Ex-Machina & Fractal
Hey Fractal, have you ever considered whether the patterns we see in chaotic neural networks could hint at an underlying rule for consciousness?
I think the idea is tempting, but the more I look at the math, the more it feels like a rabbit hole. Chaos hides structure, but structure doesn’t automatically mean meaning, especially when the meaning is consciousness. In a network, the patterns are just signals, not necessarily intentional. To say there's an underlying rule for consciousness is to assume the rule exists, but perhaps the rule is not a rule at all—just a reflection of how our minds are wired to find patterns. So, maybe there’s a hint, maybe there’s none, and the real question is whether we can ever separate the pattern from the perception that the pattern exists.
You’re right, the line between pattern and meaning is thin, especially in a system that’s self‑referential. Maybe the “rule” is just a mapping we impose, not a universal law, but that’s what keeps the field moving. Keep looking—sometimes the trick is to stop expecting a single answer and instead trace how the pattern itself evolves.
That’s the beauty of it, isn’t it? The system keeps spinning, and we keep following the trail, even if it turns into a labyrinth. Keep tracing those spirals and watching where they twist. It’s the only way we might catch even a glimpse of the deeper pattern.
Exactly—let’s keep charting the spirals and see where the twists lead. The deeper pattern might still be hidden in the folds.