> -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Bromer [mailto:[email protected]] Re: [agi] Re: Compressed Cross-Indexed Concepts > > David, > I am not a mathematician although I do a lot of computer- > related mathematical work of course. My remark was directed toward John > who had suggested that he thought that there is some sophisticated > mathematical sub system that would (using my words here) provide such a > substantial benefit to AGI that its lack may be at the core of the > contemporary problem. I was saying that unless this required mathemagic > then a scalable AGI system demonstrating how effective this kind of > mathematical advancement could probably be simulated using contemporary > mathematics. This is not the same as saying that AGI is solvable by sanitized > formal representations any more than saying that your message is a sanitized > formal statement because it was dependent on a lot of computer > mathematics in order to send it. In other words I was challenging John at that > point to provide some kind of evidence for his view. >
I don't know if we need to create some new mathemagics, a breakthrough, or whatever. I just think using existing math to engineer it, using the math like if was software is what should be done. But you may be right perhaps proof of P=NP something similar is needed. I don't think so though. The main goal would be to leverage existing math to compensate for unnecessary and/or impossible computation. We don't need to re-evolve the wheel as we already figured that out. And computers are v. slow compared to other physical computations that are performed in the natural physical world. Maybe not - developing a system from scratch that discovers all of the discoveries over the millennia of science and civilization? Would that be possible? > I then went on to say, that for example, I think that fast SAT solutions would > make scalable AGI possible (that is, scalable up to a point that is way beyond > where we are now), and therefore I believe that I could create a simulation > of an AGI program to demonstrate what I am talking about. (A simulation is > not the same as the actual thing.) > > I didn't say, nor did I imply, that the mathematics would be all there is to it. I > have spent a long time thinking about the problems of applying formal and > informal systems to 'real world' (or other world) problems and the > application of methods is a major part of my AGI theories. I don't expect you > to know all of my views on the subject but I hope you will keep this in mind > for future discussions. Using available skills and tools the best we can use them. And, inventing new tools by engineering utilitarian and efficient mathematical structure. Math is just like software in all this but way more powerful. And using the right math, the most general where it is called for and specific/narrow when needed. I don't see a problem with the specific most of the time but I don't know if many people get the general. Though it may be an error or lack of understanding on my part... John ------------------------------------------- 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
