Complexity of Persons, Learning Depth

[cKleinhuis]

sometimes i sit the and think:

Each iteration represents a learning state, in basic 3 state learning it could be represented as beginner,expert, novice,
but used at a lot lower skales, e.g. if you use a toilet paper a first time you have reached iteration one for using toilet
paper for whatever youi did with it. when applied to humans it is like samurai fighters are battling in a kind of way
together, but since the have reached same iteration ( not like experience points in rpg ) we come to parameters, each
level of iteration introduces new sets of behaviours or rules, or as mathematicans say, parameters, those parameters
if they are all the same, everything is like, being on level 0 but, every combination of each iteration level parameter
is affecting dramatically the outcome ( mostly not, but sometimes  )

so, and all this together i sit and think is the method how the brain could be viewed

it is not only a depressing view of how things develop, it is also nice to know, that EVERYthing can be learned, and
that every begining is hard !

and so i thought and stood up and went my way to ... 

[Timeroot]

But with different parameters, some areas may be unreachable, no matter the iterations... not quite everything can be learned. And sadly, if parameters decrease one area, the probability is that they will have decreased the whole as well... If the center of a Julia set goes away, so does everything else, given enough iterations. A disease, spreading from the center of the mind. Not all shifts in parameter are so drastic, but lacking one area means you will lack in another. I guess we could say Albert Einstein has a very high fractal dimension.

[kram1032]

Did you see the discussion about confidence driven systems and Genetic Alorithms?

Fits perfectly

[Bent-Winged Angel]

But with different parameters, some areas may be unreachable, no matter the iterations... not quite everything can be learned. And sadly, if parameters decrease one area, the probability is that they will have decreased the whole as well... If the center of a Julia set goes away, so does everything else, given enough iterations. A disease, spreading from the center of the mind. Not all shifts in parameter are so drastic, but lacking one area means you will lack in another. I guess we could say Albert Einstein has a very high fractal dimension.

Not neccessarily. What about the savant? What that person is lackingin one are(s) they more than make up in others... to the point of genius. Also back to the title "Complexity of persons, learning depth"  A person's Emotional IQ is also a factor.   BTW do you guys ALWAYS speak in fractal terms? 

[David Makin]

 BTW do you guys ALWAYS speak in fractal terms? 

Since absolutely everything is fractal......
(e.g. a straight line is a special case of an IFS fractal or L-system)

[kram1032]

Basically, as Physical rules are nothing more than the same operation applied to a state at a certain time step over and over again to form the next time steps (with wavelet time in quantum sizes so it is kind of a mix of discrete steps and continuous time flow), a lot of things have fractal behaviour

The straight line is a border case... Hard to say, it's fractal. The Julia of (0,0) is a perfect circle
It really depends on the strictness and choise of definitions. Just taking self similarity makes a straight line a fractal while a circle is not. Nor is the Mset in that case as it's only pseudoselfsimilar...

[Bent-Winged Angel]

Every living organism has fractal behavior; and an algorithm to match.  The more complex the organism, (the higher the IQ's)  the more complex the algorithm.. Also can reach higher iterations. In regards to speaking in fractal terms in the "real world?"  not everyone is there with you.  Communication is vital.  I tend to speak in pschychological terms being that also affects behaviors. 

[Bent-Winged Angel]

This topic reminds me of the sitcom in the US called "The Big Bang Theory" 

Premise.. Set in Pasadena, California, the show is about two Caltech prodigies in their 20s, one an experimental physicist (Leonard Hofstadter) and the other a theoretical physicist (Sheldon Cooper), who live across the hall from an attractive blonde waitress with show-biz aspirations (Penny). Leonard and Sheldon's geekiness and sheer intellect are contrasted for comic effect with Penny's social skills and common sense.[3][4] Two equally nerdy friends of theirs, Howard and Rajesh, are also main characters. 

BTW I feel like the "penny" character here! (but with red-hair) 

[jehovajah]

This topic reminds me of the sitcom in the US called "The Big Bang Theory" 

Premise.. Set in Pasadena, California, the show is about two Caltech prodigies in their 20s, one an experimental physicist (Leonard Hofstadter) and the other a theoretical physicist (Sheldon Cooper), who live across the hall from an attractive blonde waitress with show-biz aspirations (Penny). Leonard and Sheldon's geekiness and sheer intellect are contrasted for comic effect with Penny's social skills and common sense.[3][4] Two equally nerdy friends of theirs, Howard and Rajesh, are also main characters. 

BTW I feel like the "penny" character here! (but with red-hair) 

So you have red hair, bwa? Nice!

I am with you on the geekiness of some of our discussions and actual thought processes. However I feel that for a person to open up in this way is precious, and a privilege to be allowed access to their personal feelings and thoughts. Therefore like holding a snowflake I tremble to even give a whiff of prejudicial characterisation!
 People are so sensitive when venturing new ideas that they clam up as soon as they even think they might be being out of the norm!.

By the way I am not getting at you, I hope, but recognising the way it is in open society. Generally, students of a particular view gather together to discuss it in privacy, free from the damage caused by casting aspersions. It is therefore very brave to place ones thoughts on an open forum!!

[Khaotik]

Hmm... Interesting. I just reviewed some algorithms to train Artificial Neural Networks. And most of them requires iteration.
So... the training process of our brain, may be similar.
And the result, may, be ... some sort of ... fractal.

[jehovajah]

I would go stronger. The training process is identical except for sensor form. and the outcome is definitely self similarity of a rough nature, Without this conclusion how do i explain persistence of vision, form, perception, etc. These ar 2 of the main planks of any definition of fractal.