I am planning to go on a vacation.

Whats the better read this here:

Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian

Or this here:

Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook

On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 02:34:07 +0200, Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
wrote:

>I am planning to go on a vacation.
>
>Whats the better read this here:
>
>Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
>Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
>https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian
>
>Or this here:
>
>Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
>https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook

I'd take some form of e-book reader and a couple of dozens of books
that don't require much intellectual power to process. Some easy SF or
early Deen Koontz or Stephen Coonts or something.

Books like those above, I'd leave for nice, Winter nights at home
with a hot drink and snacks, and perhaps some notepaper and a pen.

Some may say that you should *NEVER* take books on a holiday and
that's a valid viewpoint if you think of the time as a period of
gaining new experiences and seeing new things. Meeting new and exotic
strangers, eating new and weird food and nearly dying from them,
petting cute furries that don't exist in your home town and just
seeing stuff that is *different*. These experiences should be enjoyed,
reveled in, locked into your memory forever.

But ... and this is more and more important as the Century passes ...
due to Security Theatre among other idiocies, there will be extended
times of blankness when you can't go anywhere, can't wander off, can't
even talk to anyone because of ten million screaming gremlins so books
are going to be a boon. Headphones and loud music, too.

Even when you're travelling, on the bus, on the jet, on the boat or
on the Orion, books are useful as a distraction if nothing else.

But you don't want books whose reading means that you need to *think*
especially not to think deeply. That way, you miss your flight or the
call to lunch or both.

Most of us can set our "watchdogs" to alert us when our flight is
called so we stop eating or watching the laptop's TV program or
whatever we're doing but that may not work when we concentrate on deep
stuff.

Sorry, the foregoing was all just my opinion. Maybe you *can* wake up
from a mathematical stupor instantly. I know people who can't. They
blink like a half-awake cat for some seconds before Reality becomes
part of their world.

Maths is hard. It takes thinking.

Alan. E. Nourse is easier.

But if pushed, I'd go for both. You never know how long the stay in
the airport is going to be and running out of book is horrible. It
might force you to actually *talk* to people. :)

J.

John wrote:
> But if pushed, I'd go for both.

What about a non-reflexive preference relation
between the two. Which one would you read first?

I also undecided in this matter. :-(

John schrieb:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 02:34:07 +0200, Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
> wrote:
>
>> I am planning to go on a vacation.
>>
>> Whats the better read this here:
>>
>> Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
>> Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
>> https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian
>>
>> Or this here:
>>
>> Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
>> https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook
>
>
> I'd take some form of e-book reader and a couple of dozens of books
> that don't require much intellectual power to process. Some easy SF or
> early Deen Koontz or Stephen Coonts or something.
>
> Books like those above, I'd leave for nice, Winter nights at home
> with a hot drink and snacks, and perhaps some notepaper and a pen.
>
> Some may say that you should *NEVER* take books on a holiday and
> that's a valid viewpoint if you think of the time as a period of
> gaining new experiences and seeing new things. Meeting new and exotic
> strangers, eating new and weird food and nearly dying from them,
> petting cute furries that don't exist in your home town and just
> seeing stuff that is *different*. These experiences should be enjoyed,
> reveled in, locked into your memory forever.
>
> But ... and this is more and more important as the Century passes ...
> due to Security Theatre among other idiocies, there will be extended
> times of blankness when you can't go anywhere, can't wander off, can't
> even talk to anyone because of ten million screaming gremlins so books
> are going to be a boon. Headphones and loud music, too.
>
> Even when you're travelling, on the bus, on the jet, on the boat or
> on the Orion, books are useful as a distraction if nothing else.
>
> But you don't want books whose reading means that you need to *think*
> especially not to think deeply. That way, you miss your flight or the
> call to lunch or both.
>
> Most of us can set our "watchdogs" to alert us when our flight is
> called so we stop eating or watching the laptop's TV program or
> whatever we're doing but that may not work when we concentrate on deep
> stuff.
>
> Sorry, the foregoing was all just my opinion. Maybe you *can* wake up
> from a mathematical stupor instantly. I know people who can't. They
> blink like a half-awake cat for some seconds before Reality becomes
> part of their world.
>
> Maths is hard. It takes thinking.
>
> Alan. E. Nourse is easier.
>
> But if pushed, I'd go for both. You never know how long the stay in
> the airport is going to be and running out of book is horrible. It
> might force you to actually *talk* to people. :)
>
> J.
>

Last year making it to LAX was quite troublesome:

As I settled into my seat, my tattered notebook
in hand, the air crackled with anticipation—though
whether it was due to my formidable intellect or the
odor emanating from my well-worn jacket, I cannot say.
With a flourish of my pen, I delved into the esoteric
realm of differential equations, blissfully unaware of
the chaos that would soon unfold.

Enter the stalwart guardians of order, the flight
attendants with their practiced frowns and accusatory
glares. "Explain yourself!" they demanded, their
nostrils flaring in disgust as they beheld my
disheveled appearance and scribbled calculations.

But fear not, dear reader, for even in the face
of such adversity, my spirit remained unbroken,
my resolve as firm as the unyielding laws of
mathematics. For though my appearance may be
shabby and my origins humble, the fire of
intellect burns bright within my breast, illuminating
the darkest corners of human understanding.

Mild Shock schrieb:
> John wrote:
> > But if pushed, I'd go for both.
>
> What about a non-reflexive preference relation
> between the two. Which one would you read first?
>
> I also undecided in this matter. :-(
>
> John schrieb:
>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 02:34:07 +0200, Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am planning to go on a vacation.
>>>
>>> Whats the better read this here:
>>>
>>> Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
>>> Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
>>> https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian
>>>
>>>
>>> Or this here:
>>>
>>> Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
>>> https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook
>>
>>
>>    I'd take some form of e-book reader and a couple of dozens of books
>> that don't require much intellectual power to process. Some easy SF or
>> early Deen Koontz or Stephen Coonts or something.
>>
>>   Books like those above, I'd leave for nice, Winter nights at home
>> with a hot drink and snacks, and perhaps some notepaper and a pen.
>>
>>   Some may say that you should *NEVER* take books on a holiday and
>> that's a valid viewpoint if you think of the time as a period of
>> gaining new experiences and seeing new things. Meeting new and exotic
>> strangers, eating new and weird food and nearly dying from them,
>> petting cute furries that don't exist in your home town and just
>> seeing stuff that is *different*. These experiences should be enjoyed,
>> reveled in, locked into your memory forever.
>>
>>   But ... and this is more and more important as the Century passes ...
>> due to Security Theatre among other idiocies, there will be extended
>> times of blankness when you can't go anywhere, can't wander off, can't
>> even talk to anyone because of ten million screaming gremlins so books
>> are going to be a boon. Headphones and loud music, too.
>>
>>   Even when you're travelling, on the bus, on the jet, on the boat or
>> on the Orion, books are useful as a distraction if nothing else.
>>
>>   But you don't want books whose reading means that you need to *think*
>> especially not to think deeply. That way, you miss your flight or the
>> call to lunch or both.
>>
>>   Most of us can set our "watchdogs" to alert us when our flight is
>> called so we stop eating or watching the laptop's TV program or
>> whatever we're doing but that may not work when we concentrate on deep
>> stuff.
>>
>>   Sorry, the foregoing was all just my opinion. Maybe you *can* wake up
>> from a mathematical stupor instantly. I know people who can't. They
>> blink like a half-awake cat for some seconds before Reality becomes
>> part of their world.
>>
>>   Maths is hard. It takes thinking.
>>
>>   Alan. E. Nourse is easier.
>>
>>   But if pushed, I'd go for both. You never know how long the stay in
>> the airport is going to be and running out of book is horrible. It
>> might force you to actually *talk* to people. :)
>>
>>                                                                J.
>>
>

On 4/11/2024 4:45 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
> John wrote:

>> But if pushed, I'd go for both.
>
> What about a non-reflexive preference relation
> between the two. Which one would you read first?
>
> I also undecided in this matter. :-(

Don't mimic Buridan's ass, and
starve to death instead of choosing.

Could it ever be more appropriate to flip a coin
than to choose between books on Bayes' theorem?

If it were only about Bayes theorem. The choice
is really hard. Maybe the author George Chapline
(Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, USA)
of the below is a fraud?

Quantum Mechanics and Bayesian Machines
https://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10775#t=aboutBook

I mean he aspires to explain some Neuromorphic
computing among other stuff, and his tome is
196 pages thick. Maybe just go for the shorter
paper here by Richard T. Born and Gianluca M. Bencomo

Illusions, Delusions, and Your Backwards
Bayesian Brain: A Biased Visual Perspective
https://karger.com/bbe/article/95/5/272/47302/Illusions-Delusions-and-Your-Backwards-Bayesian

And enjoy some description of the chaotic
behaviour of brains, that Neuromorphic
computing will possibly also exhibit, even
if they have a deficit: No neuromodulator dopamine?

Definition:
Neuromodulation is the physiological process
by which a given neuron uses one or more chemicals
to regulate diverse populations of neurons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromodulation

Jim Burns schrieb:
> On 4/11/2024 4:45 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
>> John wrote:
>
>>> But if pushed, I'd go for both.
>>
>> What about a non-reflexive preference relation
>> between the two. Which one would you read first?
>>
>> I also undecided in this matter. :-(
>
> Don't mimic Buridan's ass, and
> starve to death instead of choosing.
>
> Could it ever be more appropriate to flip a coin
> than to choose between books on Bayes' theorem?
>
>

On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 22:45:49 +0200, Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
wrote:

>John wrote:
> > But if pushed, I'd go for both.
>
>What about a non-reflexive preference relation
>between the two. Which one would you read first?

Whichever was on top of the pile. That would probably be whichever
was bought second because the pile would probably invert from its
standing, waiting to be read position when being packed. :)

>
>I also undecided in this matter. :-(

Does it really matter? A good book is a good book and learning is
learning. Maths is always fun. Discussions about maths can be
irritating but that, too, can be fun.

Reading order matters when you have a new serialised novel cut into
several books but that's about the only time it does.

Which leads me to: Harry Turtledove's "How Few Remain" and Great War
series would be nice to take on a journey if you have an e-book
reader. It'll probably be possible to get through to "Breakthroughs"
while waiting for Security at the departure end and to finish "In At
The Death" at the other end.

J.

N.B. Top-posting instead of inline posting with quotation and snippage
is poor netiquette. It fucks up the flow of attributions and the
entire conversation.

Please don't.
J.

On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 23:48:28 +0200, Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
wrote:

>Last year making it to LAX was quite troublesome:
>
<<snipped>>

Oh, a troll and a top-poster. Ah, well, welcome to the filtered zone.

G'bye.

J.

Actually it was on this flight during easter
when I miraculously escaped detention to Guatanamo
that Bayes theorem came to my attention.

Imagine you had never heard of Christianity
before nor any resurrection stories. Despite
all the billions examples of people and living
beings dying and not resurrecting, if someone
came to you and told you that their Grandpa Joe
claimed to be a manifestation of God and resurrected,
then before hearing any more, you give him 1 chance
in 4 that he tells the truth?

It all began in 1748, when the philosopher
David Hume published An Enquiry Concerning
Human Understanding, calling into question,
among other things, the existence of miracles.
According to Hume, the probability of people
inaccurately claiming that they’d seen Jesus’
resurrection far outweighed the probability
that the event had occurred in the first place.
This did not sit well with the reverend.

In 1767, Richard Price, Bayes’ friend,
published “On the Importance of Christianity,
its Evidences, and the Objections which have
been made to it,” which used Bayes’ ideas to
mount a challenge to Hume’s argument. “The
basic probabilistic point” of Price’s article,
says statistician and historian Stephen
Stigler, “was that Hume underestimated the
impact of there being a number of independent
witnesses to a miracle, and that Bayes’ results
showed how the multiplication of even fallible
evidence could overwhelm the great improbability
of an event and establish it as fact.”

John schrieb:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 23:48:28 +0200, Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm>
> wrote:
>
>> Last year making it to LAX was quite troublesome:
>>
> <<snipped>>
>
> Oh, a troll and a top-poster. Ah, well, welcome to the filtered zone.
>
> G'bye.
>
> J.
>

Yeah, of course, in a vulgar setting, a
stone is a stone, quite unlike what a
petrologist sees in a stone.

But of course we shouldn't shy away the
youngers right now, they might miss their
dream career, just tell them math isn’t

scary and science is fun.

John schrieb:> Does it really matter? A good book is a good book
and learning is learning. Maths is always fun.

Now digging into George Chapline again.
There is not much neuromorphic stuff in
his downloadable publications on resarch gate.

Maybe this one is related:

> In this paper we consider the question whether a
distributed network of sensors and data processors
can form "perceptions" based on the sensory data.
Because sensory data can have exponentially many
explanations, the use of a central data processor
to analyze the outputs from a large ensemble of
sensors will in general introduce unacceptable
latencies for responding to dangerous situations.
A better idea is to use a distributed "Helmholtz
machine" architecture in which the collective state
of the network as a whole provides an explanation
for the sensory data.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2217832_Sentient_Networks

Could be a new hobby of George Chapline, the
neuromorphic stuff, after rotating universes
and black holes.

Mild Shock schrieb:
>
> Yeah, of course, in a vulgar setting, a
> stone is a stone, quite unlike what a
> petrologist sees in a stone.
>
> But of course we shouldn't shy away the
> youngers right now, they might miss their
> dream career, just tell them math isn’t
>
> scary and science is fun.
>
> John schrieb:>   Does it really matter? A good book is a good book
> and learning is learning. Maths is always fun.