Re: virus: Free Will
Wed, 12 Feb 1997 16:54:52 -0600 (CST)

On Thu, 6 Feb 1997, Tadeusz Niwinski wrote:

> David R. wrote:
> >Another example of such an honest disagreement is Kenneth
> >Boyd's insistance that the subjective experience comes before the objective.
> >This is not true-we first assert "It is" and then "I am aware of it" and,
> >furthermore, there is evidence that the act of self-reference must be proceeded
> >by identifying things "out there". (Another discussion)
> It is fascinating what Kenneth brought up. I heard about some research
> where they found that a decision for a simple reaction (measured by brain
> impulses) was made before the conscious decision, as if consciousness was
> only informed about the decision. It is consistent with Francis Crick's
> model of Free Will in his "The Astonishing Hypothesis, the Scientific Search
> for the Soul". I think this topic is worth our time.

It's *much* more intricate!

Shortest measured reaction time, circa 1980 is on the close order of
0.1 seconds [say, 0.11 or 0.12 or 0.10].
1995 [Some Science News]: The objective time required to make an
elementary decision is measured: on the close order of 0.3 seconds.

"Wait a minute! How do I cram 0.3 seconds into 0.1 second????"

1996 [Scientific American, theme issue consciousness]: Detailed
research into subjective vs. objective time measures demonstrates that
the brain automatically compensates for a 0.2 second time lag between
the senses and its reactions. I.e.: Take a stopwatch running at
resolution of 0.1 second. When you see _.0 seconds, it is physically
showing _.2 seconds.
The missing 0.2 seconds is now accounted for, at the cost of *MAJOR

[These are likely to involve General Relativity; there's some interesting
trivia about the Classical Relativistic Electron that is relevant....]

I propose that any "phenomenon" that has these effects isn't illusory
within our shared virtual reality.

/ Towards the conversion of data into information....
/ Kenneth Boyd