《大脑思维的逻辑原理》

一本大脑思维学和神经网络学书《大脑思维的逻辑原理》
由四川大学出版社出版的《大脑思维的逻辑原理》一书，从一个新的角度诠释了大脑思维和大脑结构的原理。如果你是从事大脑思维或者神经网络方面研究工作的，或者你是对这些方面研究感兴趣的朋友，不妨一读。该书一改大脑思维理论都很抽象的形象，书中的内容和观点都很形象，容易理解，而且该书提出的大脑思维理论都和大脑的结构理论紧密联系在一起。所以在这里向你强烈推荐该书。

本书论证了，大脑思维过程是大脑中各种信息相互作用的过程，大脑只是为这种相互作用提供了场所而已。信息之间的相互作用遵循着三个逻辑定律，即触发定律、合理选择定律和理解定律。

  该书分为两部分，第一部分是大脑思维的逻辑原理，主要讲解了大脑中信息之间相互作用的规律，即着重讲解了触发定律、合理选择定律和理解定律。第二部分是大脑的结构模型，主要讲解了三个逻辑定律在大脑中是如何被实现，即论证了它们的可实现性。

如果你感兴趣，可以访问http://brain.588.net
http://zxs_sc.home4u.china.com/

[系统提示]:
  .::本帖子因为[奖励]值得推荐的原创文章被神经科学论坛管理员pl实行了：+7金钱 +5经验 的奖惩::.

楼主辛苦，还有联接可看。

This answer is much better than the last one. I am glad that you are serious about our discussion. My motivation in this discussion is trying to understand more your thought. If I ask a question that you can give me a reasonable answer, it will be my gain from you. If I ask a question that you may not have a good answer, it may help you to open the mind a little more.fficeffice" />

 

You know that every experiment is designed for implemental test about some theories. I wonder if you are difficult to imagine a typical case which implements some part of your hypothesis, how others can design an experiment for your theory.

欢迎大家访问啊

I have a simple question and it has been posted in <神经科学总论> because that is a general question.

楼主辛苦

楼主 does not dare to answer the question.

辛苦 was only for advertisement!

thinker_jeff先生：你能把你的问题说得明白一些吗？我也早看到你的回贴了，但我不是很明白您的意思，所以一直都没有给你回复，希望你能原谅。

 

引用：

---

原文由 zxs_sc 发表于 2005-11-7 21:45:45 :

thinker_jeff先生：你能把你的问题说得明白一些吗？我也早看到你的回贴了，但我不是很明白您的意思，所以一直都没有给你回复，希望你能原谅。

______________________________________________

First I have to apologize for my rudeness in some previous posters. Please understand what I want just a discussion. My second apology is that I can only use English in my computer, although I am a pure Chinese guy.fficeffice" />

 

In my poster <什么是定律?>, I want to say the term “定律” is a hypothesis confirmed by scientific experiment, not by logical analysis. Your hypothesis seems more like some conclusions based on logical analysis, which is fine if the analysis sounds reasonable.  However if you want to create a hypothesis as a 定律, the scientific experimental confirmation has to be done.

 

Let me assume you do want to create a hypothesis as a 定律, I suggest two things you may want to do.

1. Search in existing scientific experiments to find the experiments directly supporting your hypothesis.
2. Design the new experiments resulted the confirmation for your hypothesis.

This is my opinion and only for starting a discussion.

 

Thank you.

 

---

谢谢,你太客气了.fficeffice" />

很高兴认识你,我看到你的回帖了,以前我不知道你在什么地方提出过问题,所以不知道你要表达什么.

我想就我个人的一些想法说说,其实"定律"应该是一个物理概念吧,一般都是表达一些最基本的物理规律,这些规律的确需要用实验来验证.在数学中也有相对应的一个概念"公理".也就是任何新的学术,都需要有一个最初的,最基本的立足点.本书也需要有这样的立足点,那就是这三个定律,虽然书中也进行了简单的逻辑推导，但要成为被大家公认的定律，也少不了要用实验来验证。你的建议非常好，再次感谢你。

你知道，现在科学分工，理论科学和实践科学往往需要不同的人来完成，我自己的条件和能力也很有限，很多时候也是心有余而力不足。如果有人合作，或者共同讨论，那是最好不过的了。