Fundamental creativity

Creativity all the way related to the free will. So the question arises: Can machine have the appearance of free will, if its circuitry is based on chaos dynamics? This could be discussed in materialistic point of view. Chaotic systems are determined, but they are extremely sensitive to initial conditions; since these initial conditions cannot be determined very accurately, the errors multiply and make it impossible to predict the behavior of chaotic systems over long periods of time. Thus being determined is not the same thing as being predictable. If the behavior is not predictable, it could easily be assumed to have free will. But that would be unnecessary carriage. Once again, can chaos dynamics give the robot access to fundamental creativity? It is a fact that chaotic systems stuck in a given pattern (technically called an attractor) can bifurcate to a different attractor if some system guidelines are changed. Could this dynamical change of attractors not simulate fundamental creativity? No again. Chaos-machine computers, if they are to be of any use, must operate within the contexts that the programmer gives them. All computer systems act as trial-and-error systems quite appropriate for situational creativity, but not fundamental creativity, not for the purposeful discovery of a new context. The programmer alone has the purposive ness and the freedom to bring about new contexts.

Review for Cash for Cars Suffolk

If you wish to make money from your used or old car, then selection of best cash for cars network would be the smart option. The cash for cars suffolk network would be the right place to check out for people who were looking to make money from their old or unused cars.

An Intellectual Science

You know that humanity's science and technology has been developed primarily as a result of our sight. We saw the sun going round us and realized its periodicity. And hence we got day and night. And slowly developed the geocentric theory and with more observations, got the heliocentric theory. Then came 1400s with Newton etc., who studied light and it's splitting and then there was a lot more study of EM waves which though we could not see with the naked eye, we realized that they were there because of an extension of visible light and because of their effects on various photographic plates etc. And so we studied all science using eyesight. Be it quantum mechanics, or whatever. All based on Electro magnetic theory. The question is this. What would science be like, if sight was not present? Note; do not consider a blind man situation, but an organism with more advanced senses like touch, sound etc. (say a smart bat). I got this doubt because in all science fiction stories, aliens are shown having pretty much the same technology we do or hope to do. What if their evolution skipped sight for a preferable sense which is more useful in their environment?

Oxford History in India

The Short Oxford History of English Literature by Andrew Sanders is available in Indian price version from Oxford University Press. It seeks to replace the famous and dated Legouis and Cazamian. Sanders' history is one the best books on the history I have seen. It is better than almost all other history books including David Daiches's A Critical History of English Literature, Edward Albert's history , WH Hudson's A Outline History of English Literature and more recent Ronald Carter and Mc Rae's Routledge History of English Literature. It is extremely scholarly and takes into account the complex social, cultural and historical contexts of the canonical English literature. It is a model of how a literary history ought to be written. And of course most valuable for the would-be lecturers of English who want to clear their National Eligibility Test or SLET.