There are limits attached to digital intelligence generated by following the Turing model itself. That's what will be obvious in a few decades, the process of computation in the brain has been widely misunderstood.
Dorian On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/17795807-366cfa2a> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- 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
