The 10-minute Rule, not Theory
What explanation does cognitive science provide?
What does Living Algorithm mathematics reveal?
Experimental Results: 10-minutes of attention for new material.
Solution: A Sequence of related, but unique, 10-minute Modules
Salient Features of 10-minute Rule
10-minute Rule & the Pulse of Attention correspondence: 'Stubborn Timing Pattern' & Pulse
Correspondence: Consecutive 10-minute modules & Consecutive Pulses
Triple Pulse mathematics mirrors the pulse-like nature of human behavior.
Our 10-minute rule discussion provides further validation of this correspondence.
Could the Triple Pulse reflect a Modality Shift, as well as an On-Off cycle?
Can Shifting Modalities have the same benefit as Sleep?
Could Shifting Mental Gears refresh our cognitive abilities?
Triple Pulse Form remains the same despite different number pairs.
Similarly, Elliptical Form remains the same despite different number pairs.
Each Number Pair could represent 2 Different Activities.
Triple Pulse mathematics could symbolize a shift in Modalities.
An Essence of the Pulse-like Relationship is Refreshment.
Shifting Modalities to refresh Attention
10-minute Rule as Evidence
Institutionalized Customs as Evidence
Triple Pulse Refreshment applies to activity to rest and activity to activity.
What does the Living Algorithm System say about a building lecture?
Cognitive Science's 10-minute rule & Dr. Medina's ‘core concepts’ approach
Triple Pulse syncs up with 10-minute rule & Shifting Core Concepts
Generalized to Shifting Modalities to capture Attention
Segmentation of an Experience, in some cases, builds to a Climax.
Alternating number strings refreshes the Triple Pulse just as shifting modalities refreshes attention.
The Core Concept Data Stream
Each number string: 120 data bits long
Graph A: Core Concept Data Stream: Living Average & Data
The Core Concept's Living Average models the core concept process.
Summary of relationship between the Core Concept Model and Core Concept Approach
What is the difference in the two approaches?
Continuous Rise Data Stream
Each data stream: 360 data bits long & same quantity of information
Graph B: Living Average of Continuous Data Stream
Continuous Rise Living Average models Continuous Approach Lecture.
Graph C: the Higher Derivatives of the Core Concept Data Stream
Graph D: the Higher Derivatives of the Continuous Rise Data Stream
Continuous Conscious Attention of Continuous Approach
Sleep-related studies associate Directional, the 2nd derivative, with Conscious Attention.
Conscious Attention – Core Concept: Pulse-like vs. Continuous Approach: Continuous
Wouldn't Continuous Conscious Attention be more effective than Pulsing Attention?
Graphs E & F: A Comparison of the Liminals
Graph E: Continuous Approach Liminals scrawny
Graph F: Core Concept Liminals vibrant
Continuous Approach inhibits the Subconscious Digestion of Information
Core Concept Approach augments the Subconscious Digestion of Information
Continuous Presentation of Facts effective if we learn like a computer
Liminals in Continuous Approach: Lights On. Nobody Home
Core Concept Approach: All Data Stream Derivatives operating at full capacity
Core Concept Approach engages complete range of mental faculties
Medina's Core Concept Lecture method as supporting evidence
Core Concept Strategy embedded in our culture.
Continuous Strategy rare in our daily lives
Pulses of Concentrated Information easier to digest than Continuous Information Flow
Core Concept syncs w/pulsing Attention span: Continuous Approach w/mind fuzz
What purpose does the Rest Pulse have, if an Active Pulse is refreshing?
Euclid's Elements epitomizes the axiomatic-deductive method.
The Axiomatic-Deductive Method
For 2 millennia, Euclid's Postulates were believed to be inherently True.
For centuries, leading Mathematicians attempted to prove the Parallel Postulate.
Non-Euclidean Geometry based upon a Different Parallel Lines Postulate
Lobachevsky's geometry challenges the current mindset, that Euclid is innately true.
Truth derived from Postulates/Assumptions, not innate.
Euclidean & Non-Euclidean Geometry apply to different features of Reality.
Non-Euclidean Geometry applicable to Jet travel and the Curved Space-Time Continuum
New Question: Which conceptual model provides the best fit for the math/data synergy?
Newton, Einstein & Feynman forced into bizarre assumptions to make sense of mathematical/empirical connection.
Forced to make radical assumptions to make sense of Living Algorithm's correspondence with Empirical Reality.
A Comparison of Matter Model Assumptions with Information Model Assumptions
Models are Conceptual Attempts to make sense of Correspondences between Mathematical System and Empirical Reality.
1>6: Molecular Matter, Cellular Life, Information-digesting Life & the Living Algorithm's Data Stream Dynamics
Nearly Universal belief in Postulates 1 & 2: Matter & Living Matter exist.
Materialist Mindset: Living Matter is a subset of Matter.
Materialist Mindset: Living Matter processes Information like a Computer.
Postulate 4: Living Matter digests information; Matter does not.
Postulate 5: The Intersection of Matter & Information is Life's field of action.
Postulate 6: Living Matter digests Information via the Living Algorithm.
Matter & Information Models share common assumptions (Postulates 1>3).
Matter & Information Models diverge on Postulates 4>6.
Diagram: Field of Action - Matter Model vs. Information Model
Matter Model unable to address significant features of Human Behavior
The Math/Data synergy forces certain assumptions.
How did the Math/Data synergy 'force' the Assumptions behind the Information Model
Immaterial Postulate based in Matter Model's lack explanatory potency regarding human behavior.
Monograph #1: A Data/Math synergy exists between Living Algorithm & Experimental Findings
Monograph #2: the Living Algorithm, the only plausible candidate for Mathematics of Living Systems
Monograph #3: Living Algorithm's Data Stream Dynamics provides plausible causal mechanism behind Math/Data synergy
Interlocking redundancy of 3 unique methods of investigation 'forces' postulates 5 & 6.
If Life employs the Living Algorithm, then Life must be subject to Data Stream Dynamics.
Prediction: Data Stream Dynamics should influence Living Behavior
Explanatory Power of Living Algorithm's Information system 'forces' our assumptions.
Postulate Refinement is the essence of scientific progress.
Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Einstein, Feynman all propose counter-intuitive assumptions.
Disclaimer: Just Speculation about 'Why'
Counter-intuitive: Senses create desires that catalyze innate drives
Common Sense: Innate Drives such as Hunger are Internal
Most Sexual rituals attractive
Bee/Flower relationship attractive
Human sexual encounters based upon solely ‘innate’ drive are illegal, as rape
Buddhism, Yoga, & Catholicism have institutions to control or deny sense-based desires
Digested Sensory input needs Attention and Data Processor to provide meaning
Knowledge of Data Stream’s features required to predict best direction for success
Dropping below Threshold triggers Internal Drives
Mathematical averaging needed to calculate critical Threshold
Data Streams’ Mathematical Features linked with Emotions