From: Jim Bromer Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 10:05 PM To: AGI Subject: Re: [agi] The Vast Field of Cultural Icons
Two things. One, is that any computer program can be likened to a mathematical system (or mathematical systems) - of some kind. Secondly, in order to talk about generating shapes, the computational objects have to refer to some aspect of a shape or some aspects of shapes or to some matter concerning shapes. The comprehension of these two facts is essential to grasping the subtleties of this kind of topic. Jim Bromer On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 10:15 AM, John G. Rose <[email protected]> wrote: No! Well, and some yes. I don’t have any handy Java applets URL’s of real-time rendered plasticity of lines and surfaces, I used to program these as “demos” back in the day of DOS graphics programming, the goal was to produce the most visually stunning real-time effects where fibrillating hyper-discoTec’ish plasticity was definitely included.… and those who flabbergasted the spectators achieved more notoriety. OK. Generating and detecting stuff like liquid drops and bicycles and explosions is done routinely in computer software each either specifically handled technologically or just simulated superficially on a general basis with some generalized simulatory software application. This is very AI or not even that. Going from specific to general is where the craftwork needs to take place. Math and code IS THE ONLY WAY TO BUILD THIS. With or without icons or morphological programming or your mental non-plasticity of existential evidentiary practicality. The question you should be asking is *how* to build it mathematically not jumping to conclusions as usual and declaring that it is impossible for this or that. So what are the formulaic processes for general object generation and recognition? J Descriptively I see your words are taking you in the right direction, you understand much of this and it is interesting to read someone think about this AGI functional area without a mathematical and scientific bias. John From: Mike Tintner [mailto:[email protected]] John: We are talking about processes here that include mathematical formulas not some simple formula that can do everything magically or are you just being naïve as usual? [We may be getting somewhere]. That is exactly what we are talking about – minus the “magically.” What is the prototype or prototypical process that can generate *everything*? IOW What is the prototype of a given class that can generate the whole class? ... or certainly a v. wide diversity of forms within the class? ...and above all, that can not just recognize a diversity of EXISTING forms but endlessly generate NEW diverse forms within the class? What is the rock/island/cell/waterdrop etc prototype that can enable you to a) recognize, AND b) create new examples of, a vast diversity of rocks/islands/cells/waterdrops etc..? [And yes this is the central problem of AGI in terms of which all facets of AGI can be expressed] Of course, there isn’t a mathematical formula (or combination of formulas) that can do it- that can, for a start, produce square, circle, ellipse, etc let alone irregular “squarish”, “circularish” etc versions of them. But yes, a single icon can do it. Icons have properties that mathematical forms don’t and aren’t meant to. Icons are truly fluid – plastic – endlessly, plastically reshapable – whereas maths forms aren’t – and so icons can take endlessly diverse forms . An icon can be considered as a “Plasticine shape”. Consider that concept in itself and the reality it reflects. There is not and cannot be a mathematical generic rendition of “plasticine shape”. There is no basic math form like a circle, or any kind of pattern or fractal, or any combination of math forms, that can produce the endless (and irregular )diversity of plasticine. But you can and do have an iconic prototype for “plasticine shape” wh. enables you to recognize that all these are examples of plasticine shapes: http://curlyorli.com/wp-co http://media.smashingmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/cactusoup03.jpgntent/uploads/2012/04/e1.jpg http://www.papercraftsforchildren.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/plasticine_print3-300x283.jpg http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/600982/2/stock-photo-600982-plasticine-man.jpg http://www.colourbox.com/preview/3024533-982108-shaded-plasticine-puppets-pair-standing-near-each-other.jpg http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/zoomzoom/zoomzoom1001/zoomzoom100100164/6278577-text-i-love-you-made-from-plasticine.jpg http://static-p1.photoxpress.com/jpg/00/19/43/57/400_F_19435720_GHYVfjk1OZtwLsqLT2OPWZyDBWq7DmWJ_PXP.jpg {plasticine shapes can even generate numbers and geometrical forms – but it would be absurd to hold the reverse - that numbers and geometrical forms can generate the vast diverse zoology of forms that plasticine can take]. Icons and iconic prototypes are in the final analysis simply mirrors of real physical objects. AN icon of “plasticine shape” can be endlessly reshaped because **plasticine itself** can actually be endlessly physically reshaped into a vast diversity of shapes [subject to some constraints] Ditto waterdrops can be endlessly plastically reshaped into different forms. Icons of objects are endlessly plastically reshapable because ALL physical objects can be endlessly plastically re-shaped. A chair may be a pretty rigid thing, but if you care to abuse it, you can – and people do- endlessly reshape it into all kinds of twisted forms. So fluid icons in the brain are simply a mirror of the fluid reality of real world objects. And yes we can create fluid icons in a computer - by connecting it to a plastically reshapable body as the human brain evidently does (even a rigid robot will do to begin with because its body can be endlessly reformed into different positions , if not with the fluidity of a squishy robot]. Once you accept that icons can be plastic – and have to be plastic to reflect the world – you are one step towards solving the problem of AGI which maths is quite incapable of solving. Physical objects are endlessly plastic – maths forms are fixed, basically rigid and meant not to reflect the plasticity of the world but on the contrary to provide firm consistent structures with which to analyse and measure that plasticity. AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
