You have an imaginative synthesis of a number of different ideas. I can read your comments as a kind of poetry, but I cannot take them as literal realities. Quantum entanglement, for example, is an effort to explain a phenomena that seems contrary to what would be expected given the success of theories of material physics. To take the conjecture of quantum entanglement as a means to explain some mysteries of higher intelligence and expect it to be successfully used in experimental computer technology is, to me, a little silly. But to take it a step further and claim, as I think you are, that it is the basis of consciousness experience - the mystery of Chalmer's hard question of consciousness - is not an idea that I want to spend any time on. It is interesting to see so many people deny that there is a hard question of consciousness. It explains a lot. I have often thought that the people in these groups are talking about science fiction as if it were reality. I am interested in the science fiction of thinking about programs that might be feasible in the next twenty years. But the basis of science fiction in the movies is fantasy and myth. It is not the myth of religion (as some of you would say) but the myth that is the product of intentionally produced myth. It is not a faith but only a story. You have taken some of those fantasies and used them as if it were the basis of feasible near term science. Then by combining them with conjectures in science you dress them up all fancy and fine. If you had made your statement without reference to qualia or quantum entanglement I would say that I actually think that there may be some substance somewhere in the mythology that you are creating. Perhaps a simplistic reality-based endeavor, like programming, is what can save our imaginations from being delusional. I am going to write what should be a fairly simple program to allow me to copy more than one string at a time so I do not have to go back and forth from document to document while copying and pasting. Many people have written this kind of program before, but I want to do it just to see if I can get it to work with a number of different programs. I mention this because the intense use of directed imagination on a problem that will need to be debugged again and again will allow my imagination to be focused on something practical and I will be able to exercise it rather than let it grossly expand. I love using my imagination. I have some fantasies that are just as wild as yours. But by occasionally turning it to some practical issue where there is a tremendous amount of directed feedback I can free it.Jim Bromer
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 4:41 PM Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm beginning to think that consciousness is the pathway to intelligence. > Bear with me. At first, it sounds "illogical". However, we could entertain > the notion that experience-based learning is practically impossible without a > consciousness, then it becomes logical. > > If we need both consciousness towards intelligence, and intelligence towards > consciousness, it becomes possible to merge peer objects into a single object > we may call 'consciousnessintelligence'. > > A construct of consciousnessintelligence may bring us closer to visualizing > the emergence of qualia. For purposes of this discussion, I'll attempt a > definition of qualia. I'll take my cue from the theory of general relativity > and how that pertains to energy in a holistic sense. > > Suppose the human brain functions as a cosmically-linked torus, it should > follow that it generates electro-magnetic energy and is imbued with structure > for polarity. Such polarity may flow over a binary fractal. > > In a simplistic view, let's assume this toroidal structure, simultaneously in > a geometrically fractal interaction (in the sense of an active brain) > vibrates its frequency as entangled particlewave encapsulated information > with its environment. For the brain, this interaction may manifest as > e-fields in action. > > So we have matter, and anti-matter conjoining as a hot and cold force-field > to be interactively polarized in such a way as to generate a singular version > of that event interaction (the way = a method - being influenced by a > particular entity's subject position relative to the timespace continuum). > Furthermore, this version - as information - is subsequently embedded within > the unique consciousnessintelligence of the host, probably synchronously. > > Still, to me that is not qualia, yet. However, it might be a constructive > mechanism for qualia, in terms of meta qualia. > > When the consciousnessintelligence reacts to the polarity-based stimulus, it > automatically responds with an inherent objective to achieve a wait state of > equilibrium. In so doing, it may activate the energy flow within the > torus-like brain, and utilizing the stimulus as dynamic trigger, flow out an > informationally-rich pulse to be made observable as thought, action, feeling, > hunch, gut feel, or whatever form of predisposed energy envelope. > > What I have tried to describe thus far is but a a single step of a > chain-reaction, the DNA also acting as a dominatorrecorder (multiple roles), > which when it flows towards the opposite polarity passes "through" a discrete > point on a stochastic scale of degrees of consciousnessintelligence. This > discrete point may be as brief as a flash of light. We may call this moment > optimal consciousness , or knowing. > > As such, knowing is an outcome of consciousnessintelligence, and so is the > function of explaining. Is explaining, knowing? > > Given the meta qualia (the structure as discussed), all aspects of brain > functioning are 100% enabled to make this moment happen. One should possibly > visualize this structure-in-operation as a flower that is one with itself, > interconnected with its environment and purposed to always be on standby for > knowing. > > Qualia then to me would be that "flash of light", as the moment of knowing. > Esoterically, I'd say qualia is that absolute moment when individual, > consciousnessintelligence potential is realized. > > Computational models already exist for most of the components and > functionality I mentioned. As such, I think it has total relevance for the > step-by-step development of an AGI model. > > Thoughts? > > Rob > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Jim Bromer via AGI <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, 24 September 2018 8:02 PM > To: AGI > Subject: Re: [agi] E=mc^2 Morphism Musings... > (Intelligence=math*consciousness^2 ?) > > Matt's response - like an adolescent's flip remark - is evidence of > the kind of denial that I mentioned. > Jim Bromer > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:49 AM Matt Mahoney via AGI > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I wrote a simple reinforcement learner which includes the line of code: > > > > printf("Ouch!\n"); > > > > So I don't see communication of qualia as a major obstacle to AGI. > > > > Or do you mean something else by qualia? > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018, 5:21 AM John Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Matt Mahoney via AGI <[email protected]> > >> > > >> > I was applying John's definition of qualia, not agreeing with it. My > >> > definition is > >> > qualia is what perception feels like. Perception and feelings are both > >> > computable. But the feelings condition you to believing there is > >> > something > >> > magical and mysterious about it. > >> > > >> > >> And what I'm saying is that the communication of qualia is important for > >> general intelligence in a system of agents. And how do agents interpret > >> the signals, process and recommunicate them. > >> > >> But without fully understanding qualia since they're intimately intrinsic > >> to agent experience we can still explore their properties by answering > >> questions such as: What is an expression of the information distance > >> between qualia of differing agents with same stimuli? How do qualia map to > >> modeled environment? How do they change over time in a system of learning > >> agents? What is the compressional loss into communication? And how do > >> multi-agent models change over time from communicated and decompressed > >> qualia. > >> > >> And what is the topology of qualia variance within an agent related to the > >> complexity classes of environmental strategy? > >> > >> And move on to questions such as can there be enhancements to agent > >> language to accelerate learning in a simulated system? And enhancements to > >> agent structure? > >> > >> John > >> > > > > Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + participants > > + delivery options Permalink > Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + participants + > delivery options Permalink ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T9c94dabb0436859d-Me4b72f6eeb4695a3a9e1a9a3 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
