Ben,
I believe that every physical system with energy to spare will dissipate that energy. I believe that EI follows as a side effect of dissipation,and that EI takes place in all systems, animate or not, including the brain, and including a hurricane. I believe that EI manifests itself as the phenomena of emergence and self-organization, where the dissipative dynamics results in the formation of stable, invariant structures that we know with various names (attractors, invariant structures, conserved quantities). I believe that the supreme law of nature is the correspondence between observed symmetries (more than one way of representing a system, such as in causets -- causets, or acyclic digraphs, or canonical matrices, acyclic algorithms, software that halts), and conserved quantities, such as energy, momentum, and all the structures our brains make. I believe that intelligence can be explained with emergence and memory. I don't know enough of evolution to assess the evolutionary relationship between memory and locomotion, but it would be very interesting to know if such a relationship has existed or not. Animals have EI, memory, and locomotion, vegetables have EI, but no memory or locomotion. Any connection? I believe that a directed graph is a good model for the brain, and that the brain does EI by physically making connections between neurons shorter. That this shortening should result in the formation of neural cliques, which are known to exist. And that a rectangular geometry for "cables" of axons in the brain, which are also known to exist, is a good one for EI to work. I did not engineered EI. I found it by observing my own brain at work, and I also found it at work in a canonical matrix (or causets, or acyclic graph...etc). My "mathematical games" are intended to convince myself that EI actually exists, and that it is mathematical, independent of any assumption I could have made or any conclusions I could have drawn. This is very important because it means that EI could have played a role in evolution. I do not belive other forms of inference engineered by humans could have played a role in evolution. I use the term "engineer" to refer to EI. It's a shorthand. It means a person is using the EI in his brain to draw conclusions, and then simulating those conclusions on a computer without giving EI to that computer. I believe that any computer without EI can not be intelligent and can not be claimed as AGI. I believe all this, and I would be irresponsible if I didn't tell others about it. EI maps causets without structure, as they come from sensors or senses, to causets with a block system that didn't exist in the original causet. Rephrasing, EI maps from observation to algorithms that halt, or to conserved structures that can in turn be observed. Both sets, the raw causets and the structured algorithms, are infinite but countable. The map is bijective, and behavior-preserving, and the inverse function exists and is computable. This map exhausts all the possibilities. Of course, one can always define any other bijective map, but it would not be behavior-preserving. I pose the question of the origin of algorithms. For Turing, they were "instruction tables" created by mathematicians good at solving puzzles. To me, that's EI. But EI creates those algorithms from observation, all of them. So observation, and only observation, is the source of algorithms. All these things, I do not see in isolation. I see them as self-consistent, and forming a theory, new, very different from others. It has to be seen as a whole, not in pieces. It can only be judged by observation and measurement. If this is what it takes to do real AGI, then we will not have real AGI until we do this. Sergio From: Ben Goertzel [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 11:49 AM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] Representations and data structures I see, so by your definition, anything that is engineered or designed by humans is "narrow AI" ... Do you also believe that anything that is evolved by natural selection, for differential fitness in particular sorts of environments, is "narrow AI"? I note, however, that the math you are using your own AI approach was also designed by humans (posets etc.). So doesn't that also make your own approach narrow AI? Or do you believe that posets come from the Gods, whereas other algorithms and data structures are of merely human origin?? ben AGI | <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> -- Ben Goertzel, PhD http://goertzel.org "My humanity is a constant self-overcoming" -- Friedrich Nietzsche <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/18883996-f0d58d57> ------------------------------------------- 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
