Dreams

Dreams are something that have boggled mankind for ages. We believe that dreams are built from the subconscious. Now from our previous discussions, we likened our consciousness to a virtual serial processor. So where does this subconscious fit into our parallel-serial processor combination? Well, from what we think of the subconscious, we can think of it as another type of memory, one which I shall call the cache memory of the brain.

For those that do not know, the cache memory in a computer is a very fast, very small amount of memory that is directly integrated with the processor. It stores the information that is currently in use by the processor, and information related to the process the processor is executing. In simpler terms, say you are playing a game on your computer. Your processor is executing many processes, and to make it go faster, game related processes are stored in the cache for quick access by the processor.

Our mind does something similar when we think about something. It automatically creates a list of things associated with that something for easy access in our subconscious. If you think about any single object, such as a book or a person, your brain will come up with various examples of a book and information regarding that person.

Now back to why we dream. First, the difference between a dream that occurs during sleep and a daydream. A daydream is nothing more than our imagination, artificial reality at its best. But dreams that occur during sleep are very different altogether. They are incredibly random, at times bringing people and events from different eras of your life together. They don’t follow any set progression or pattern. We don’t dream all the time, and we tend to forget most of what we dream.

I wrote in Evolutionary Creationism, that the brain has an infinitely powerful graphics engine which is limited by only how much we know. I also wrote that the brain has a set of definite data structures that it uses to store information. If we take these premises as true, I have an (although seemingly farfetched) idea of what is really happening when we dream. If there are definite data structures for the brain, then the brain must clean up and organize the contents every now and then for fast access. In other words, the brain must defragment its memory.

So how does this result in a dream? During the process of defragmentation in a computer, clusters of data are swapped all across the hard disk while they are being organized. These clusters of data will come from very different files and processes, and will go through the cache to be processed by the processor before being relocated to another area in the memory. If the brain does the same thing while defragmenting, then we can guess that when each memory goes through the subconscious, it gets processed by the processor, our consciousness, which is responsible for simulation. Thus, the dream is created of random memories while our consciousness works to clean up our brain while we sleep. You might ask, why then can’t you dream while you are awake? Well, most people know it is inadvisable to work on data that you are defragmenting. The brain takes this into account and chooses the time when the conscious is inactive, and can have full control.

Of course this is not a solid conclusion made from experiments, and all are welcome to tear apart my argument to shreds in the comments.  

The Brotherhood…

Finally back…

Well 6 episodes in and what do I think? Well, as far as the plot is concerned, there’s not much thats different from the original so far. But its going at a much more rapid pace, which is welcome by me, because I can’t wait till the manga storyline kicks in.

Animation is brilliant so far, however I slightly prefer the original’s style as compared to the current one. Their faces seem a bit too full, though this really isn’t that apparent except when there are flashback scenes to when they were kids. And I wish I could watch it in English too, but I guess they wont start dubbing it for at least a year…

The opening and endings are alright, and they are similar in the way that they cant stand on their own too well. But the accompanying animation for the songs are excellent and more than make up for that. Its really nice to see a completely animated ending sequence. Looks like Bones is not holding back a single buck for this one.

On another note , this pic made my day

Lost Season 5

Those that know me, know that I love Lost. I probably would like it even if they decided to replace all the characters with various animals and character interactions were given by subtitles and word bubbles. So I suppose with my slightly biased view of Lost, most might take what I have to say about it with a grain of salt. But all said and done, whatever you want to say about the rest of the season, the season finale was just amazing!

Lost spoilers from here on, if you haven’t seen the finale, go watch it!! If you don’t watch Lost, well I have nothing to say to the likes of people like that…

Take the candy…

Well, I would like to to point out a few things some people might not have noticed.

First of all, in all the flashbacks except for one , Jacob was present. The one where he wasn’t present was Juliet’s. And she died… well most probably died anyway… I don’t think that that was just a coincidence.

Next, what lies behind the shadow of the statue? Did a little research and people have come up with two very different translations of Richard’s answer:

1. The four horsemen of Death

2. The one who will save us all.

I’m more inclined to think its the latter choice…

Last up… what the hell is Jack’s Dad?? While, the discovery of Locke’s body proves that the Locke is not who he says he was, Jack’s Dad’s body was missing from the coffin when Jack found it wayyyy back in season 1. Of course somebody could have just taken it…. but I don’t know. Also, my guess is that when Locke went to the cabin the first time with Ben, and heard “help me”, I’m guessing it wasn’t Jacob, but the other guy that wanted to kill him. It could’ve been then that he somehow latched on to Locke waiting for him to die or something….

Ah well, with the way they ended it, they could take the story anywhere. Well except of course for the bomb actually working and everyone landing safely in Los Angeles with no problems whatsoever…. man can’t wait a whole year for it!!

Evolutionary Creationism

There are a growing number of theists that believe that God and evolution are compatible. Even I considered that the possibility was plausible for quite some time. However I now believe that they are completely incompatible. I shall attempt to explain my views by criticizing the one thing that makes us so special : the Brain.

Granted, we have very useful and comparatively rare features like opposable thumbs and bipedal movement, but our brain really tops the list. Let me start by saying one thing: the brain is not all its cracked up to be. Bold words maybe, but I feel that too many people treat the brain as this omnipotent source of power. Don’t get me wrong, the brain is a magnificent and powerful organ, but we should not kid ourselves.

For the purpose of my argument, I would like to compare our brain with a computer. Its not a new comparison I know, but I think I can get a little bit more out of it. First of all, the processor. I explained a little before in Virtualization about Daniel Dennett’s and Richard Dawkins’ view on the brain. They believed that the brain is fundamentally a parallel processor, which is how our body can effectively control the millions of processes that go on in our body, on top of which a virtual serial processor is built. A parallel processor is a type of processor that is divided into many processors. In terms of computer problems, a parallel processor can enable a problem to be divided into sub-problems, send them to multiple different processors and then these processors send the results back to the main processor. A serial processor can only handle one process or problem at a time. The way a serial processor handles many processes at the same time is by continuously switching between processes so fast that it appears to be running them in parallel.

This is astoundingly similar to how our own thought process works. You cannot think of two things at the time. Try for yourself if you want, but you will find yourself switching between one thought and the other. You may argue that if that were so, we would not be able to multitask. The truth is, you can’t, not in the way a parallel processor does anyway. Think about talking on the phone and driving. Your attention will flit between both continuously. If we really were able to multitask in a parallel manner, I suppose that things like car accidents would be very rare. But we cannot, and with every task we add, we halve our efficiency.

The next part of the computer is the memory.

A computer uses definite data structures to represent memory. This is to improve information retrieval times. The brain definitely uses a definite structure (although far more complex) as well. First of all, your memory is not perfect. You do forget things (sometimes completely). Some things, usually more recent things, come to you faster than older things. We do not remember every single sentence the English language has, instead we remember certain rules. Also, the addition of certain clues or hints, can jog your memory.

As you might have guessed, these are same limitations and features of modern day memory we find in computers. While, computers don’t forget things, they have a definite limit, exceeding which they must delete excess information. Recent events and processes are usually handled in the RAM where they can be stored for fast access. Older things stay in secondary memory like a hard drive, which is much slower. The rules that we remember to use English, are similar to compression of information in a computer, which also uses a rule to encode data.  For retrieval of information, lets use Google as an example. The more keywords you put, the closer you get to what you were looking for. The brain’s memory does this as well. Except the brain has the ability to associate not just text with a memory, but sounds, images, even video.

A quick side note about video that the brain handles. We don’t remember memories frame by frame. Instead, we remember the conditions, the people etc, and rebuild it again with our imagination. I think this can be compared to the difference between pre-rendered cut scenes and in-game engine cut scenes we see in current video games. Our brain is more like an infinitely powerful graphics engine that can virtualize events depending on how many conditions you remember.

Now you might be thinking,” Well that’s well and good, he’s given some argument on how we’re similar to computers, but what does that have to do with evolution?”.

The thing is, evolution of species and evolution of computers happened in very similar ways. Both grew from binary logic. Species have the strict logic of either two things: survive or die. It either works or it doesn’t. But they have had one big difference.

I haven’t read The Blind Watchmaker yet, but I guess the analogy that Dawkins is trying to convey in the book is that the evolutionary process is blind. That is, a blind watchmaker can only know if his watch is working in the end (perhaps by the sound of the watch ticking or something). Since he is blind, he must try every permutation and combination of the available resources he has and check. Obviously, this will take a very long time. However, eventually, he will get it right (assuming this watchmaker has got a lot of time on his hands).

The first electronic computer (ENIAC) was built in 1945. Its 2009 now and we can see the level of advancement in electronics. I have no doubt that we will be able to simulate the human mind completely by the end of the century. This is because we have guided the evolution of the computer. We have not made every permutation and combination of electronic components, because we have the ability to simulate and make sure that we can make a working computer on our first chance.

This is where Evolutionary Creationism doesn’t make sense.  If our evolution was guided by God who definitely would have had the ability to simulate situations as well, humans would have been created in less then a millennium. This has to be wrong, because if you believe in evolution, you also have to believe that it has been going on for a very, very long time, simply from fossil evidence and such. Well, if you don’t believe in such evidence, then there’s not much argument, but as for me, it does not make sense that God had anything to do with evolution.

Emotion

I am largely basing my articles on the theories of Richard Dawkins published in The Selfish Gene. He has took up a gene-centric view of evolution which I feel best explains the phenomena. In his book he reasons that it is the gene that is the unit of evolution and the implications this has. While this makes a lot of sense at present when we know that our hereditary information is passed on through our genes, in the beginning the ‘gene’ as we know it didn’t exist. Of course, we cant say what exactly happened millions of years ago, but quite a few educated guesses can be made. Dawkins has theorized that simple compounds called replicators existed and had only one purpose, ie. to replicate. At that stage, evolution occurred when a replicator made a mistake while replicating and produced a new compound. If the new compound had desirable traits, it survived. Otherwise, it perished. Eventually, these replicators mutated so much that had created ‘gene machines’ to protect themselves from the outside world. They would be hidden away, but their main instruction to their gene machine was clear: to stay alive till replication.

Now, onto the topic at hand, Emotion. We know that most animals exhibit emotions. Since we can see emotion in most life forms, we can guess that it is a desirable trait (otherwise the species would have died out, and emotions along with it). However, emotion is a very abstract term. It refers to quite a few chemical and neural processes. Some interesting findings about these processes can be found here. It also involves the memory, for example an emotion like desire can come from wanting something once had.

So emotion is quite a complex feature integrated (quite literally) into our bodies. So why was it deemed necessary? And how did it come about?

I think we can all guess why its necessary. Emotions like fear can save many a life. Anger can protect one. But we are getting way ahead of ourselves. Even if there was a need for it, evolution happens by chance and mutation, a little at a time. I think I can guess what the first ‘emotion’ was by thinking about the worst act we humans consider committing – cannibalism. We regard it as an act against nature itself. And its probably true. I think this revulsion dates all the way back to the days of the replicator and the first gene machines. An obviously good trait to maximize your own kind is not to destroy your own kind. I also think that this is where memory and some sort of sensory apparatus for the gene machine began. The ability to sense other gene machines through contact and analyze if they were the same requires memory to at least know what your comparing against. A comparator would also be needed for checking, and this could probably be seen as the brain of the gene machine.

Why Happiness???

Now that was all mostly science, so lets get to the philosophy bit of the article… why happiness? When thinking of most animals, they have two major states, an agitated state where they usually display negative emotions, and a stable state where they exhibit… well,  nothing really.  And this is well good enough for survival. So why the extra mile? Well I believe that basically by adding happiness to the list of emotions is equivalent to encoding the will to live into the gene machine. The main instruction a gene programs into a gene machine is to live until replication. By adding happiness, it makes sense that this instruction can be carried out more effectively.

Almost feels like we’re in the matrix now…. following a gene’s will. But that’s the trap that we should always watch out for. A gene does not have a will and does not want anything.

Well that’s it for now… mind is a bit tired from all the thinking. I think I’ll talk a bit about Creationism next time…

Red Dead Redemption

The latest news from Rockstar!

…No its not a new GTA game, its a sequel to a game nobody played, Red Dead Redemption.

Now western-styled games have never been too popular… ever. I myself am not a great fan of the genre, both in movies and games. However, co-founder of Rockstar, Dan Houser revealed some interesting things about the new game and even a sceptic like me cant fail to notice some good work going on there.

First of all, Rockstar has touted the game to be All-round package of a western, unlike previous attempts before which used to focus on just one part of the experience. Being a game from Rockstar, I think we can hold them to that. The game will focus a lot on exploration and in some ways it looks like they are taking a leaf from Fallout 3.

Expect a lot of Exploring and Chases…

Next, I have to say one thing… the game looks amazing! If they can maintain decent framerates, at least as well as in GTA4, I think Rockstar will accomplish what they are trying to do. Its really important that they do too since this will probably make or break the Western genre of games depending on its success. Basically, if Rockstar cant do it right, nobody can. (and nobody will try)

It doesn’t look like this is going to grace the PC, and there really is a very small chance of it coming (like after blockbuster sales on the consoles) so lets hope it does well!

Virtualization – A side note

The idea of artificial reality is nothing new. It is nothing more than our imagination, our body’s way of safely simulating events and predicting outcomes.  Quite a bit of work has been done in linking our ability to simulate and the phenomenon of our consciousness together. The philosopher Daniel Dennett, has suggested that our brain acts as a parallel processor that keeps our bodies working. On top of this, it has built a virtual serial processor, which is our consciousness. Richard Dawkins likens this consciousness to a virtual Operating System.

I would like to expand on this idea a little. According to Dawkins (although its purely speculative, its nonetheless very probable) consciousness arises when the brain’s simulation of the world becomes so complete that it must include a model of itself also. Thus, from the analogy above, our consciousness, or the simulation of the world, acts as an operating system. Now this idea works very well when we think of day to day happenings and the possible outcomes to a given situation. For example, if its cloudy outside, you can imagine that it might rain. This is because our operating system’s resources are the various phenomena of the world, and since our consciousness can simulate the world, we can make a valid prediction by running a program that uses these resources.

However I feel that the scope of this simulation is too limited. Our consciousness is far more flexible. This is why I prefer to use the word virtualization instead of simulation when speaking of what our mind really accomplishes when it imagines something. This is in deference to a software known as VMware (or Virtual Machine ware), which really exemplifies imagination. This is because the brain can simulate things that do not hold true in the world. In terms of operating systems, a program that runs on Windows will most probably not run on Linux. In terms of structures, they are almost like two different worlds. However VMware can virtualize another operating system, and run both operating systems concurrently. On top of that, compatible information can imported from the host to the virtual operating system and vice-versa. This is very much what happens when you read a science-fiction story. We make sense of situations that involve faster than light travel, aliens etc and use our own logic to predict the outcome of the story. Thus the artificial reality we virtualize is mounted on top of our own and can be unmounted at will. I’ve already discussed the significance of such an ability.

In my next philosophy article, I shall discuss imagination’s relative, emotion.

Artificial Reality

“An Atheist is a man with no invisible means of support”

-John Buchan

Along the path from the primordial soup to the fairly advanced beings we are now, man has forsaken quite a few “natural” survival traits and replaced them with, at the time, less useful abilities. As we can see from ourselves we do not have the maneuverability of any primate, but instead have gained ability in another area, that is, of course the mind.

What is the big difference between the mind of an ape and ours? Studies have shown how similar they are physiologically, but why then have humans advanced while our ancestors are becoming endangered?

Humans have developed a possibly unique ability to hypothesize. Now this ability is a lot more broad and applicable to everyday life than one might think at first. Simply put, a hypothesis is an explanation to a problem or a phenomenon. Perhaps it is a little too simple, because from that definition, most animals technically hypothesize as well. For example, a monkey can solve its problem of being attacked by grounded predators by staying in a tree. The experience it gains throughout life by observation of the enemy deems staying at a height safe.

So what is the difference? While animals can only come to conclusions by observation and experience, humans can do so by experiment, inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. Reasoning can be seen as a virtualization of the problem with set rules and inputs and an output that only has meaning in that virtualization.

For example:

All zombies are angry people.

All angry people are teachers.

Therefore all zombies are teachers.

This logic is sound, but it is only sound in the virtualization of the premises. As the premises are fictitious, the conclusion is also.

Now while the above example can be easily passed off, what about the following?

The Sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

The Earth is not moving.

Therefore the Sun revolves around the Earth.

Of course we know that this is not true. However, this was a very valid conclusion once upon a time. Successful ideologies, work patterns and ways of life had been built upon the idea.  Of course the most important mistaken virtualization is that of God. But again, disregarding what is true and what is not, most of human history has been influenced for better and for worse by this artificial reality. Or as Douglas Adams named it, an “Artificial God”.

However fallacious the notion is, its had its uses. Whether scientists admit it or not, human kind might not have been the kind-hearted species it is (well for the most part anyway) without religion. Do we still need it? In the face of terrorist threats and what not, atheists have begun to come out and call for complete disbandment of religion, and who can blame them?

But the truth is, the problem is not that of religion, but of people. Its not as if a scenario where an atheist bombs a mosque in retaliation is not imaginable. Just as current Islamic priests condemn the actions of these so-called jihadists, fellow atheists would condemn that atheist as well. As long as there are people, there will be those at the higher levels trying to control the lower levels with things people believe in, but that is another issue altogether.

Now let us assume that our dreams and ambitions do not involve the ultimate culmination of the world or universe or how it all began. I’m a non-believer myself, but there are certain truths that can only be obtained from lies. In the movies we watch, the games we play and the religions we practice, we make an artificial reality with the medium, and though its purely fictitious, they can alleviate very real problems that we have.

So what have we gained after all these years of evolution? The ability to solve problems with fictitious premises.

JRPG Marathon!

I’ve been wrong about a lot things about this generation.  For one, I always thought the PS3 would eventually gain momentum and beat the Xbox 360. I was wrong there and I can understand why it happened. I couldn’t imagine the Xbox 360 getting JRPG exclusives, simply because the target demographic (ie. Japanese people) didn’t even have significant fraction of the install base of the PS3. I was wrong there too, but I still cant understand why. Well, maybe the difference just seems so much more apparent because of the total lack of console JRPGs on the market right now. (Although Star Ocean and Tales of Vesperia are pretty significant exclusives). Where are all the Atlus and Level 5 games we’ve become accustomed to in the previous generation? Atlus released Persona 4 on the PS2 again and it doesn’t look like anything is coming in near future and Level 5 looks like its only interested in handhelds…

WHERE ARE MY JRPGS???

In some ways, the current dearth of JRPGs is a good thing.  For one thing, the genre has been getting stale (with notable exceptions) and I think developers in Japan in light of the serious recession they are facing are in the process of rethinking their franchises.  For another thing, there are a ton of PS2 RPGs I just never got around to playing, so while wating for the JRPG savior (yeah I’m looking at you FFXIII) I’ve started a marathon of JRPG playing for the summer vacation.

The first game on my list is Rogue Galaxy. I just started it last night, and it seems good enough. The battle system is nice, and the battles are unexpectedly tough, but not irritatingly so. I suppose having save points almost everywhere helps quite a bit. Anyway, I’ve only scratched the surface of this game and I’ll give a full review when I’ve finished with it.