[Mustang19]

No, there isn't fundamentally. Both are mathematical constructs. For all we know theres an alien race out there with a human brain equivalent model fetish.

[General Battuta]

I cannot follow your logic in the slightest and it makes no sense to me. Generating a cipher is required to describe colors, it's not for spheres.

[Mustang19]

By describing color I mean describing the physical processes that create the perception of color. Only mathematical logic is necessary to describe physics. Any consistent physical system can be described mathematically just as shapes can be.

[Herra Tohtori]

How would a three dimensional sphere appear to a being that observes non-three number of spatial dimensions

[Mustang19]

It wouldn't appear worth ****, you would have to add to GBs list of characteristics all intelligent beings must have one of:

1 has no concepts whatsoever
2 has a concept of 'all points at a fixed distance from a point'
*3 has concepts other than that

ed: Distance is not the only way to represent what we perceive as space, potential energy can describe the same phenomena.

[General Battuta]

How would a three dimensional sphere appear to a being that observes non-three number of spatial dimensions

How it appears is irrelevant. We can describe higher-dimensional shapes using mathematics even if we can't perceive them.

[Mustang19]

In case you didnt get the QED on my last post:

1) By describing color I mean describing the physical processes that create the perception of color.
2) Only mathematical logic is necessary to describe physics.
3) Any consistent physical system can be described mathematically just as shapes can be.

or

1) Color is a physical process.
2) Math can describe physical processes.
3) Therefore math can describe color.

[General Battuta]

I agree, it absolutely can, but there is no way that an alien species observing its environment would arrive at the human conception of color without

1) evolving the same visual system in parallel
2) deciding to **** around and simulate a bunch of visual systems

Whereas a sphere is mathematically basic and does not require the creation of an interpretive layer either by accident or design.

[Mustang19]

An alien species would not arive at a conception of a sphere without

1) Evolving a similar spatial perception system in parallel
2) Deciding to **** around and invent geometry

A sphere is a geometric concept, everything in mathematics is derived from axioms, and math is not basic logic but 100% convention interpreted through langauge... I don't know what else to say.

Although yeah probabilitistically they're more likely to know what a sphere is there's nothing preventing them from knowing what color is too.

[General Battuta]

I just don't see arriving at similar mathematical axioms as even in the same class of reasoning as simulating up the same visual system.

[Mustang19]

You're prejudiced by the practical usefulness of studying the two topics. There are topics in any field which no one will even think of considering worth analyzing. Just because thinking about shapes is important to most people in order to sit in a chair or climb up stairs doesn't mean geometry wouldn't sound trivial and inane to some brain in a vat satisfied watching a bad monocolor screensaver all day. Nor might we rule out some alien be astounded we haven't discovered some mathematical concept they consider fundamental.

multiple edits, jumble of nonsense

[Luis Dias]

Because mathematics is completely divorced from the empirical it is not constrained by the need for evidence.

A sentence which is absolutely false. Mathematics is the tool of the empirical mind, and it started when someone started counting beans. Or potatoes. The details are somewhat unclear . Mathematics depends upon the empirical.

While mathematical axioms must be stated, altering the axioms simply leads to new mathematical approaches. No mathematical system will ever be complete, but mathematical constructs are objectively real in the way the charge on the electron is real - they are not constructs the way color is.

Exactly, this I can agree with. Mathematical constructs are as "real" as the charge of the electron. That is a nice proposition.

Anyone who exists in the material world can derive the concept of a sphere. They don't need to find the Sphere Species and dissect their brains and model them

This is an argument that states that the definition of sphere is much more simple than the definition of color. We can agree that this quantitative difference will translate to a qualitative one, because that distinction is useful for us humans with our little brains.

I agree, it absolutely can, but there is no way that an alien species observing its environment would arrive at the human conception of color without

1) evolving the same visual system in parallel
2) deciding to **** around and simulate a bunch of visual systems

Number 2 is clearly what is being discussed here, and it is true. You're arguing that spheres are "different" because they are easier. But mathematics doesn't stop being mathematics just because it is more complex.

But I wasn't even discussing "spheres" but "shapes". A shape is a perception of a figure that you see with your eyes. This perception is tainted by many things, for example how your eyes work the things that are around you into tridimensional shapes that you can platonically caricaturize, like say, a cube. An alien that could "see" the space between and within atoms, between the core and the electrons, etc., could well develop a completely different geometry. A sphere could be a really strange (but definable) geometry for it. Or it could be not.

[General Battuta]

But I wasn't even discussing "spheres" but "shapes". A shape is a perception of a figure that you see with your eyes.

No it isn't.

[Luis Dias]

It isn't? Language barrier kickin in I see... so "shape" is already a geometrical construct, uh?

Well, geometrical constructs only exist in our brains, so the point stands !

[Shivan Hunter]

Because mathematics is completely divorced from the empirical it is not constrained by the need for evidence.

A sentence which is absolutely false. Mathematics is the tool of the empirical mind, and it started when someone started counting beans. Or potatoes. The details are somewhat unclear . Mathematics depends upon the empirical.

Five CPUs is empirical. the concept of "five" is abstract and completely removed from any empirical object. The only concievable way for an alien species not to have the concept of five is for them not to have the concept of discrete units.

But I wasn't even discussing "spheres" but "shapes". A shape is a perception of a figure that you see with your eyes.

No it isn't.

whether triangles exist in this image is a matter of perception, but the concept of a triangle- and the concepts of vertices and edges- are simple mathematical constructs and most intelligent alien species that have developed mathematics could be reasonably expected to be familiar with this concept.

The human mechanism by which colors are perceived is not nearly as simple a concept- it would require at least an understanding or reasonable imitation of the human brain.

[Luis Dias]

Because mathematics is completely divorced from the empirical it is not constrained by the need for evidence.

A sentence which is absolutely false. Mathematics is the tool of the empirical mind, and it started when someone started counting beans. Or potatoes. The details are somewhat unclear . Mathematics depends upon the empirical.

Five CPUs is empirical. the concept of "five" is abstract and completely removed from any empirical object. The only concievable way for an alien species not to have the concept of five is for them not to have the concept of discrete units.

The concept of "five" couldn't ever have been produced by mankind if there weren't "five CPUs" to count. Or potatoes. That's the point. Thus you can never say that this concept is "completely removed", since this concept was firstly derived from the experience that there are "five" many different things, and that it would be interesting to create this abstract notion of numbers.

But I wasn't even discussing "spheres" but "shapes". A shape is a perception of a figure that you see with your eyes.

No it isn't.

whether triangles exist in this image is a matter of perception, but the concept of a triangle- and the concepts of vertices and edges- are simple mathematical constructs and most intelligent alien species that have developed mathematics could be reasonably expected to be familiar with this concept.

I also think that it is highly probable for an intelligent alien species to have derived a similar definition, but this stems more from the fact that we share an apparently equal environment, with the same empirical opportunities we had before. I could not state the same certainty if such aliens were from a different type of universe with unknown laws and qualities.

The human mechanism by which colors are perceived is not nearly as simple a concept- it would require at least an understanding or reasonable imitation of the human brain.

...which doesn't invalidate my point. It would be harder to communicate the concept of colors, but it would be equally possible. It's just a degree of enough intelligence to do so. And we aren't a very bright species. Just enough to kickstart a civilization. Barely.

[General Battuta]

So that entire post was basically a ringing concession that there is a serious difference between color and shape.

[Luis Dias]

hmm yeah. I was originally thinking about figures, or the perception of shapes we have in our brains.

For instance, what is the geometrical shape of the sun? It depends upon the wavelenght. Or what is the geometrical shape of a human being? Equal.

[Shivan Hunter]

Because mathematics is completely divorced from the empirical it is not constrained by the need for evidence.

A sentence which is absolutely false. Mathematics is the tool of the empirical mind, and it started when someone started counting beans. Or potatoes. The details are somewhat unclear . Mathematics depends upon the empirical.

Five CPUs is empirical. the concept of "five" is abstract and completely removed from any empirical object. The only concievable way for an alien species not to have the concept of five is for them not to have the concept of discrete units.

The concept of "five" couldn't ever have been produced by mankind if there weren't "five CPUs" to count. Or potatoes. That's the point. Thus you can never say that this concept is "completely removed", since this concept was firstly derived from the experience that there are "five" many different things, and that it would be interesting to create this abstract notion of numbers.

Any species that encounters two of the same type of object will likely develop a way to count them and thus a counting system. Is it conceivable that an intelligent species would never encounter two of the same object, including individuals of the species? The possibility is so remote that it is barely worth considering.

But I wasn't even discussing "spheres" but "shapes". A shape is a perception of a figure that you see with your eyes.

No it isn't.

whether triangles exist in this image is a matter of perception, but the concept of a triangle- and the concepts of vertices and edges- are simple mathematical constructs and most intelligent alien species that have developed mathematics could be reasonably expected to be familiar with this concept.

I also think that it is highly probable for an intelligent alien species to have derived a similar definition, but this stems more from the fact that we share an apparently equal environment, with the same empirical opportunities we had before. I could not state the same certainty if such aliens were from a different type of universe with unknown laws and qualities.

The human mechanism by which colors are perceived is not nearly as simple a concept- it would require at least an understanding or reasonable imitation of the human brain.

...which doesn't invalidate my point. It would be harder to communicate the concept of colors, but it would be equally possible. It's just a degree of enough intelligence to do so. And we aren't a very bright species. Just enough to kickstart a civilization. Barely.

This isn't about communicating the concept; the idea of color would not be very difficult to communicate and would not even require a full model of the human brain, just a few facts about how the eyes and brain work. This is about the ideas developing by themselves, that is, being external to humanity and able to be experienced by another species without our intervention.

edit how does the geometrical shape of the sun depend on any wavelength

[Mika]

Dammit, I lost 6 pages of interesting discussion.

You guys are having a discussion on visual system and nobody invited me?

Anyways, to beat a dead horse, what Herra Tohtori said a couple of pages ago:

I still maintain my view that colour is primarily a function of wavelength of photons and the spectral spread of the light arriving to the retina.

This is not enough to describe color sensation.

Also, my understanding is that the retina itself does some amount of preprocessing of the visual data, but can't exactly recall what it was. I need to dig up more of this on tomorrow at work. Would you recall something on this MP-Ryan? At this moment I'm not sure at which point even the residual distortion of the image is removed, I would guess it is visual cortex but then again, visual sensory stuff is outside my area of research (though I do instruments for that purpose too).