The Philosophy of Bonding

The Philosophy of Bonding

The debate on explanations on the famous saying of Heraclitus saying no one crosses the same river twice. It indicates changing waters or the changing times or even the changing experiences. But once a man commits an error on a situation thereafter in a similar situation, he will not commit the same error.

More a man knows more he moves towards the unknown.

Mind is a unique organ that can never be completely understood by its keeper.  All experiences are eventfully coded by the mind, the funniest things in bonding all these codes. If the mind is asked to bond glass tumbler and water, then it easily fits a picture of a water filled glass tumbler. When mind is asked to bond a hand full of jasmine flower it simply bonds a handful of jasmine flowers with its fragrance and color.

In the process of bonding the mind tries to set a pattern already experienced or set a new pattern that will be logically correct and understandable. For instance, mind has experiences wind and mind has also experienced spider web. When the mind is asked to bond spider web and the wind this is a challenge. Mind has never experienced a situation where both the wind and spider web were connected. This throws a discomfort is trying to collaborate the wind and the spider web.

Both the data of the wind and the spider web are part of the data in the mind but yet the collaboration process is not easily achieved. Mind may know a data but still may not know it. This is a paradoxical situation. When the same task is pushed in to Artificial Intelligence the task is well executed by giving an output. Here what the mind could not do is executed by the AI.

Mind always rely on logical connectivity and banks on a good quantum of experience data. But in Artificial Intelligence this need not be present. It was giving an output which may not satisfy everything logically and it may not have experienced it either.

It was a unique experience to request AI to generate images. The task depended on the prompt. A situational prompt was presented and was tagged to “classic painting” it did give a good output. To take the task further the prompt was changed from “classical painting’ to ‘Philosophical painting” or “Musical painting” or “Poetic painting” the output was not the same in all three.

Does these tasks exhibit a limit to the perception formation of the logical mind, if yes, then is not the AI scenario better in task orientation than the mind. AI is capable of connecting two non-related things to give an output which may or may not be logically correct, nevertheless, it completed the task. But when the same task is given to the mind it fumbles to give a logical output. Is the fear of giving an output of two unrelated things based on logical perfection?

Human mind will not cross the same river twice, but AI will not hesitate to cross.

 

The Viscosity of a Debate

The Viscosity of a Debate

In a debate where opinions are discussed there is a race between participants where individuals argue their ways to win over the others. Taking the principle of viscosity of fluid and applying to debate an experimental trial can be evolved to arrive at a plan for winning the debate.

The terms Viscosity and Debate are as follows:

Viscosity of a fluid is the resistance the fluid exhibits to flow or the resistance it exhibits to an external object moving in it.

Debate is a discussion between people in which they express different opinions about something related to the discussion.

An external object can pass through to reach a particular depth in the fluid of high viscosity if:

The object is sent with a greater amount of force.

The object generates a quantum of heat to reduce the viscosity of the fluid.

The object can generate mass as it goes down the fluid.

In a debate the person needs to weigh the opponent’s potential to debate and also the will to hold on to a debate. This analysis needs to be done prior to any debate. During the process of a debate the debater can break the resistivity and move deep into the debate with advantage, provided the relevant points with uniqueness are shot into the debate forcefully at appropriate time intervals causing a weakening in the response resistivity formulation of the opponent.

2.    Creating a heated sequence at appropriate time intervals during the debate where the opponent slides into losing of balance causing a weakness in resistivity

3.     The debater can keep adding weight to their presentation by adding relevant but unforeseen points to the debate, and

4.     The debater can also add irrelevant but foreseen points into the debate to put the opponent into a phase of disorientation.

Any debate will be challenging because it holds on to the principle of uncertainty. No debater can say with certainty the response mechanism of their opponent. In such frame of debates the opponent has to be viewed like a fluid with greater viscosity.  

Formula for Viscosity is   F=µA (u/y)

F is the force of the debater

µ is the content factor of the debate

A is the scope of the debate.

u is the advantage data to enhance capitalizing the debate

y is the disadvantage data to destabilize the opponent

“A person as a debater will see success when there be focus on the content of the debate keeping the scope of the debate at a manageable level with building the content of the debate on structured data of advantage to capitalize and using timely presentation of disadvantage data to destabilize the opponent.”

The Data of Unfamiliarity

The Data of Unfamiliarity

Familiarity is a set of data already accumulated and processed for knowledge. All living creatures are functioning in a relatively easy environment where all data is processed and stored. These processed Data is stored in a set under Familiarity.

Familiarity gives confidence and a deep sense of the feeling that all is well and nothing to worry. Every interaction of living creatures is processed in swift section of time with the data they encounter, and it is mapped with the library already carrying huge data of familiar and already experienced conditions. This puts the living creatures to quickly recognize the interaction and proceed to the next stage of response. 

The basic algorithm of all living creatures is to scan any interaction for familiarity. If the creature experiences an event unfamiliar then within section of time triggers a response that this new set of data experienced is unfamiliar puts the receiver at crossroads. The nearest possible mapping is initiated to find out if there is any threat. If the answer be in affirmative the creature instantly exits from that interaction. Even if a smallest fraction of the mapping confirms that there is no threat then the next step in progress to approach the interaction with caution is initiated.

When creature moves into the platform of exhibiting caution in the smallest segment of time all sense organs start to transmit all possible data with regards to the unfamiliar interaction to the mind. The swiftness in processing the new data and mapping them into various categories ensures that no unfamiliar interactions are allowed to cause disturbance.

As the mind gets exposed to Unfamiliar Data, such Data gets into a process of quick checking and moving to a new set if it cannot be mapped with any existing set, not even to the nearest proximity. When a similar event to the new batch of unfamiliar data is experienced, the data gets processed to a fully familiar data and moved to a new or appropriate set.

The most interesting part is when two people are exposed to an event where for one person the event’s data are familiar and for the other person the event’s data are unfamiliar. A communication about the data of the event when explained by the person familiar to the event to the person unfamiliar to the event there is new mapping happening. In such a case the person unfamiliar need not wait to experience the unfamiliar event once again to have it processed as familiar data.

Any narrative data of one person gets registered as a familiar data in another person even without experiencing the narrative in reality, but when it is experienced in reality the stored data gets refined to a higher quality data.

 

Critical Thinkers from India

 Critical Thinkers from India

It was a world of exploration, backwards, in time. The path travelled helped me reach a phase in the past period in the Indian Sub-Continent very many thousands of years ago.

In a society, which is also a tribe as may be affectionately mentioned in sociological terms, there always emerges few minds who think far and much far ahead into future. They are the Critical Thinkers who live both in the present of their current times and in the future too through knowledge.

In a society many thousands of years ago in India the critical thinkers of that period wanted to save all intelligence and knowledge it had acquired, gained and evolved are safely saved as precious data. In addition to saving the knowledge and intelligence gained they also wanted it to have it reach the generations in future into an astronomical period of many thousands of years.

Many similar societies and tribes did the same and the methods they chose to do it were unique in their own ways.

The then societies depicted the knowledge and intelligence in the form of drawings, and some did by the way of carving scriptures in solid rock. Many geographical factors of climate change walk through these rocks and cause considerable damage to the contents over the period.

At a later stage the critical thinkers preserved the knowledge and intelligence gained by writing them in palm leaves and other available writing logs. All materialistic kits like the palm leaves, wooden tablets, rocks, rock tablets, cave walls, pottery scriptures, and metallic plates traveled very lengthy period in time passing thorough testing and adverse climatic and changing conditions, many successfully reached and many untouched still in future.

The critical thinkers in the Indian land also planned to have the knowledge and intelligence gained in their society at their period in time to reach the future generations safely. They adopted all materialistic kits to do so like the others did. They were aware that such knowledge and intelligence engraved in materialistic kits will reach the future generations only if it gets accessed by them.

Those materialistic kits which remain undetected may go unannounced to future generations. This made the critical thinkers think of some way through which the knowledge and intelligence gained by them is safely transmitted and transferred into the hands of the future generations for many a thousand years to come.

The critical thinkers from India put all the knowledge and intelligence gained by them into a capsule form and embedded it in the form of epics and puranas and many classical tales that went in through ears after ears after ears and the story like communication pattern of speaking and listening travelled safely many thousands of years and reached all the generations in-between up to this point in time intact and unaltered.

The Big data today looks like a small step when comparing with the technology of critical thinkers of many thousands of years ago.