/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11118764
cringe

i didn't do nothing officer my brain made me do it

>>11118766
>complains about cringe with photo of your obsession from when they were 10 years younger

>>11118768
cringe

>>11118767
So who do I arrest?

>>11118764
If you made a decent diagram you wouldn't need weird notes everywhere explaining it.
Also you shouldn't need things in brackets if you made it properly as the structure and the labels should tell you the inputs and outputs.

Using stuff other than circles to illustrate different types of functions might be useful.

Basically your (((diagram))) is shit.

>>11118776
I will add that it's not the information that's the issue as I didn't really look at it, but I can already tell without needing to read it the diagram is not well structured or has a logical flow.

Perhaps this is because you're shit a diagrams or the brain is something that is difficult to abstract accurately.

>>11118764
incredibly cringe. Simplifying a process as unbelievably complex as the brain to a few simple nodes. We don't know how the brain works, nor do we even understand the physics behind it all. Untill then, this belongs in philosophy.

>>11118777
The parts of the brain I am illustrating (and inaccurately illustrating for the sake of simplicity) is not difficult to abstract, it's definitely just that I'm shit at diagrams. What do you mean by brackets? And by circles do you mean the inputs and outputs or the entire rectangles?

>>11118779
There is a definite answer. One or the other. Therefore, this is more science than philosophy.

>>11118779
Also, the point of this isn't to describe every part of the brain and every process. Only a small part of it depicted inaccurately to explain a question

>>11118782
I would take a look at how people design Neural Networks as it might give you some pointers on how to structure your "diagram" as inputs and outputs.
From I could see, it seems you're trying to illustrate information flow through the brain in terms of inputs and outputs (which is probably difficult to do).

Having blocks of information in your diagram means you might as well write the information out for your process in dot point form. You seem to be omitting information to make the diagram work for the process, rather than modelling the diagram around the process.

>>11118790
After some thinking, it might also help to correspond the diagram that you have, against a physical drawing of the brain, with different colours highlighting which section of the brain corresponds with which process.
I don't know anything about brains so I don't know how difficult this this.

>>11118790
Most of the shittiness is that I'm trying to model this in the space on the whiteboard. I can see how it's confusing because I didn't specify the input and output types. I can do that in a reply in for point form as you said, though.

>>11118795
You also have very feminine handwriting anon

Ah, I see where a lot of the confusion is coming. This is not meant to be a shitty diagram of the brain. It's meant to be a shitty logic diagram of the brain processes. However, I guess it is too shitty to understand.

>>11118804
Titles are pretty good as well

>>11118802
The female handwriting you're used to seeing must look far worse than the female handwriting I'm used to seeing

>>11118804
Is this is for psychology?

>>11118807
>tfw psychology feels like such a meme when it comes to the brain that I'm not sure how much of it to believe

>>11118805
The title is near the bottom because I wrote it last and thought there's not enough space at the top

>>11118806
I've noticed a trend where women have lots of curves in their lettering and men have more sharp angles and shapes. Men also pay less attention to ticks on their i's or t's.
There also a few papers and/or projects people have done to detect the gender based on someone's handwriting.

>>11118807
No. I'm a freshman in cs. I've never taken psuchology. I mostly just made this after thinking about how I feel like I'm just a spectator fooled to believe I'm in control of myself. Yeah I know, cs is for code monkeys, but I figured I really don't care about what I do in college. It won't affect my future employment in my case anyway. Also, I prefer to learn things by myself so I plan on learning some math and physics subjects from edx.

>>11118811
The paragraph at the bottom is not a title.
I would suggest "logical processes of the brain" once you improve your diagram. I'm guessing this is for an assignment or lab?

>>11118817
Nah, the title is "The Brain" lol. Yeah, not a real title. No, this is not for anything, I just felt like making it (see my previous comment)

>>11118815
As long as you study some mathematics in your degree you should be fine.
I find the parts that I missed out on in CS I made up for later by doing projects and then learning about the Math that is required to write the algorithm for that section of the project. I can't write a formal definition or proof for a math concept, but I can understand to implement it in a language of my choice.

I need to go to sleep because I have classes in 7 hours. When I have time tomorrow (technically today for me) I will revise this diagram.

>>11118820
If you're a freshmen in CS, probably start by building flow diagrams for something less complex then the brain.
Or read up on Neural Networks.

>>11118827
I had to explain what I was thinking using some basis for the parts of the brain I'm talking about. For example, the autonomous processes in our brain are obviously separate from the parts that have a spectator/conscious processes. I wanted to model this to make this distinction.

>>11118814
Girls don't use 4chan. He probably just wanted it to be legible. Plus, writing on a whiteboard feels nice and smooth.

>>11118830
Do you Automata at some point in your degree?

>>11118839
Girls definitely do use 4chan. But probably not this board.
Blackboards are superior

>>11118845
Yeah. First semester senior year though. However, for me this means I'm taking it in sophomore year.

>>11118857
No reason you can't get a head start.

>>11118764
your diagram sucks ass and model of the brain is retarded

(stimula external and internal)
- The internal and external portion of this shows you are retarded and low IQ. Just label it as "inputs", no reason to not use the simplest word.

>common calculator tasks
>calculator
This is pretty much sick logical thinking, as in diseased brain.
>autonomous
this word is stupid in this context, maybe you meant subconscious?, there is no autonomous vs non-autonomous part of the brain and using such a term makes no sense

bio flex dic search
- poor design, you create a complex sounding function name and then write a clearer and simpler name for it underneath.

It's sort of like "goobie triplex disrupter" (this adds 3 to the number)
Instead of naming it goobie triplex disrupter just name it "add 3 function", you are low IQ and so using complex words to fool yourself that it's intelligent thought, mimicry

priority filter
- Whats a filter that just takes the first input? You just added this for no functional reason and your high level abstraction doesn't use it for anything.

The rest is just nonsensical and low IQ. I recommend that you just entirely stop with your brain ideas and work on something simpler and basic like properly modeling something your IQ level like a fast food store and gain some skill

You would want to first understand the level of abstraction you are working at. You want to understand what a higher level would like and a lower level. Maybe understand some basic things about neural networks if you don't.

Maybe look into something like thousand brains theory and other ones before trying your own.

>>11118886
It doesn't take the first input. It takes the first input that isn't empty. I don't really know how to say this. If one process has no output, the input to the priority filter will be empty. This way, if there is no reflex, it tells the motor cortex to do the action from the subconscious nodes, if that output is not empty. If there is a reflex, it ignored the subconscious node output and just does the reflex.

>>11118892
It takes the first input that isn't empty.

so the first input?

>>11118889
I've said this already, but the point of this post isn't to have a useful diagram of the brain functions. It's to make the question understandable about whether or not the spectator influences the autonomous parts of the brain. Previous commenter suggests no regions of the brain are autonomous, but rather subconscious or conscious. However, I'm asking to rethink this. If the spectator/consciousness does not act as input for some of the conscious brain functions mentioned, then it is both a conscious function and autonomous at the same time. If you are not spectating it, it is both subconscious and autonomous.

>>11118892
so I mean just to elaborate

I can give it a billion trillion empty inputs instead of whatever number you are thinking of and it functions identically to if I just gave it 0. Meaning the function ignores empty "input" and so it isn't even input.

Whatever you are thinking of with sending "empty" input is stupid.

>>11118902
See you are just confusing yourself with big words. If you translate what you are saying into something simpler you would see how retarded it is right away. You have really big basic thinking problems.

>>11118892
For example, if something is done to trigger your reflexes in some way, you cannot control what you're doing during the reflex. Or, depending on the answer to the original question, what your brain is doing during the reflex and what you're observing your brain do.

>>11118902
First it depends on definition of your words. Conscious vs Unconscious, autonomous (doesn't even work in this context)

You would first have to define what the fuck you mean by autonomous in the context of the brain. Since you are using the word very differently than any definition.

Also the use of the word "spectator" is something you self-defined and is not something used anywhere else. So you have to define what you mean by that.

Also you are basically throwing around these vaguely defined words which mirror your own vague understanding of things. It's basically stupidity squared to do so in the manner you do.

>>11118911
Yes, people know what a reflex is.

>>11118915
I was explaining what the priority filter is doing

>>11118914
This is the definition I'm using for autonomous: "denoting or performed by a device capable of operating without direct human control"

I agree it doesn't make much sense in this context after reading the exact definition. By autonomous functions in this context I mean everything the brain does except for spectating. So every function is autonomous except for the spectator. By spectator I mean the consciousness. Its known function is to be aware of the brain's tasks. If this is all it does, then it has no affect on any other function of the brain. The other functions would do the same things without the spectator. However, if the spectator acts as an input for these other functions (if being aware is a stimulus) then it means that the consciousness might be responsible for the actions of the motor cortex because it can affect the functions of the brain that were previously assumed to be autonomous. If this is the case, they are not all autonomous (but the subconscious functions still are) according to my definition from earlier of autonomous.

>>11118933
In the example I used about the consciousness being responsible for the motor cortex, I meant that it can affect the functions I listed, which are shown in this case to give input to the motor cortex through the priority filter.

>>11118903
So, yeah. It outputs the first input that exists, like I said originally. If there is both reflex output and conscious thought output, the conscious thought output isn't used by the motor cortex, only the reflex output. That is what I mean to be modelling.

>>11118905
Sorry but I'm not going to trust a random /sci/fag to diagnose me with basic thinking problems after taking my shitpost too seriously that I put together in less than a minute. I mean, seriously? The original post says itself that it's grossly inaccurate. It's a joke. It says the brain is raping you. I can tell you haven't heard one in a while

>>11118954
we are in the territory that it's over. Your IQ is too low to understand that you are stupid. It's not a factor of how much time you spent or anything else. It's just stupid. Your IQ is too low for things like this.

OP, you need to clarify your concepts for yourself and give a try at philosophy. This is not a real problem.

>>11118764
"I" is empirically unknowable, question about free will is unsolvable in principle. Any more questions?

>>11119077
In other words, _I_ do stuff - without, among other, wasting my time upon idle navel-gazing.

>>11118764
Look into neuroscience and how reflexes work. Like how the pain based ones don't even have to go through the brain.

Idk about the raping though - dopamine is the reward and the conscious part of the brain is one of the brain's tools to get it. So it's really raping itself.

>>11119061
witgenstein strikes again!

>>11118764
You ARE the brain, retard.