# Info

Part 24 of 24 (683 words)

part of the body but too sub-personal to scale to “you” at all. So “self” isn’t ambiguous by

accident - it tracks the relation, and predication about the self is sensitive to both which self

(mind vs. embodied person) and what scale (whole-system vs. sub-personal constituent) the event

lives at.



One underlying point ties it together: your self is not something shared out among your parts.

Whatever a single cell is or does, it isn’t a co-owner of your perspective - there’s one experiencer

here, not a federation of cell-selves. That’s why the cell can die without you dying, and why the

body can count as part of “you” (wide self) without any individual part of the body being a self in

its own right. Being part of the self and being a self are different things. The body is the shared

physical system with parts; the self is the unshared experiencer those parts don’t get a vote in.







Belief tracks two different things depending on whether confirmation occurred.



For something confirmed, belief is not really belief anymore. Once one has confirmed something oneself, its plausibility is effectively 100% for that person, because confirming is what closed the gap. There is nothing left for belief to bridge. The strength of the position comes from the act of confirming, not from an estimate.



For something unconfirmed, belief has no such anchor, so its strength is whatever the plausibility is. Belief in the unconfirmed is proportional: it rises and falls with how plausible the thing is, given what one actually has.



So the two cases differ in kind, not just in degree. Confirmed belief is held in place by the confirming; unconfirmed belief is held in place only by its plausibility percentage, and it should move whenever that percentage moves.







When was "the 'most similar to ChatGPT' ai" first available to the average retail consumer and on what devices?





Does current physics provide an example of a non-abstract physical existence known to be "'absolutely static' from any one instant to the next instant" in the strongest possible sense? Has physics proven such logically or metaphysically impossible?





Babies are very innocent because they don't know any better whenever they do a wrong/harm. Can you keep that level of innocence if "the more you know, the more it can't be "'you didn't know any better' whenever you newly know the wrong/harm""?





Even if it becomes possible in the future to "'reveal all info that solely brain waves can be used to reveal' via analyzing solely brain waves", would brain waves alone be able to be used to "'reveal mental imagery and/or speech' via analyzing solely brain waves"?





How many times do science experiment results need to be repeated for it to suffice for being the scientific method? Is two times ever able to be sufficient for becoming established science?





Is energy a requirement for thought? Can thinking exist without energy? Is energy a requirement for consciousness? Can consciousness exist without energy?





"To observe (other than its meaning in Physics) something is not limited to watching/eyesight; things like noticing a noise, an itch, a prick on one's own skin, and/or etc. are able to count as observations", correct?





"In physics, 'observe' = any interaction that entangles a quantum system with something else in a way that depends on which state the system was in (e.g., a rock sitting in sunlight is constantly being observed by photons bouncing off it)", correct?





Are "BCI that have 'AI and/or auditory neurofeedback system'" the only confirmed ways that "'sentence-level communication' via solely 'thought'" was accomplished by a severely paralyzed person? Did that first happen in 2021 or in 2022?





"A fact itself isn't identical to any particular physical representation, is informational/propositional content & isn't a physical entity, but can be physically represented or instantiated; the words 'fact' & 'state' aren't synonymous", correct?





Could our universe eventually return to a state from which a new Big Bang occurs, resulting in a new universe configuration that differs from our current one, such as having its contents located in different places as the universe expands?