On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 4:57 PM, John G. Rose <[email protected]>wrote:
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jim Bromer [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > how would these diverse examples > > be woven into highly compressed and heavily cross-indexed pieces of > > knowledge that could be accessed quickly and reliably, especially for the > > most common examples that the person is familiar with. > > This is a big part of it and for me the most exciting. And I don't think > that this "subsystem" would take up millions of lines of code either. It's > just that it is a *very* sophisticated and dynamic mathematical structure > IMO. > > John > Well, if it was a mathematical structure then we could start developing prototypes using familiar mathematical structures. I think the structure has to involve more ideological relationships than mathematical. For instance you can apply a idea to your own thinking in a such a way that you are capable of (gradually) changing how you think about something. This means that an idea can be a compression of some greater change in your own programming. While the idea in this example would be associated with a fairly strong notion of meaning, since you cannot accurately understand the full consequences of the change it would be somewhat vague at first. (It could be a very precise idea capable of having strong effect, but the details of those effects would not be known until the change had progressed.) I think the more important question is how does a general concept be interpreted across a range of different kinds of ideas. Actually this is not so difficult, but what I am getting at is how are sophisticated conceptual interrelations integrated and resolved? Jim ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
