Colin, Your confidence that the "real world" goes beyond computation, based on SCIENTIFIC data, is somewhat fascinating and ironic to me...
After all, all the scientific data ever gathered in history (or that ever will be gathered in future history) is a big finite bit-set (a finite collection of finite-precision numbers) So, it's kind of amusing for you to adduce this finite bit-set as evidence that the universe and mind are somehow transfinite, in a way that would prevent engineering digital general intelligence... Obviously, this proposed transfinitude is not directly implied by the finite bit-set of scientific data --- it's a subjective intuitive leap... My own intuitive feeling is that -- yeah, there is a transfinite aspect to the universe that goes beyond science -- this does not prevent us from engineering digital systems that are intelligent, in the same sense that human beings are. These systems will be associated with non-scientific transfinite aspects, just like we are... Regarding quantum peculiarities and their relationship to the mind/brain, see work of Dirk Aerts and Atmanspacher and others, showing that quantum-logic is fundamentally about the relation btw observer and observed, not the particular physical system under observation. It can be correct to model a digital computer program using quantum logic, under appropriate circumstances.... The applicability of quantum logic to intelligence does not imply the infeasibility of creating digital intelligence... These are complex issues, so it's not surprising that folks are getting them wrong at this stage. In a few decades the above remarks of mine will probably seem boring and painfully obvious ;p -- Ben G On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 7:17 AM, martin biehl <[email protected]> wrote: > Colin: > > "A computed model of fire does not burst into flames. A computed model of > cognition does not cognise. A computed model of flight does not fly." > > I like the analogy (at least it made me think about it) even though I am > not sure whether it is misleading. Is it not that people are trying to make > computational models of wood, that can then be lit up (by running the > program which would be akin to starting the (artificial) physics)? Then you > get artificial fire... > > cheers > > martin > > 2012/6/5 Mike Tintner <[email protected]> > >> ** >> >> Colin: The AGI community is unique in the world and in the history of >> science in expecting a computed model to _*be*_ the original. A computed >> model of fire does not burst into flames. A computed model of cognition >> does not cognise. A computed model of flight does not fly.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> You just won’t get it (see attached). This is a >> generational/acculturated blind. J When we get over this it’ll be like a >> dam-burst of progress. Right now were as stuck as we were in 1955. >> >> >> >> Colin, >> >> >> >> The AGI field - & it's the whole field, not just Ben & associates/ >> friends here - is indeed unique. I certainly can't think of any field >> anywhere that expects the old, existing paradigm that clearly doesn't work >> in the new field - & hasn't ever worked in the slightest - to be capable of >> solving it. >> >> >> >> The blindness and ignorance of the most basic principle of creativity - >> BREAK ( and in this case shatter) the paradigm, don't WORSHIP it, Logan, >> Ben et al - are truly awesome. >> >> *From:* Colin Geoffrey Hales <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 05, 2012 7:38 AM >> *To:* AGI <[email protected]> >> *Subject:* RE: [agi] Embodied approaches to computation >> >> Hi Logan,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Already know about Turing Completeness. Irrelevant. The whole concept >> begs computability. We do not know, for brains, if all processes in the >> brain are computable. We do not know. Nobody knows. Question begging at >> best. There are masses of uncomputable numbers. Human brains found them. >> Penrose is right.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Also, the universe _*as*_ a computation is not a model computed on a >> computer. This is map/territory confusion on an industrial scale. There are >> 2 essential things in brains:**** >> >> ** ** >> >> 1) Networked action potentials (an EM phenomenon expressed by >> nano-scopic chemical-level transmembrane EM processes)**** >> >> 2) EM coupling (ephapsis). Action at a distance over 0.2mm scale >> distances (ish), generated by 1).**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Everything else is EM noise or biological background overhead and can be >> replaced by signal processing.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> 1) And 2) are what you use to make an AGI. You do not simulate, emulate >> or mimic either of them. You *replicate* the physics of them. You do not >> replace the EM fields with the EM fields of a computer that waves a model >> about in a manner that is totally detached from the field expression and >> different from one computer to another, even one program invocation to >> another. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> The AGI community is unique in the world and in the history of science in >> expecting a computed model to _*be*_ the original. A computed model of >> fire does not burst into flames. A computed model of cognition does not >> cognise. A computed model of flight does not fly.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> You just won’t get it (see attached). This is a >> generational/acculturated blind. J When we get over this it’ll be like a >> dam-burst of progress. Right now were as stuck as we were in 1955.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> So I’ll leave it there. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> No I won’t. I’ll write it up and publish it someplace.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Cheers**** >> >> Colin**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* Logan Streondj [mailto:[email protected]] >> *Sent:* Tuesday, 5 June 2012 3:31 PM >> *To:* AGI >> *Subject:* Re: [agi] Embodied approaches to computation**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Colin, please learn about turing completeness. >> All concievable algorithms can be represented. >> >> The biophysics of the brain has long since been simulated via neural nets. >> Now we are simply working on various ways of coalescing data and >> algorithms. >> >> For instance OpenCog is comprised of many different "Weak" or "narrow" AI >> algorithms. Can think of it as add several "narrows" and you get a >> "wide", though there is of course also the interface, of how to use them >> and such. >> >> Human language is a mode of intercommunication across space and time, and >> thus can be used as an interface. As am implementing in General >> Intelligence Operating System. >> >> So yes while there may be many details to a biological cell, it has a >> basic plan of it's function or structure, written in DNA, the source code >> language of the body. >> >> Our bodies give us stability, sense of space and continuity, also >> allowing us to modify the surrounding world. Those are the basic turing >> abilities , which make us infinite beings, capable of creating any >> conceivable idea. >> >> This humans, computers, animals, plants, rocks, wind, fire all have in >> common. >> We are all beings of light in bodies of geometrical form. >> Simply in different amounts of knowledge, >> collected useful light or past-experience. >> >> So wheras biological brains store information is a neural-net, which >> gets partially over-written with every reading, i.e. every time you >> remember something, you're recreating the memory. >> Technological brains allow a wider variety of storage options, with >> potentially higher stability. >> >> The road to transhumanism started, when people began using tools, the >> road to AGI started with writing. >> There are billions of people around the world that worship a few select >> books. >> Many people ascribe great intelligence to these books. >> >> Indeed writing is what underpins rights, righteousness, and justice. The >> bulk of the world economy is based on some electronic writings >> >> So in conclusion, >> while physics may be relevant to psychic phenomena, >> language is more relevant to intelligence.. >> >> Besides once there is sufficient knowledge, >> we'll know how to sense what the human pineal-gland or mind's eye can. >> >> Logan Streondj **** >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11721311-f886df0a>| >> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription**** >> >> <http://www.listbox.com>**** >> >> ** ** >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/6952829-59a2eca5> | >> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10872673-8f99760d> | >> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/212726-11ac2389> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > -- Ben Goertzel, PhD http://goertzel.org "My humanity is a constant self-overcoming" -- Friedrich Nietzsche ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
