As we look around, we observe objects and their inter-relations embedded in 4.pi steradian space; consider relations and processes as objects too. We especially note that the description of objects is constructed of information. We further notice the apparent realism of the information, it is undeniable, concrete, and non-probabilistic regardless of whether or not the objects exist. Since information does not interact physically, yet undeniably apparent, it must have a non-falsifiable existence in reality. The causal function in nature must be directly responsible for this reality. The regularity in causal function of physical systems dictates that a resultant state S of a system must causally depend on the reality of precursor states of interacting systems within limits of causal function. Therefore, S intrinsically must correlate with the information of relation among precursor states, which is expressible quantitatively as -- disjunction of conjunctions of values (semantics) of states within limits of reality that may result in S (Singh 2018). For the same causal dependence, S must also correlate with this expression on the values of correlation of respective states in each configuration. The second level correlation is organizable in modular hierarchy to give rise to arbitrary structured and abstract semantics. Conjunction creates a configuration within limits of specificity, whereas disjunction of such conjunctions gives rise to abstraction of structure and relation. Hence, we have a quantitative mechanism of information processing in addition to its ontological basis. If the brain can process semantic values of information, there must exist a formal mechanism.
As similar to the natural system in the human brain, according to researcher Bender et al. (2009), the semantic processing of the human brain is distributed in regions across the temporal and frontal parietal cortex, which can primarily retrieve word meanings through a range of semantic processing.
With a new artificial intelligent system available to either move or support the organization, the key things in the end are to increase the productivity of the brain, So, if we go beyond the definition of augmented reality (AR), which adds digital elements to a live broadcast using a camera, Or virtual reality (VR) that shuts down the physical world, or mixed reality (MR), which is a mixture of AR and VR, real words and digital objects, the Natural cause which touch reflects in brain sensors directly and it may be either caused by AR, VR, or MR is correlated with the existential information reality, which will increase productivity as an immediate reaction on the human body.
> ... the semantic processing of the human brain is distributed in regions across the temporal and frontal parietal cortex, which can primarily retrieve word meanings through a range of semantic processing.
Indeed several authors have noted where in the brain the semantic processing takes place; it is as if processing does not occur in other areas. What do they really mean by the term semantics here? As you note, and I agree, semantics is the meaning, but what exactly is a meaning that we have first hand access to? Meaning of an information does not depend on the words in a language, as they occur in the mind even without those words. Words merely serve as a mechanism to refer to them such that the brain accesses those meanings or semantics. The brain can access them even without the words if the context correlates with them. So, these meanings (semantics) have a reality of their own, independent of a language and an interpreter. Please ponder, what are they?
On the other hand, since information necessarily expresses something, the value expressed is taken here as a semantic value. Moreover, a resultant state of a system necessarily depends on certain limits of precursor states of interacting systems, therefore, the state necessarily correlates with the information of the precursor states, and their inter-relation. So, I really do not know why people confine the meaning of semantic processing only to certain areas of the brain. Also, why only some processing can be said to be semantic, whereas all interactions result in exchange or processing of information (semantics). I must confess, no matter how I define the terms formally laying down a quantitative mechanism of processing, readers always miss them or ignore them.
I hope this distinction clarifies my position vis-a-vis the other researchers.
Thank you again for your comments.
Rajiv
