Friday, October 30, 2009
Behavior Management
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Thoughts on AI
From this narrative of emerging consciousness I would make these conjectures. First, the physical laws of chemistry – the binding rules of matter – are sufficient to support the emergence of consciousness. Second, consciousness emerges from the patterns of energy exchange in the mind. The metabolic processes of neurons and associated cells supports consciousness. Third, these patterns of energy exchange emerged from biological metabolism but these patterns are not restricted to only biological platforms.
Our own human consciousness is starting to come under our own conscious control. Psychotropic drugs are a start. They change the feeling of what happens They reassign meaning to experiences. As we begin to understand this better we can start to engineer consciousness and the feeling of what happens. I would not speculate about alternaive types of consciousness that might already exist around us - I only suggest that we should not be surprised if we either discover or create alternative kinds of consciousness in the near future. If consciousness is a pattern of movement of energy, then it can be designed. It can evolve and I do speculate that if we were to make a 10 generation leap into our future, we would find a consciouness as radically changed as if we were to make a 1000 generation leap into the past.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
The Monk Problem
The Monk Problem poses this question: A monk hiked to a mountaintop at starting daybreak and arrived at the mountain top at just at sunset. After two day’s meditation, the monk starts his downward journey at daybreak and arrives at the bottom of the mountain again at sunset. Was the monk ever at the same point on the trail at exactly the same time of day? The problem can be mentally modeled by imaging the two trips superimposed on each other. As ascending monk starts from the bottom, the future self start on the trip down. At some point they will pass each other –they will have been at the same place at the same time of day. An alternate model is to graph distance from the bottom against time. The first day’s graph is increasing while the return journey’s graph is decreasing. Where the two graphs intersect represents the same distance from the starting point and the same time – the graphic case of the monk meeting himself on the trail.
When I first ran across the problem I shared it with my wife – also an experienced teacher – and she argued that the answer was not so clear to her. She thought is was quite possible to never be at the same point at the same time. After perhaps 30 minutes of explanation, acting out, and resorting to hand waving and raised voices ( a sure fired way to increase comprehension) we found the root our miscommunication. My wife saw the trip up the mountain as discreet – the point the person occupied was the footprint . The monk had obviously not trodden the entire trail; the trip was a series of points of contact. My mental image of the trip was a continuous motion of an idealized point. The incident made me wonder about teaching and how we think with language. Even though we have similar backgrounds and training my wife and I made different tacit assumptions about the meaning of point and this resulted in two different interpretations of the Monk Problem.
If my wife and I have this much trouble sharing mental models, we face an even greater challenge sharing our mental models with our students with their varied backgrounds and experiences.. If my wife had taken my word as authority she would have rejected her meaningful and accurate construction to accept a senseless one. This is why telling isn’t teaching. She certainly could have repeated my explanation and that is why saying isn’t knowing.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Computing Power and 6th Grade Math
This has to change how we think about teaching math. If an algorithm exists, a computer can do it. I don’t think we have a good map of this new ground before us, but I do feel we need to throw the old map away. Teaching computational skills at the expense of conceptual understanding and technology-based problem solving is just no longer appropriate.
