hello

In the context of computer programming, this message is what is known as a

‘Hello, World!’ is a computer program as minimal and simplistic as possible, by design. It’s nothing more than a pop-up dialog box with no other functionality or purpose other than to simply display the message ‘Hello, World!’

It’s also often the first initiation into the word of coding for any aspiring computer programmers and coders, not only due to it’s ease and functionality; but also, because it’s the perfect introduction and example of the variety and complexity in which a computer operates with.

There are two variations of the code which runs the ‘hello, world!” program:

There are two different types of programming languages you can use to successfully run a computer algorithm: Compiled Coding Language and Interpreted Coding Language.

The Algorithm for the ‘Hello, World!’ program written in Compiled Coding Language looks like this:

“#include <stdio.h>int main(int argc, char** argv) {
printf("Hello, World!\n");
return 0;”

The Algorithm for the ‘Hello, World!’ Program written in Interpreted Coding Language looks like this:

“print("Hello, World!")”

These is what is known as an algorithm, which is an ordered set of instructions recursively applied to transform data input into processed data output.

“In the compiled version a preliminary translation has been made from the higher-level programming language into lower-level machine language. When the compiled version is run, the instructions of the machine-language code are directly executed.

In the interpreted version, each high-level language instruction is first translated into machine language, executed, and then the process is repeated with the next instruction.”

In short, Compiled Coding Language is “Computer Language” while Interpreted Coding Language is “Human Language.”

The reason for the discrepancy is…

And in 1975, this concept caught the attention of Kenneth Colby, Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California School of Medicine and led him to inescapable realization:

Mental Processes = Computational Processes

+

Brain Hardware = Computer Hardware

CellularNetwork_SmallIntestine: Inquiry/HormonalBalence

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

StatusCheck_HormonalHungerCorrelation

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

Operation_NervousSystem_InitiateSalvation

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

Action:HoldBreath

Operation_Chew

ResumeBreathing_

Command_ActivateChokingPrevention/Epiglottis_Over_Windpipe

Action:HoldBreath

ResumeBreathing_

Operation_Transfer/MouthToEsophagus

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

Command_EsopagusMuscleExpand

ommand_EsopagusMuscleRetract

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

Activate_SphincterMuscle/Relax

Activate_SphincterMuscle/Lock

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

BeginProcess_DigestiveJuices/Chyme_To_SmallIntestine

Activate_Pancreas

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

Activate_Liver

SmallIntestine_AbsorbToBloodsteam

BeginTransfer_SamllInstestine_To_LargeInstine

Activate_Gallbaldder

Action:BreathIn

Action:BreathOut

Instead, all of this is compiled into one all-inclusive, automated, code in ‘Computer Language,’

An overwhelming amount of data and processing power means that without the automation and autonomy of it being done in the background for us, we would instantaneously begin glitching out, crashing, and shutting down, rendering us completely inoperable.

Critical, Continuous, Complex background programs and processes being entirely managed and maintained by our neurological operating systems with little conscience effort, thought, attention, participation, or even recognition.

And if it can do all of that without us so much as missing a breath, step, or swallow; what else can, and does it do, without us being informed or involved in the process at all?

In other words, there must be neurological programs and processes which are not only unintelligible and inaccessible to us, but which also operate in the background and override the performance of our overall cognitive functions.

This isn’t necessarily a bad thing – as there are countless functions which are necessary for our survival which our brains must regulate and manage which if not done so subconsciously and free of thought; would overwhelm us to the point of udder uselessness.

So, what then does that say about our total lack of understanding of it to begin with? And what value could be gained from seeing the detailed documentation of just how deeply the influence of our neurological connectors, chain-reactions, chemical coercion, and perhaps, even corruption we are subjected to? Even more importantly, how much control do we have?

What Professor Colby was tapping into – the ability, for the first time, to do just that: opening and exploring your own neurological ‘Task Manager,’ and even more importantly, the ‘Event Viewer,’ and exploring how this exact concept applies on a physiological level and influences our behaviors without us even knowing.

“Citing a universal generalization to explain an individual’s behavior is unsatisfactory to a questioner who is interested in what powers and liabilities are latent behind the manifested phenomena.

A new way of formulating psychological theories is now available in the form of computer programs, processing algorithms which have the virtue of being explicit in their articulation, traceable in their operations, and which can be run on a computer to test their internal consistency and external correspondence with the data of observation.

We want to assume that not-well-understood mental procedures in a person are like the more accessible and better understood procedures of a processing computer.

Computer simulation models have the ability to converse in natural language in the form of a dialogue algorithm. In contrast to a verbal, pictorial, or mathematical representation which as a result of interaction changes its stats over time and ends up in a state different from it’s initial state.

An interactive simulation model that attempts to reproduce sequences of experienceable reality, offers an interviewer a first-hand experience with a concrete case. In constructing a computer simulation, a theory is modeled to discover a sufficiently rich structure of hypotheses and assumptions to generate the observable subject-behavior under study. A dialogue algorithm allows an observer to interact with a concrete specimen of a class in detail.

An algorithm composed of computational procedures converts input structures into output structures according to certain principles. The modus operandi of such a model is simply the workings of an algorithm when run on a computer. At this level of explanation to answer a “why” question means to provide an algorithm that makes explicit how symbolic structures collaborate, interplay, and interlock – in short, how they are organized to generate patterns of manifested phenomena.

To simulate the input-output behavior of a system using computational procedures, ones write an algorithm which, when run on a computer, produces similar behavior resembling that of the subject system being simulated. The resemblance is achieved through the workings of the algorithm, an organization of the manipulating procedures that are ethically responsible for the characteristic observable behavior at the input-output level. Since we do not know the structure of the “Real” processes used by the mind-brain, our posited structure stands as an imagined theoretical analogue. A possible and plausible organization of processes analogous to the unknown process and serving as an attempt to explain their workings. A simulation model is thus deeper than a structureless black-box explanation because it postulates functionally equivalent processes inside the box to account for outwardly observable patterns of behavior.

A simulation model constitutes an interpretive explanation in that it makes intelligible the connections between external input, internal states, and output by positing the intervening processing procedures operating between systems. It makes clear why and how it reacts as it does under various circumstances.”