the notion that our current abilities in regard to interacting with complex networks: ~monte carlo; is analogous with copernicus's abilities to interact with planetary trajectory without calculus
i only have a tangential familiarity with scale free, but as i understand it scale free is more of the same in regard to interactions with networks
but i do agree that wholly understanding network trajectories will have a significant effect on our understanding of cognition, neuroscience, ai, and some yet undiscussed consequence
however, if the brain uses any sort of mathematics,
the language of that mathematics must certainly be
different from that which we explicitly
and consciously refer to by that name today
from the book(o):
However, the above remarks about reliability and
logical and arithmetical depth prove that whatever
the system is, it cannot fail to differ considerably
from what we consciously and explicitly consider
as mathematics.
.
it took me some time and effort to find the lecturer's name: David Dalrymple; so i'll link it here(i)
i found this to be articulated perfectly..
the notion that our current abilities in regard to interacting with complex networks: ~monte carlo; is analogous with copernicus's abilities to interact with planetary trajectory without calculus
i only have a tangential familiarity with scale free, but as i understand it scale free is more of the same in regard to interactions with networks
but i do agree that wholly understanding network trajectories will have a significant effect on our understanding of cognition, neuroscience, ai, and some yet undiscussed consequence
https://youtu.be/6Px0livk6m8?t=4551
von nuemann anectdote and quote..
as remembered:
from the book(o): .it took me some time and effort to find the lecturer's name: David Dalrymple; so i'll link it here(i)
(o) http://www.amazon.com/The-Computer-Brain-Silliman-Memorial/d...
(i) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Dalrymple_(computer_scie...