of both norepinephrine and adrenaline, from which the former is directly derived.  DA interacts with both NE and Adrenalin receptors as well, and shares many of their alerting, activating, and stimulant qualities.
.
Also, it must be understood that it’s the comparative activity of neurochemicals, not just only their absolute levels which determine these activities’ outputs. This is because there are down regulators of DA, such as GABA and Serotonin (5-HT), as well as other catecholamine up regulators. So a modest DA level, but with decline in inhibitory neurochemicals such as serotonin and GABA can produce overexcitation, well past what the actual DA levels would produce. For instance, a GABA setting protein in brain reduces effective GABA inhibition of DA, and may create psychosis or mania, while the DA level really has not changed that much.
.
Next, in order to generate information, at least two events must be compared to generate information, just as comparing a length of an object to a measuring scale creates data, so comparing the known major effects of DA with other neurochemicals will create the relationships and information about most all the other neurochemicals, which both share effects of and interact with DA in some ways. Thus we use DA as the major descriptor, the least energy comparison by which we interpret and more completely can understand, in a general framework sort of way, more comprehension of brain neurophysiology and neurochemistries.
.
Dopamine (DA) has these multiplicit capabilities as manifested by its many receptors sites, showing its complex systems’ essential nature.
It creates pleasure, and this is well established. DA in too high activity/levels can create an imbalance which creates psychosis and/or mania, which in the “Emotional Continuum” :
.
.
shows how essential it is to understanding emotion. Talking to those who’ve experience such events, they state it was a rich and wonderfully joyous thing. Then did NOT want to lose the mania or psychosis, because it was a highly euphoric state. This observation also explains why taking meds to suppress such states is often resisted by patients as they lose that feeling of “Freude” and pleasure. It’s highly rewarding effect to have high DA activities and levels.
.
In addition, high DA levels/activities are associated with increased speed and depths of memory lay downs. The most exciting events we experience, those mountaintop experiences, the dangers and major events of our lives are enshrouded in a high DA state, and we thus rarely forget them, Wild, wonderful, dangerous, or very exciting. DA enhances long term memory, possibly by enhancing synaptic creation by protein synthesis.
.
Also, high DA, or indeed high adrenaline as well, creates a euphoria, which can be imitated by opiates, cocaine, amphetamine, endorphines, nicotine, and even the dimethylxanthines, such as Caffeine, theobromine, theophylline, tho the latter three are not as strong as the former.
.

Also, each those substances may be quite addictive, in various levels, and when levels decline, also result in addictive withdrawal effects, from mild in caffeine and its congeners, to moderate in nicotine, and rather severe in opiates, cocaine, etc. These withdrawals also reinforce the addiction because getting “high” again will ablate the highly unpleasant withdrawal states of nausea, illness, headaches, etc., as well as restore that euphoric feeling.

.

Often those with high DA activity are anorexic, and lose appetite, as it’s a potent anorexic agent, as are nicotine, amphetamines, etc. The implications of this for anorexia nervosa treatment is significant, because if that DA activity is high, it can be blocked with DA inhibitors, such as the haloperidols, and so forth.  Orexin effects can also be a source of this condition, but operates via the older, deeper DA systems creating appetite suppression and satiety.

.

Inhibiting DA will also create drowsiness, which is commonly seen with most all DA blockers, as well. Thus DA is a very well described alerting agent in brain among the neurochemicals, as are the other catecholamines and those agents which release them.
.
In addition, DA is known to be addictive as well, as giving large doses of L-dopa, will create problems with addictive withdrawals upon stopping higher L-dopa use in Parkinson’s patients. In addition, fava beans have a moderate amount of L-dopa in them and thus can be addictive in themselves, perhaps accounting for some of the popularity of fava beans and humus.
.
DA can create nausea and vomiting, as anyone has seen with a flight or fight response of bilateral adrenal discharges released in dangerous, threatening, or modest to severe injuries. Strength, performance and speeds enhancement occur with this survival response, as well. & many of the opiates create serious nausea, too. although the anandamide receptors (via, for instance,THC)which can create euphorias also, creating increased appetite, pain control, and control nausea to some extent. Thus we learn by those chemicals which create & modulate DA effects, more of the entire aspects of DA, itself. We learn by comparison, and create knowledge and information by these fruitful comparisons.
.
Those persons often will throw up with high DA effects, and in addition, are highly resistant to pain. PCP users are notable for this pain resistance, and nothing but a strong taser will slow them down. Thus DA has significant pain relieving activity, and notably modest with dimethyl xanthines, nicotine, but more pronounced with opiates (both exogenous and endogenous), and cocaine, as well.
.
The association of euphoria producing drugs with pain control is well known, and this is yet again another DA effect, centrally.
.

The association of DA with higher creativity is well known. And if the DA gets too high it can also create madness. Thus, the well known association between madness and genius of this type. And the creativity of many highly talented persons is associated with a DA profile very much like that of a schizophrenic, though those affective characteristics are controlled in some way, so they do not come out as mania or madness of frank psychoses. Creativity and inspiration are thus DA characteristics as well. And those drugs associated with this kind of DA stimulation can also promote creativity, though with a cost, as is well known with such stimulant drugs: addiction, death, psychosis, and so forth. Heart attacks with overstimulating effects of the catecholamines are well known. For this reason very little coffee or even chocolate are allowed patients in coronary care units.

.

The well known “roid rages” seen in males who use huge amounts of androgenic steroids, show how very widely originating DA stimulation effects can be. And in estrogen usages, or menapausal withdrawal of estrogen, psychoses and related mental disorders can also, clearly be observed. And “roid rage” and those menopausal disorder ARE successfully, confirmably and repeatedly treated with major tranquilizers, as more confirmation of this wide range of substances whose multiplicit effects, show the complex systems at work. Thus, the balanced, brain.

In addition, testosterone can create an aggressiveness often seen in younger men, shortly after puberty, which may persist unless socially better controlled. Almost all of those males who “burn rubber” creating the squealing tires effect are young. Few women do that, either.
.
Recently a “Y” chromosome of a highly specific type was reported in 50% of the men in Europe, having a common male ancestor. For that much growth and spread of the few genes on the Y, it must have been potent indeed, creating substantial advantages, Least energy effects, which created its stupendous growth. Y chromosome is uniformly associate with 4-5 fold higher androgen levels after puberty in most all males compared to women. Thus the complex system effects of sex hormones in creating advantage of enough of a value to perpetuate itself and grow to this degree, is likely a possible reason for its growth and success.
.
Let us take a number of clinical states, such as sleep/wake cycles, migraine headaches, and in a later article, on the pain complex system of DA, opiates and endorphins, and the neurokinins. This will explain the bases of pain control as a complex system strategy, rather than just taking a single medication, & instead of the usual, linear, and too limited approaches to DA disorders and related conditions.
.
During wakefulness, DA levels and activities are rather high. However, as the day wears on, esp. with hard physical labor, a certain amount of sleepiness can occur. Because the DA and 5HT interact in a balanced way, as DA activity declines, the person normally becomes more drowsy and tired, & very often a nap will restore normal wakefulness. Thus, the 5HT effects will rise when DA activity declines. And alertness will rise, as DA effects are enhanced, as caused also with nicotine, dimethyl xanthines, and so forth. This also is another case of the “balanced brain” where effects are activities levels modulated by other neurochemicals, being stimulants or sedatives.
.
IN fact, it’s rather interesting that humans have what are termed nicotinic receptor sites, when nicotine is NOT found in the brain at all!! This indicates that there is something in the brain, normally, which activates those receptor sites, and in doing so, creates similar effects as do nicotine, including withdrawal and addictive effects, as well as with higher doses (as with Strychnine), delusional, manic states, and often seizures. Thus, since DA is the major stimulant widely employed endogenously,(it will awaken some comatose patients when given IV to raise BP) the primary nicotinic neurochemicals must be the catecholamines. There is NO endogenous nicotine found in human brain.
.
Why then are nicotinic receptors sites discussed? What do those receptor site ACTUALLY bind to? And why is this question never really addressed? But it does strongly imply a relationship between muscle activity and acetylcholine and dopamine. We know that the strength of those who are in high DA states is far, far greater than normally seen. PCP and other manias are seen to do this. Stories of flight and fight responses from Adrenal release are well known. The increased aggressiveness of those with high DA activity/levels is also well known. Thus, the secondary neurochemical in muscle activation is likely DA as well as ACh. The evidence has been there for years, tho and hasn’t really been well understood, either. But these are extreme cases, but nonethless real, observed, and repeatedly seen events showing almost supernormal strength. DA is likely behind this as well as adrenaline.
.
For this reason, as we know that stimulants necessarily mimic DA, and that DA creates addiction if in high levels/activities, then the so called nicotinic receptors are in fact, partial DA receptor sites.  External nicotine when administered, activates these sites to produce addictions, some euphoria, appetite suppression, and can create withdrawal effects, as well. Thus the DA spectrum is partially, again, mimicked by nicotine. And that’s the whole key.
.
In terms of pain control, euphoria is found with elevated DA levels/activities, as with amphetamines, cocaine, PCP, and even with THC, which is the anandamide receptor, tho that is endogenously produced and often released with stress and flight or fight responses, but short lived. Where DA activity is imitated, or mimicked, then we have found, as with opiates, a cross reactivity with the DA primary sites, in most cases. Thus the nicotine receptors Are NOT actually such sites, but ALSO cross reactive with where DA is also active, either primarily or as a moderator.
.
This fact is also strongly reinforced by this observation, clinically, that DA can create nausea, as can any of the catecholamines in high doses, but that they also create pain control as well. This explains why the nicotinic agonists, epibatidine and its analogue nicotinic agonist tebenacline both are powerful pain reducers, too,  200 and 50 times as effective, mg./mg. as morphine sulfate, the baseline pain control drug we use to measure pain reduction (again, comparison process!!). They act as DA analogues, and kill pain as well, but without the addictive side effects, tolerance, although they do create nausea, as do opiates and DA.
.
We see partial DA spectral effects with many other meds as well, thus showing the overlaps with DA effects of stimulation. We also begin to understand why the aspirin in some compound drugs, are given with caffeine (Anacin)to enhance pain control, as well, This, too is no accident, but complex system effects acting, which we can see, once we detail the full DA effects of stimulation, pain control, appetite suppression, nausea, increased BP and heart rate, etc. When we measure by comparison other drugs against the DA profile of multiplicit effects, we begin to see more deeply into the neurochemical systems in our brain & how they interact and act.
.
Thus we can see why DA operates in the nicotinic receptor sites, when there is NO nicotine in brain to activate them!!
.
We see depressions with beta blockers, but why does no one ask how this happens? Because beta blockers block catecholamine effects, the DA is also affected in some cases and thus depression occurs, as partial spectrum of DA effects. Thus the alpha and beta adrenergic receptor sites are ALSO DA receptor sites. This adds about 4-5 more receptor sites to the DA family as well. Plus the nicotinic sites, too.
.
Then when we discuss sleep, we must make a model of DA and 5HT and how they interact. The drowsiness which occurs is when the lowering DA level/activity occurs, unmasking the 5HT (and GABA) sedating effects. When GABA is low in activity/levels, mania and psychosis can be produced.
.
So when drowsiness occurs, the 5HT may then increase in activity as well as in levels, & the person sleeps for a while. Then awakens when the DA returns more towards normal activities, too. And we can dream during naps as well.
.
And that is interesting, because as we awaken partially during normal sleep, the 5HT activity is high and we cannot awaken fully. But the cortex is activated and normal activity during dreaming is seen there. Thus dreaming is a state of heightened DA activity while 5HT is high and one cannot fully move, nor get up.l
How does one explain hypnosis? DA activity stays high enough to be able to hear the hypnotist, but a sort of dream state occurs, and can encode suggestions which act as post hypnotic states. This is largely what’s happening as we know that memory encoding is enhanced during sleep, too. So we dream due to higher DA activities plus heightened 5HT levels, which maintain sleep long enough to get enough rest and not to increase muscle activity. The combinations of Da and 5HT are more than just a few, but also multiplicit as their receptors sites show.
.
The facts are, when we are asleep, we are NOT comatose nor fully asleep. This is easily shown by nocturnal bladder and bowel control, and the fact that we do NOT roll out of bed!! Even when we are asleep, parts of our brains are wakeful enough to do these unconscious acts, preventing bed wetting, and falling out of bed, too. Children often do not have these systems fully matured until after 5-6 years old and are often at risk of falling out of bed, too. But few adults do, either.
.
Nor are we in total paralysis during sleep, because we move around in the bed at night as time lapse photography has shown, confirmably and repeatedly in sleeping people. Why does this happen? So the body does not get pressure palsies, or bed sores due to too much lying in one position. These ARE seen with paralysis total as well as drug and often Ethanol induced comatose states, as most clinicians quite well know by multiple, confirming observations.
.
Thus while asleep, apparently we move, the sleep paralysis is temporarily lifted to allow some movement, & sleep paralysis recurs. But bladder/bowel control are not lost, and neither do we fall out of bed!! These observations which are fairly straight forward and clear, put to rest the belief that sleep is a simple, not complex system state. And it also explains rather well hypnogogic states, as well. It’s more complicated than that, but it provides insights into how the other brain states change and highly influence our behaviors via DA and 5HT, among others.
.
Brain is in a balanced state with the core pillar of brain activity being DA for both motion and Emotion. It’s balanced with GABA to maintain sanity and decreased delusional states. It’s balanced with 5HT to create wakefulness and drowsiness, signaling to us via yawning that we need to sleep. Thus yawning is a declining DA level/activity associated with a normal to rising 5HT activity. It often precedes sleep, very likely. Simple, simplifying and highly problem solving. Comparing the KNOWN effects of DA to the other neurochemicals to gain deeper and greater understanding and knowledge about how the brain works.
.
Thus, the balanced brain.
.
All of this suggests the root of anorexia nervosa, as a high DA activity level, with the delusion states of “being fat” when the person is not. The appetite suppressant effect is very apparent by the extreme weight loss. Thus simple, effective DA blockers currently available will suppress the anorexia, and begin to ablate the delusions of being fat as well. Anorexia is a too high DA activity/level brain disorder, and should be approached as such. No doubt this insight will result in much better understanding of AN, how to treat it and by T&E show more of its complex neurochemical bases, rooted in DA over-activity, at least.
.
Sleep disorders are often seen with manias, depressions and related conditions. This should not be surprising. A normal sleep pattern in the circadian rhythms of cycling DA levels/activities, modulated by serotonin. The interesting fact that raising 5HT levels in depressions using SSRI’s shows this codependency of normal sleep with 5HT upon DA, as well. Getting better sleep allows the DA levels to be more normally repleted over night, and thus helps one side of the neurochemical balance equation to return to normal, thus pulling the person out of depression better. Depression IS a complex system disorder, thus neatly explaining the whole spectra of presentations and seemingly unlimited ways of presenting itself. PLUS showing that simply elevating DA activity via a MAO anti-depressant will NOT fully cure/treat the condition. Nor will SSRI’s, either. Thus the stage is set to more fully understand migraine headaches and How those must be treated more successfully using the complex system neurochemical approach, which we use to treat depressions in their fullest variations and nearly unlimited forms.
.
Migraines are complex system neurochemical disorders. There are a huge variety of kinds of this, as well, thus complex system traits being apparent. What seems to occur in migraines is that the 5HT level drops, thus releasing the stimulatory effects of the visual scotomata and the other positive effects of DA being unbound and over active.
.
In addition, the visual cortex in migraineurs has a peculiarly low threshold to magnetic stimulation causing visual scotomata, when so stimulated. Normals do NOT have this. Thus the migraineur has a 5HT neurochemical variant, which from time to time, will drop the 5HT level/activity and in some cases, create, guess what? The fingerprint spectra of DA being released from inhibition. There will be nausea, which must be treated. There will be pain from vasodilation, the usual throbbing ha’s. There is the spreading depression of Leao seen over the cortex, which ignores and passes over the arterial supply, thus showing an inhibition of normal cortical activity,quite independent of blood supply patterns. There can be seizures about 10% of the time, showing that normal cortical inhibition is gone, and DA activation has occurred as well. The migraineur in an acute attack is NOT interested in eating, either, not just because of nausea, but because of the DA effects increased by decreased 5HT, unmasking DA signs!!
.
In addition, many migraineurs will take coffee, and caffeine is often added to ergots to enhance their activities against a migraine. The inflammation which occurs with migraines is often seen. Thus migraines are complex system, neurochemical effects, whose effects are better detailed when compared to DA effects, enhanced or so forth.
.
MIgraineurs may be highly perfectionistic persons, because the DA is unmasked in part by lowered 5HT activity. This also goes along with the syndrome of DA hyperactivity as well, but migraines may well enhance inspiration as well as creativity, even intelligence. How else to explain why the gene is present in about 20% of many women, although in males much less expressed. Understanding that it’s a complex system also explains why a single drug approach so often fails to fully control the migraine.
.
It used to be we used ergots to control it, to some extent, tho there were side effects, and a tolerance developed, often. Just like tolerance to addictive drugs. Also rebound HA’s came about in tandem. Ergots were largely thought to create more vasoconstriction to control the pounding arterial HA’s like nitrate HA’s which can imitate migraine’s pounding, throbbing pain. BUT, and this is the point, the universe is subtle. The ergots do NOT fully control migraine, and ergots ARE 5HT agonists as well.
.
Even the strokes we seen occ. with migraines are a result of the complex system biology, because the platelets contain a LOT of 5HT, and if they discharge will raise 5HT levels & technically could partly treat migraines. But that causes clotting and thus the strokes seen with migraines to some extent, with or without the use of ergots or much else.
.
For instance, even if we used the newer tryptans which now exist in a wide variety from slow onset but prolonged action, to fast onset but shorter activity, we see only about 2/3 of migraines responding well. This again, shows that even though the 5HT agonists work, they do not work much more than 2/3 of the time, which means complex system neurochemistry in going on in the brain. 5-HT agonists are NOT the whole story of migraines!!
.
The key to understanding this is to understand the full panoply of drug treatments for migraines: the tryptans, the DA blockers, the anti-inflammatories AND the muscle relaxants, plus an anti-nauseant, AND the amitriptyline antidepressants as preventatives when taken largely at bedtime, to sleep.
.
Does this complex spectrum at All sound familiar? Nausea AND appetite suppression. The DA activity is unmasked and enhanced by the 5HT plus effects. Thus using a potent anti-nauseant, which is oral, and very fast acting, with the 5HT agonists, or by itself in more mature migraineurs, we can get a close to a 90-100% control rate of migraines.
.
When we consider that there are sleep disorders with migraines, helping the person sleep better and more regularizing in the normal diurnal cycles, (NO night shift work!), we can better control them, too. Now this will not ignore Orexin and other neurochemicals, but simply how those too will fit into the DA/5-HT balanced brain model to help control migraines.
.
We’ve known for years that chlorpromazine with its massive DA blocking capacity blocks both the nausea and directly the migraine HA’s too. The sleep it induces of itself will substantially treat a migraine. But because of its side effects, we choose not to use it except when, if the migraine goes on too long without effective RX & a migraine rescue is needed, then the whole panoply of the complex system migraine effects are shown.
.
Thus the domperidona plus tryptans methodologies. Those, by themselves, block most all migraines, which is not generally known. But we must recall the neurokinins that get going as well, which create pain, directly, create vasodilation and the throbbing pains. Thus Anacin may work pretty well partly, but only 50-60% or so, too. Showing once again, even those there is caffeine with Aspirin, only partial treatment works, in this case, also.
.
So here we have the major components: the dropping of the 5HT, which creates the DA effects, occasionally seizures as well, and the scotomata. Then we have the inability to sleep because the migraine is too strong, due to DA overstimulation and activity. & unless the person can sleep, the migraine will be longer lasting. Thus sleep has an effect to restore the balanced brain by raising 5HT levels. & we do this with sedatives such as Fiorinal (APAP plus Butalbital), using a barbiturate to induce sleep, as well as sedate & suppress the overactive DA effects.
.
Thus we see very clearly, using the comparison process via comparing with DA, the 5HT effects, the entire spectrum of migraine HA’s in all those full panoplies of presentations, symptoms and signs.
.
I had a patient who did well with domperidona alone, but noted if he took an Aleve, the HA went totally away. He had more neurokinin effects than most, and if THOSE get going, then the HA is very resistant to drug alleviation, too, with only the Tryptans. Thus fast treatment at onset of migraines is essential to control. Once the migraine train of events gets going too much, it’s hard to control it from getting worse. & multiple meds are usually needed to block the HA.
.
So we have 5HT withdrawal effects, and unmasking of DA effects of nausea, anorexia, decreased pain control because DA is overbalanced, and so forth. Then the neurokinin effects of throbbing HA’s plus the inflammatory effects, locally in brain, best treated with whatever is effect and safe for the patient to use, aspirins, NSAID’s or whatever works best. Then the muscle spasms and pain effects as well, best Rx’ed with sedation, sleep and acetaminophen is some form or combination.
.
Most migraineurs except in familial forms, are different. They present in the full complexity of the system in a wide range of forms. All the myriad ways of complex systems. And understanding that it’s NOT a linear condition, but complex system, allows us to not only better understand the wide range of migraines, but also how to best treat it NOT as a linear, single condition, but 5HT declines in actvities/levels, causing DA interactivity, and then neurokinin release, & a sleep disorder, and the muscle tension aspects of it as well, PLUS the nausea from DA unmasking by lowered 5HT activity/levels, etc.
.
Extending this model to most other disease states, ignoring the linear models which ignore the complex system nature of most all medical conditions, will result in much more successful prevention, treatment and avoidances of the many, many complications of migraine, such as loss of work time, handicapping otherwise productive persons, strokes, seizures, and long term chronicity, as well. Because if the system simply gets used to having migraines and these recurrent behaviors become ingrained & learned, then those are ever harder to treat, as well. HA’s can be behaviorally learned, indulged, and self-promoted to occur. It’s complex system!!!
.
These are the benefits in the long run of considering the “Balanced Brain” approaches to a more mature, more effective and better treatment using the CP, complex systems, and DA as the parent neurochemical in the brain, with whose effects, by comparison with the other neurochemicals, we can far more easily understand much, much more the complex neurochemistry/neurophysiology of brain.
.
Will not go into the sleep disorders, too, although those are largely associated with depressions, mood disorders, and many other conditions. But those too, are amenable to the complex system, comparison process approaches for improved understanding and treatment.

Stabilities, Repetitions, & Confirmability

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/CP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014

 

“The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible.”
.
“The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility.”  –Albert Einstein “Physics and Reality” 1936
.
“Found your house upon the rock. For the winds and storms may come but it will endure.”  –Traditional wisdom
.
The “Three Little Pigs” story, about the houses built of straw, sticks of wood, versus the brick house. —Traditional wisdom
.

Part and parcel of complex systems are stabilities which those generate among their complexities. These are repeating events in our local and even, in the case of stars and emission lines and gravitational forces, can be universal. Our brains can “cut the Gordian Knot” of complexities and see more of what’s actually going on in the system. It’s this human characteristic, shared in simpler ways by the other animals and even some plants, which can note stable events in their environments, such as trees, rocks, streams, and the branching of the trees where in their nests lie, and can put these into their long term memories (LTM), and then constantly refer to them and recognize them to ID and thus use those for navigation around their territories. Indeed, territoriality must needs, by necessarily strongly imply recognition of landmarks by ANY species which is observably territorial. Thus LTM and comparison processes (CP) go hand in hand, regardless of which animals or species, or even plants demonstrate such interactions with environments.

.

 Using the same, or analogous systems of recognition they learn to recognize same species, their mates, food, dangers such as predators, sudden heavy rain storms, and so forth. Plants know their own pollens, and can often identify, as in the special case of fireweed, the best times to grow. In springtime plants know by recognition of temps, rains, and related patterns when to germinate seeds, or grow out leaves, and set flowers. In this way, they make use of their environment, because stabilities naturally occur by repeated reinforcements into their LTM’s of whatever kinds being used.

.

Einstein asked a very serious and critical question when he asked how does the capacity to understand the universe come about? IOW, how is it that we can comprehend events in the universe?  This article gives insights into the neural, higher level mechanisms of how this comes about. It’s the very repetitiveness of the day/night cycles, the tides, the moon rising and setting. the full moon versus the other moon phases, &  the seasons,which impress themselves upon the day to day and year to year physiology and behaviors of plants and animals, of all sorts.
.
He also described the relationships of events as to their connections to other events. This is a sort of relativity in and of itself as well. It’s the foundation of this article that relativity arises as a form of the comparison process, which comparison process allows us to ID, and repetitively recognize events in existence, which are stable, largely. The more often repeating events are detected, the more likely those will pass by process of reinforcements into the nervous systems and similarly physiological systems of plants.  The self evident facts that there ARE such stable events all around us, are the events which make the universe comprehensible. If “all was change”, from moment to moment there would be no constancy of events, and these are what makes the universe comprehensible. It’s the observable, provable organization of the universe which makes it comprehensible. Order creates comprehension/understanding.
.
Further, we note the major differences between scientific evidence and proofs versus those of historical, genealogical and legal events. The latter three are rarely repeating, except in general forms, such as humans, which have huge variability and rarely if ever are repeated themselves exactly. IN contrast the sciences concern themselves with provable, repeating, exactly specified events, such as atoms, elements, isotopes, molecules, organic and biological structures, which are often repeating in their general forms, although few are exactly alike.
.
Take the proton for instance. It exists theoretically as the same proton within an atom, or molecule, or nucleus, or as a free ion such as acid solutions. Yet none of them are EXACTLY, or absolutely the same, but exist in a multiplicity of forms, most all arising from a proton which is nearly the same. Still, NO proton, for the reason of the Fermion rule, can occupy the same space at the same time. Thus, the positions of protons are all and must be different. Their relationships to nuclei, atoms, molecules, and such are definitely different, yet we believe that, essentially, the proton is of the same type, regardless of where it’s found. Though it has many manifestations and types, as described above.
.
Now compare this with a single human. He/she is unique, and even ID twins are not the same, for the simple fermion rule. Thus there is NO true identity in terms of position, although of structures they are assumed to be similar even in nuclear and molecular and ionic compositions. Thus although it’s assumed and likely true that protons in a nucleus are all the same, they do differ by position. And further, the nuclei of those atoms below Fe56 can lose energy by fusions, whereas those above, cannot, and require more energy to create them. Thus the U-235 atom has been coaxed by specific neutrons to fission and release energy, but only to a certain point. This finding of neutron emission by fissile U-235 is what created the nuclear chain reaction, which is a repeating, stable finding wherever the conditions are right.
.
Now contrast this with a single human being, who is very likely unique, but note the vast variations possibly in the trillions of those beings which can be considered “humans”.
.
Now, let us look at our logic, and how that works.
.
All humans are mortal.
Socrates is human.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
.
This is a logical, deductive syllogism, and necessarily true, though is it? As long as the categories are fixed, relatively and stable, we can perform acts of logical deduction with them. But what of the conundrum, which came first, the chicken or the egg?
.
This paradox arises because of categorical confusions and inexactitudes, as most paradoxes show. & their solutions arise when we deny the absolute “identity” of members of the class, category, or word meaning. The point here means something very clearly. If all chickens are the same, it’s true. If all eggs are the same, it’s true paradox. BUT,& this is the veriest point, they are NOT all the same. Evolutionary model shows us that at one time there were not chickens, which became chickens. So clearly, if we define the genetics of a chicken rather precisely, there were at one time, “not quite” chickens, which mated, and the egg had the first full complement of genetics and phenotypic characteristics of what we’d call, ID, recognize, understand and categorize as a “:chicken.” Thus, the egg came first.  QED. This shows the problems with categories which are rather fuzzy in many cases, and the semantic problems which can arise due to this fuzziness, or false assumption of complete identity, which in the case of “ALL mortals”, does not exist.
.
The problem with logic is the assumption of identities of the events, which they do not have. Thus most all logic is not quite true, because the assumption is that all grass is, when healthy, green, is not necessarily the case. The categories, are shown thusly to be “fuzzy” and not well defined. Within those tight definitions of “humans” the logics are said to be very solid. But in fact, it’s not. The universe of events contrasts, contradicts and often gives us paradox when we try to impose this utter absolute and fixedness upon events. The idealisms of the mind, do not thus correspond completely to events in existence.
.
And if we try to detail and tighten down all of these categories, not only do they lose much of their value, but we end with the problems of legalisms, which do not and cannot totally comprehend and deal with all complexities even using most all known ideas & their words meanings. Also. we begin to run up that exponential barrier of increasing costs and times, and lose to the rules of diminishing returns. We cannot afford such a system. It’s too complicated to be, in the long run, useful. It violates least energy rules.
.
Thus logic of itself breaks down in the face of fixity of events and definitions. When we try to fix virtually ALL of the conditions which make electrons quantum tunnel to make transistors work which clearly DO work highly reliably in our computers, then we have that same repeatability again. That same repetitiveness which give us reliable technology. But as soon as the conditions change, it gets too hot (why most computers have fans and must operate in cool conditions), the transistor becomes too small & quantum leakages occur (which marks the end of the silicon revolution and Moore’s Law, BTW). The system breaks down.
.
The light and ignitions switches almost always work, but even those break down. Conditions are no longer fulfilled, & the machine or cell, or living system breaks down. The fixedness of events in existence is that which reinforces themselves in our minds and allows recognitions to take place, which then create comprehensibility, understanding, knowledge and the categories and hierarchies of our understanding. But take away this fixedness by altering conditions & at once, the repetitive  events are gone.
.
Thus it’s the breakdown of the models, which causes loss of comprehension, much of what Einstein showed as he introduced the quantum, and relativity. IN the same way, the comparison process, as a fuzzy logic, an uber logic, used in brains in most animals, and also in many plants which can detect up from down, that is center of gravity by some unknown means, and grow relative to that.
.
.
But in history, how can we prove that Julius Caesar in a repeatedly observable way, ever existed? When such persons are living, we can very often show that truth. But after they die and information decays due to normal entropic events? We can see the same constellations (tho they change slowly enough we can ignore it in our lifetimes), the seasons, and rising of the sun and setting, too. Around us are all of the stabilities, which repeat themselves. But in that case we also see the panta rhei, the flux, the change which makes us realize this stability is largely not immutable. & there exists a range of great stabilities to the lesser, and at last the few at all.
.
IN the article, “:Depths within Depths” we see the deepest, most essential and basic, established stabilities, those of the emission lines of the atoms, which are observably stable over 15 gigaLY and 15 gigayears. & all distances and times in between the present and this immense past/distance. We see the same gravitational forces and even the Einstein crosses showing the verifiable reliability  and great age of the universe, where even across the solar system we can detect photons bending paths in a high gravity field. And we see that the stars of the most distant galaxies also shine by hydrogen fusion processes, just as they do in our sun, and so, too, the rules of nuclear processes & the Second Law are observably stable, and long lasting.
.
It’s the lack of repeatability of history which makes it hard for our understanding, because, verifiably, it’s NOT the same from year to year. These countless recombinations are generally ongoing and without end. The same is true of legal truths based upon accounts of events, which are not only necessarily not repeatable, but which cannot be shown to be repeating, unlike many physical processes, which do. Further, eye witness testimony of itself, as even the law knows by demanding physical evidence of proof of a verbal claim, means that human observations are very, very fallible. And this has been confirmed many, many times.
.
These stabilities of many events make these repetitions possible. Stabilities arise generally because of least energy effects. When our neocortex recognizes these stabilities, it does so meaningfully and with assumed force that those will be seen again and again. This is a result of experience.
.
Thus this shows the differences by comparison between the duplicable results, confirmabilities of the sciences (penicillin always works in not resistant bacteria and other organisms) versus the development of bacterial resistances which make PCN relatively useless, like some other drugs, with respect to bactericidal effects.
.
The point is that complex systems are exactly of this kind. There are aspects of them which are observably stable and repeating, tho much of it is not. The combinatorial complexity of those complex systems of huge numbers of interacting factors are virtually incomprehensible, BUT, & this is the point (the Fermi/Ulam findings), stabilities CAN and often do arise in complex systems, such as the solar system, such as stable societies, and beliefs, such as market stabilities, for a while. Even in weather and the seasons show these. Tornadoes, hurricanes and whirlwinds have these repeating, complex system features. And our brains can comprehend those as long as it can recognize repeating classes, more or less, of events. Thus, if very very clearly, those can be considered stable and the rules never change, as in transistors, within the limits of the conditions. Water at STP of 1 CC always weighs most exactly, 1 gram. 1/100th of the difference between the STP boiling and melting point of water is 1 deg. C. The same is true for most all relatively stable, fixed measuring systems. But those are NOT absolute, as relativity has shown us and this conclusion has been scientifically, and repeatedly and confirmed to be likely highly correct.
.
Confirmability of the sciences is found when events in existence largely repeat themselves. Lacking that, events become “chaotic” or turbulent flow, or more correctly & universally, complex systems. Thus the usage of the complex system model allows us to better comprehend more about systems which for us, are so complex we cannot understand, literally all of it. Our understanding considering our extreme limits is and likely most always will be limited. But the findings of stabilities in such complex interacting systems, create predictability, and thus control. we can see tornadoes forming under a range of conditions, can detect the rotating winds with Doppler radar, and thus by comparing positions of this event, can predict where it will go, and give warning. This is how the sciences work, in fact. This is how our brains detect, recognize, & form pattern recognitions which lead in many cases, to predictive control. Thus the CP is the parents of knowledge & predictive control.
.
This is essentially how the Rhizobacter fix nitrogen at soil temps, while humans must use 100’s of atmospheres of pressure and over 1000 C to fix H2O and N2 into NH4+, the basis of protein chemistries, as well.
.
It’s the repeatability of events in existence which give us scientific confirmation. Under very similar circumstances and conditions, we DO find these stabilities. Simple linear stability can be seen, but in complex systems, which are most all of event, the recognition of repeating events, such as in the plate tectonic model, again render a complex system comprehensible. We see the patterns, the repeated stability of volcanoes arising from subducting plates; fault lines where plates move laterally  more or less against each other,  creating earthquakes great and small. Similarly hot spots arise as the surface of the plates moves over underlying upwellings of basaltic lavas. Then the mountain ranges come about with this faulting, or with collision of plates, such as which created the Karakorums and the Himalayas, including the remnants of the Appalachians which arose from a similarly repeated but not exactly the same events, 100’s of megayears ago.  Or the Alps, too.
.
Therefore, how do we determine what is confirmable and what is not likely to be, for us at this time? This bears heavily on the P and NP question as well. because if a solution can be confirmed, then we can know it’s a truth. If not, it cannot be known, largely. It’s then clear from the events of history NOT being confirmable, due to entropic factors as well as complexity, that historical truths of the past are largely NOT confirmable, esp. the further they are into the past, as information tends to decay in time.
.
Thus we are left with thermodynamic considerations once again. P and NP problems are of this same type. IN order to confirm something as true, it must be a considerable, repeating stability. If not, it cannot be confirmed, scientifically, and this means that the sciences do NOT necessarily apply to it, as the problems with histories of all sorts show.  It might be in some cases, but there is no clear order to this problem. Archeology is necessarily an incomplete science due to this fact. & in order to solve the P and NP problems posed, apparently we must be able to solve it or not. So historical problems CANNOT be P = NP in a vast range of events.
.
Further, what are the classifications of events in existence which CAN be confirmed, that is, what are their fine structures, or details? We do not know in most cases. We cannot order complexity very well. Some, such as living systems and so forth we can to some extent, but not completely. And we know thermodynamics plays an important part in this.
.
Universally, observable processes such as TD, relativity and QM we CAN in some consistent sense, confirm, again and again. But those we cannot confirm, which are substantially rare and unlikely to recur again, such as a famous persons in history, & thus we cannot solve that problem. & with time passing inexorably it becomes increasingly clear we cannot. Using DNA methods we can sometimes establish ancestry, but this again runs up that exponential barrier in terms of cost. & DNA itself degrades so much even over many centuries, that we cannot duplicate dinosaurs and so far, even woolly mammoths and other species, either. Winding in & out of this are the Thermodynamic rules of entropy, once more. We can begin to classify those events which we CAN confirm, but must generally state the rarest of the combinatorial complexity problems we cannot. These are, once again, the limits of our knowledge.
.
CF: https://jochesh00.wordpress.com/2014/09/03/beyond-the-absolute-limits-to-knowledge/
.
Thus the stability of events in existence and our ability to perceive these relatively stable events, are what give us comprehensions & lie at the roots of scientific confirmability. But the law, history and genealogy do NOT have this to rely upon in many, many cases and use similar means to make sense, that is understand, what’s going on. Realizing the limits of the sciences with respect to history and the laws with respect to scientific events is very important to do.
.
And in order to understand these better, we must classify as best we can those events and processes which repeat themselves for us, and those which do not. IN that fine structure of careful observations and classification using CP, we will find more answers. But as usual it’s NOT a logical, mathematical method which will work, but simply testing, checking in an empirical sense which will give us answers. This once again may come to rest upon experimental maths which can model such events, which are often and usually presaged by verbal recognized patterns, which can then be mathematized, in many, but not all cases. This is how relativity was mathematized by Minkowski and Einstein AFTER the fact, when the essential details of special &  general relativity were created. These are limits to maths, as well.
.
It’s the vast range of combinatorial complexity and repetitiveness which creates the problem, too. And when we with our brains find “breakthroughs” which we deem creativity, which allow us to see more “pattern recognition” then we make progress. Understanding & detecting most all of this is the comparison process (CP), which does most of the work in recognition via LTM, pattern recognition which creates the hierarchies of out understanding, & so forth.
.
When we concern ourselves with current problem of confirmability in the science articles published even in our best journals, we find the same problem. Those cannot upwards of 2/3-3/4 of the time be confirmed. This is esp. irksome in pharmacology, where journal articles were shown not to be the case, and those had to be weeded out and the facts of the matter found by confirming them repeatedly. It’s not accidental, that the accountants’ final figures are repeatably shown to be the case, but that’s still a matter of higher reliability than normal. Because if the bean counters get the same sums each time, it’s more democratic, than absolute, as well.
.
So how we know what we know, that is our epistemology, depends basically upon what we can confirm by repeating events in existence. Einstein showed these methods are NOT absolute, and therefore cannot be proven mathematically, but best by confirmations. If the math applies by comparing and closely modeling those confirmations it has a use. If not, then it’s discarded. Thus our maths, as per the Dictum of Gauss must have a practical use, and if not, they are useless to us. Inevitably then most math must very likely be experimentally validated, and if not, cannot be entertained. Otherwise we waste time upon fantasies, and sadly, this eliminates most math as being absolute, either.
.
Take geometry for instance. We do NOT see Euclidean geometries very often. Those are very rare. The universe is not Euclidean, and uses a geometry not very related to our own. Indeed, we can compare and ID human constructs versus natural phenomena by this very Euclidean nature of  our constructs, whereas events in existence, such as waves, clouds, mountain ranges and so forth are simply NOT Euclidean, thus not of human origins. By comparison, of course.
.
Yet another way, more useful and widely applicable, to confirm scientific findings rests upon this very repeating of stable events in existence, in many of their forms. This very repetition makes technologies possible, from hand axes and arrows to spears to the modern computers and MRI scans, for instance, of today. In most cases true events are also confirmed by the technologies they spawn. Irascible and falsely claimed events, such as Russo’s E-cat have NEVER and cannot result in and create technologies, simply because thy are not the case, and not confirmable. This fact, that real events in existence can often be used to create tools, devices, and technologies, due to this universal repeating characteristic, is yet another way to confirm scientific articles.
.
The Garden of Eden model here shows this point ever so much more clearly, as does the “Depths within Depths” show this immense stability of the observable universe, as well. Adam and Eve were the first humans is the religious dictum, but the story can be seen in yet another more convincing way, too. They knew sin. They knew of good as well, because they could compare events which resulting from good acts, versus the bad outcomes from evil actions. This point has been forgotten and the not Biblical ideal of “original sin” was created to help clarify the problem. But the outcomes of sins are evil and death while that of good is life and survival in the here and the hereafters.
.
At what point did prehumans become aware of this comparison of good and evil? At what time, were they able to understand what was right and what was wrong? What was moral and lawful, & what was not? & the Garden of Eden story applies this parable to answer the question. it was the outcomes of those acts which when carefully, and repeatedly compared gave them knowledge & the knowledge of what was good and what evil. The tree of knowledge lies within our cortex, and from that origin we became not animals and thus acquired the veriest essence of our humanity.
.
IN the same way as the chicken & the egg, there was a time where genetically, biologically and culturally, pre-humans could not reliably detect and recognize what was right or wrong. This problem still exists today among children, and the morally incapable. They lived in a state like the animals who do NOT have much morality, nor clear cut values. Nature is red in tooth & claw, and stealing, damage others, and such is mostly the case in the animal worlds. They can be trained, but do not usually act morally, and will often hurt themselves & others by being unable to make these distinctions which are the veriest essences of humanity. Our ancestors knew this & saw, recognized and saw the patterns repeatedly. Thus We humans are breed apart from animals, and plants.
.
So not Only was it the expulsion from Eden, but the story of the Garden ALSO tells of the time, when humans could first, reliably, tell the difference between good and evil, & this is what started our human race, as well. These are the eggs which became the first humans, as well. That ability to do pattern recognitions, reliably and well. The comparison between moral laws and our behaviors & those of others which drives the recognitions of morality, even physical laws. THAT mental ability was what changed  & made is recognizably human, and set up the entire flow of human progress and social organization for the last 10K’s of years. & incidently creates the civil and scientific laws, as well.
.
So the answer as to what the Garden of Eden story also portends, is that this is when pre-humans became humans in a large breeding population. They knew sin, but they also knew the good, & by comparing the outcomes, the fruits of their various behaviors, we know those outcomes as good or evil.
.
&in the same ways by comparing the observed events, organized by the same comparison process which drives morality we know the lawfulness of the universe, and we know, most interestingly, HOW we understand, and how the comprehensibility of the universe comes about, in the same way. This union of moral laws & physical laws, coming about from the same, repeating comparison process thinking, recognitions and LTM is what marks us as uniquely human, although we share many of those simpler traits with most all the higher animals, and even many plants. Because implicitly within the recognitions of the outcomes of good and evil, are the outcomes of the sciences which create our skills, devices, methods, and technologies. All from the same neocortex of our ancestors.
.
This is the universality of comparison process, La Chanson Sans Fin, which has been found, and which applications can create an understanding of the wellsprings of creativity & the limitless improvements in how to understand,  perform and educate. The comparison process, least energy (which arises from comparing outcomes of energy and related costs), complex systems and structure/function relationships give us a good understanding of these matters. Einstein article showed he was very interested in, how comprehension &  understanding came about by the interactions between events in existence and our nervous systems. This article is very likely a good answer to his very basic, deep question.
.
And it was found by extending Einstein’s relativity epistemology and applying it to neocortical functions, too. We see further because we stand on the shoulders of giants.

 

 

The Structure of Color Vision

By Herb Wiggins, M.D.; Clinical Neurosciences; Discoverer/Creator of the Comparison Process/CP Theory/Model; 14 Mar. 2014
 .

Using structuralist methods, LE (least energy), and CP (comparison process) we can find out a very great deal about how color vision is generated in the brain.

.

First of all,  will compare and contrast the linear electromagnetic spectrum of the known color frequencies to how the brain organizes and identifies the colors. That disparity likely will tell us much more about how our colors come about within the brain, i.e., using our language to describe how the brain creates the basic colors we see.  ROY G BIV (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet. These colors were Not known before Newton to be arranged in any order, as the color vision of humans does not imply energies and frequencies of light, but simply posits these basic colors, plus a few synthetic ones. Silvery as a reflection of light off silver, steel, and water, and other shiny objects. And brown which is a combo of red and green, and again totally without ANY individual frequency on the color spectrum, either. The existence of brown and silvery, may therefore be part and parcel of the creation of useful colors by our visual systems. White, the unlimited grays, and black are also NOT true colors which can individually be located by frequencies on the EM spectrum, either. These disparities should give us pause, as to how human brain colors came about.
.
When we compare the frequencies of light for each color with the combinations of frequencies using mixing of dyes and paints, we see that the eyes creates color using a scheme which is roughly corresponding to the spectrum, but not dependent upon it totally. Thus it can create orange from yellow and red, and green from blue and yellow.
.
For instance, mixing paints and dyes of yellow and red, one gets orange. This is inexplicable because orange is NOT a mix of yellow and red, but a discrete color frequency band in the EM spectrum. However, the visual system can perceive it that way. It’s Odd. Similarly, mixing yellow and blue we get green, again ignoring an existing band of green frequencies, too These comparisons show us WHAT kind of processes and structures are doing the work. Much like optical illusions do the same for many shapes.
.
.
Also, green mixed with blue makes blue-green, which exists as well as a frequency band. Turquoise is yet another, a very light blue, with white mixed with blue, also NOT on the EM spectrum. Grayish blues and blackish blues also exist. These disparities show that colors are synthetic creations in/of our visual systems.
.
In addition, when a person has red/green color blindness, they may often report that brown is the color they see instead of red or green. They cannot see red or green traffic lights, but note which is brightest and know that a red light by convention is on the top, and green is on the bottom. God help them if the signal is mounted horizontally as it was in some towns in the 1970’s and ’80s.
.
In addition the illusions of color afterimages and bleaching are also interesting. When two colors of red and green as figures are put next to each other, if we stare at them for a few minutes, then at once look at a white sheet of paper, we see the figure for the red shape as green, and vice versa. This is true of orange and blue and yellow and purple. Why this should be is puzzling, just as the existence of brown, silver and the other colors, The lack of any hints about the spectrum using our color schemes and the curious mixing of colors which create the intermediate colors, when in fact, those are also compound, is an insight into how colors are created by our visual system.
.
The colors red, green, yellow and blue when mixed can create most all the colors, red/green being brown. & the silvery color, which is synthetic, most often seen with light glancing off water, steel, or silver.
.
The opponent color scheme to explain how our visual system creates colors, should be renamed the comparison color model. Incident frequencies of light are compared to each other by the visual cortex and the combination of colors creates the kinds of colors we see. Thus using red, green and blue diodes most all the colors can be created by our electronics, comparing amounts of red, yellow, green and blue. This also explains the composite color, brown, which while there are corresponding frequencies of light in the spectrum for each of the major colors, there is NONE for brown, or for silvery colors.. This means it’s more likely that color creation is a comparison process. When a certain amount of red is seen with a nearly equal mix of yellow, orange is produced. When blue is mixed properly with yellow, green is produced. Mixing orange with blue, purple with yellow may produce grays, largely. Also red and green create browns mixed with various amounts of many photons or few photons (white and black) numbers. Thus the opponent color model should be labelled more correctly, the comparison process color model. Brown is purely a synthetic color, as is silvery, or light reflecting off water commonly. Those are NOT pure color frequencies, but composites, which have NO actual presence in the spectrum. Neither model explains nor even considers brown!!! The visual systems create colors there, just like it creates all of the colors. But using a mix of about 3-4 major frequency detectors, it can create most all the colors without only 3 inputs, plus black and white (Darkness and lightness) for numbers of photons perceived within the normal ranges of the rods, and this gives the gray scale, largely. Thus It’s not opponent, but comparisons and combinations, which create the colors we see.
.
It’s easier to create a representation of all of the frequencies PLUS the colors of white, black, brown and silvery to further extend our perceptions of commonly seen events. Using 7-8 colors plus black and white and the grays, is more complicated. and so the LE solution of our visual systems is by combinations of colors creating the colors we actually see. It’s least action, simpler and more elegant. than having a receptor for each broad band of EM radiation. It saves complexity as well. It’s simplify, simplify simplify. That it’s NOT purely spectral, both brown and silver very clearly show, too, as well as blacks, grays and white. none of the latter have ANY band of frequencies on the EM spectrum. This disparity is also as insight as to how the visual systems creates what we see.
.
These combinations also give rise to the problem of synesthesias, wherein colors are mixed in different ways, to give rise to new colors, not seen before. Thus the potential palette of the senses is  a LOT bigger than is needed. Synesthesias are in addition a comparison processing of touch, feelings, sight, hearing rerouted in ways which make sensory outputs mix, which are not usually used because they are not needed. But comparison processing of the senses CAN easily explain those synesthesias, too. Combinations, remixing, are comparing simply, and easily explain synesthesias of all sorts, including hearing colors and seeing tones and combinations of such. Synesthetes simply assign by set point methods, much as  when we speak another language & use different tones, accents, vowels, and consonants, and their distinctions to create meanings, which clearly mark most other languages and dialects, too. Set points are different, and there that is, as well. This is the beauty of the comparison process, because it explains so very much with so very little. Again, elegant, highly capable, multiplicit almost without limits, and so forth, and highly fruitful as well.
.
Now WHY, how does it come about that we see colors? And a very likely answer is, that it’s practical, which also explains brown and silvery, too. Consider this commonly seen, but very much missed and highly important point. When, each day, do we see a rainbow?
.
At every sunrise, and sunset, the rainbow of colors is created, red, then orange, then yellow, then a bit of green and finally the blue of the clear sky. For common green we get green from plants, largelly their leaves, and that works pretty well, too. These set the colors we see by constant reinforcements until it becomes LTM (Long Term Memory) and thus recognizable and stable. For brown, we get the combo of green and red, or yellow and black, both of which are both combinations, that is comparisons of colors. Brown is a dual color and can be created in two ways. It’s a dual duality of colors!!
.
This model thus explains colors as practical reflections of commonly seen mixtures of colors, green as blue and yellow. orange as red and yellow. purples as red and blue, & so forth. Brown as red/green or yellow and black with some whites, too. So Brown is a dual duality, in fact, most peculiar but because there is a LOT of that mixture, the vision system creates a color just for it. Brown of skin, bark, dried leaves, and on and on and on. Just as red is blood, & sunrise and sunset rainbows from the refractions of light through the thicker atmosphere, so is the spectrum of the rainbow created from water drops, a refraction as well. Rainbows can also be created by using a spray of many other liquids, and even water ice, creating the solar halos, so rare, but well described and known. Thus color is created by our brains, using the commonly seen major colors of the sunrise, sunset, but NOT from rainbows, as those cannot be see often enough to set up in our memories of colors, so we can recognize the palette of colors each day. Greens from plants, and blues from skies and the white to black, the grays and whites of clouds, too, to the black of night. Black means very low numbers of photons and then the colors disappear, if light is too dim, i.e., not enough photons to allow color detection, too. It’s the combination of colors, of comparison which creates it. PLUS the creation of brown.
.
Silvery, or metallic, is simply almost total reflection of most all colors incident upon the reflector, and thus has a characteristic all its own. Mirages are simply more of this same type seen by the eyes, off a heated air layer.
.
The interesting thing is that when pure, silvery crystals of water ice are very small, when seen through a microscope they are clear. When seen with normal vision, they are white. Thus the visual systems distinguish the two, tho they are very much of the same origin as clear or white. This is another illusion also revealed by a microscope & comparison with clear water ice, too, which is NOT white, yet is at merely a different size scale. Another disparity showing us how the visual systems synthesize colors.
A very interesting issue also is  that if we were on another planet whose sun emitted the maximum number of photons at a more orange wavelength, compared to our sun brightest frequencies, which are mostly yellow/green, what colors would we see? Pretty much the same as we do now because we see the reddish cast of light at the sun’s rising and setting and are used to it. Tho our visible spectrum is clearly set around the frequencies which are the brightest and largest number of photons emitted which pass through our atmosphere, if the sun were bluer, or more orange, then that new setting of lower frequency, high photons numbers would arise in time as our eyes adapted, genetically to the new sun.
.
Our eyes naturally fix upon the brightest and largest numbers of photons in which to center vision, because this gives the MOST information. We shine a bright light on objects of interest to see them better. So, in a sense do our eyes. It’s efficient and the best way to see the most. It’s Least Energy, again!!
.
It’s also the case that when a sodium vapor light is used, some tree leaves turn a very brilliant yellow, whereas in the sunlight they are green, clearly. This is the case of incident lighting being reflected at those wavelengths when there is little green light. Mercury vapor lamps also tend to make skin more bluish and greenish, as there is very little red in mercury emissions.  Thus it might be possible to detect characteristics of the pigments in leaves by using red, yellow, green and other lights to detect which major pigments are being seen in sol called green leaves. Those maples trees which can give brilliant colors off, should also be detectable and identifiable in these ways.
.
But the facts that leaves and indeed many events show the colors they do, by reflection, shows once again that incident frequencies of light show us different colors in different lighting. This is clear. Colors of events depend in a relativity way, upon the incident lighting. There is NO absolute colour, only the arbitrary, but easily used sunlight standard, to determine what normal colors events are. Again, the relativity of the visual systems, just as with the neocortex which observes those colors and orders and recognizes them.
.
Thus, like words are made up of a series of set consonant and vowels, the set point model of pronunciations, which each language has, so too, are the colors set up in the same way.
.
But where do those colors come from? Our memories of colors are set up in the visual cortex. The standards are set up from birth by the most common colors we see, such as red, orange, brown, and so forth. Each of these are set and then become stable series of synaptic memories in the visual cortex, against which we describe and measure most all else that we see. If we see a cherry, we call it red, or maroon. An apple, red, or yellow as the case may be. An orange, orange. A lemon, lemon yellow. Her eyes were as “blue as the sky”, is yet another metaphorical description showing how it’s done. We use the set standards of color, drawn from our perceptions of those frequencies to describe evens in our existence by comparison to those colours.
.
Some have written a very great deal about the qualia of the senses. Sadly, there is no way to test such a term, quali., and must be considered without value in the sciences. Why do we see and ID and set the colors as we see them? As stated before, by the environment interacting with our visual memories. Which ID’s colors, assigns by experience which bands of frequencies are red, orange, yellow, green, etc., as well as the browns, white, grays, and blacks.
.
Is there a sense for “perfect” colors, as there is for “perfect” pitch? Interior designers know there is, but it’s based upon sunlight, largely, too, as the “arbitrary, relatively fixed & stable standard” against which we describe and measure colors. We see again, how the measuring epistemology of Einstein’s relativity, the comparison processes of verbal descriptions AND measurable frequencies, and lightness and darkness, are used universally to ID colors. To which we add the least energy principle, that the standard must be easy to use, ubiquitous and simple. Just as we use water to establish our temp scales, weights and much else. Observe the object in full sunlight, the standard by which we assign colors, and assign the color to it or by frequencies distributions from a photometer, and number of incident photons of each frequency. That’s relativity, once again.
.
.
These can be seen quite well at any paint store or paint department. The EM spectrum is simply a linear succession of frequencies. In real life, there are ranges of frequencies, based upon numbers of photons at those frequencies, which determines lightness or darkness, or the grays of unlimited kinds in between. Thus real colors are NOT linear as on frequencies lined up according to about 500 nm. to 800 or so, BUT are mixtures of colors, brightnesses and grays as well. Pastel red as pink or rosy. Intense reds of rubies, and the darker shades of corundum reds. The entire palette of colors is 3 dimensional at least, NOT just linear frequency sequence, either. That’s too linear to be accurate. and thus the palettes of colors at paint stores which begins to show the FULLEST range of color combos and so forth. Simply go to a paint store and look at the unlimited palettes of color chips they have there to verify and give real meaning to how the actual colors, pure or in combinations in real life are far, far more than any simple, linear frequency line of colors.
.
Then there are the electric blues, the oranges and bright green colors seen on road crews’ jackets, and so forth. & the metallic color combinations as well seen best on our cars. Or the multiple color crystals which change as the incident light angle changes, as well, specifically the maroon which changes to a bluish maroon Ford, when the eyes & head move around. Complex systems, and not linear, either, any more than the brilliance of many birds, notable the hyacinth macaws, the cockatoos, the male birdwings, and the magnificent displays of the incomparable metal mark butterflies (Ancyluris spps., etc.) and the Papillios, the swallowtails.
.
And all of these noted facts should give us a better understanding about how the visual system detects wavelengths of light and then creates the many colors to represent those.