Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI]

Alan, with regards your absolute view on consciousness, I give you Solipsism as 
an alternative to your razor. Still, I appreciate you including the concept as 
relevant to DL-based AI.

Rob

From: Matt Mahoney via AGI 
Sent: Wednesday, 11 July 2018 7:58 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

Consciousness is what thinking feels like. Thinking and feeling are the result 
of neurons firing. You love life and fear dying because it increases your 
expected number of offspring. Why is this so mysterious?

-- Matt Mahoney

Artificial General Intelligence List<https://agi.topicbox.com/latest> / AGI / 
see discussions<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + 
participants<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery 
options<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups> 
Permalink<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-Ma6b7955af1ab607471273455>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M9306fcad7327d42eaaf9630b
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI]

Alan

Given your prednet example; In a 2-layer network, if the camera recording the 
R0 update frame was turned away for the update, the prediction made prior to 
the frame update would obviously be incorrect. Would the machine know - without 
referring to benchmarked footage - that the camera-input was moved to bias the 
result, and either report on it, or correct for it somehow, or just make a new 
prediction?

Rob

From: Alan Grimes 
Sent: Wednesday, 11 July 2018 6:03 PM
To: Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI wrote:
> Look, I'm trying to follow the train of thought here with regards AGI.
> It would be significant to AGI architecture if the contention was made
> that first, existed consciousness, and then matter. It would probably
> invert the life-cycle approaches we tend to follow in software
> development. But all this informational noise is clouding the issue.
> If it's not scientifically proven, no one can be right, or wrong. As
> for consciousness, in the absence of a working architecture, most of
> it is conjecture, and thus unprovable. However, there should be no
> question that it slots into the top-5 AI questions.
>
> Rob

BLEH!!

OCCAM'S RAZOR, HACK CHOP, CUT SLICE DICE.

Proposal:  Consciousness is precisely what is described by this:

https://coxlab.github.io/prednet/

Task:  "microgranualize" neural networks into cortical column-equivalent
units then wire them up as described in the previous link -> collect a
billion dollar prize.


Altertaitively, to prove me wrong:

Provide a simpler theory that explains more.
or prove that this theory fails in some fundamental way.

--
Please report bounces from this address to a...@numentics.com

Powers are not rights.


--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-Macaf9844a8fb7930f2b26a54
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Alan Grimes]

just camel via AGI wrote:
>
> There are literally thousands of enlightened beings who will tell you
> the same thing using different (maybe less technical) words.


So what?

That just means that there are thousands of people with a neurological
abnormality that causes them to have a weak sense of self.

-- 
Please report bounces from this address to a...@numentics.com

Powers are not rights.


--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M54f8bb09a71101d2440f9a36
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[MP via AGI]

Alan, what is it about prednet that makes you think it’s conscious? What signs 
is it showing? What’s it doing that makes you think this?

From what I see, it’s something that predicts the next video frame from the one 
it has been presented. There’s an NN for representation but... that’s it.

What’s got you so worked up over it?

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Alan Grimes  wrote:

> Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI wrote: > Look, I'm trying to follow 
> the train of thought here with regards AGI. > It would be significant to AGI 
> architecture if the contention was made > that first, existed consciousness, 
> and then matter. It would probably > invert the life-cycle approaches we tend 
> to follow in software > development. But all this informational noise is 
> clouding the issue. > If it's not scientifically proven, no one can be right, 
> or wrong. As > for consciousness, in the absence of a working architecture, 
> most of > it is conjecture, and thus unprovable. However, there should be no 
> > question that it slots into the top-5 AI questions.   > > Rob BLEH!! 
> OCCAM'S RAZOR, HACK CHOP, CUT SLICE DICE. Proposal:  Consciousness is 
> precisely what is described by this: https://coxlab.github.io/prednet/ Task:  
> "microgranualize" neural networks into cortical column-equivalent units then 
> wire them up as described in the previous link -> collect a billion dollar 
> prize. Altertaitively, to prove me wrong: Provide a simpler theory that 
> explains more. or prove that this theory fails in some fundamental way. -- 
> Please report bounces from this address to a...@numentics.com Powers are not 
> rights. -- Artificial General 
> Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: 
> https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M66b331e85eab61ec2b194c52
>  Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M40a76e8741f82b1705786b75
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI]

Look, I'm trying to follow the train of thought here with regards AGI. It would 
be significant to AGI architecture if the contention was made that first, 
existed consciousness, and then matter. It would probably invert the life-cycle 
approaches we tend to follow in software development. But all this 
informational noise is clouding the issue. If it's not scientifically proven, 
no one can be right, or wrong. As for consciousness, in the absence of a 
working architecture, most of it is conjecture, and thus unprovable. However, 
there should be no question that it slots into the top-5 AI questions.

Rob



From: just camel via AGI 
Sent: Wednesday, 11 July 2018 4:10 PM
To: agi@agi.topicbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

In a nutshell: Consciousness came up with virtual 3D worlds as a way to enhance 
evolution of consciousness. Not-so-evolved consciousness follows and identifies 
with avatars (human beings) in order to learn fundamental lessons. (Just like 
children do when they play computer games.) By using human avatars in a 3D 
world individuated consciousness can mature and converge towards low entropic 
states of love, compassion, non-attachment and understanding. As consciousness 
evolves it becomes de-attached from the human experience (what we call 
ego-loss, liberation or spiritual enlightenment) and ultimately moves on to 
operate in non-physical realms (nirvana, kingdom of heaven, great spirit ... or 
other contemporary analogies and metaphors).

This process is very fundamental. We need to undergo this process mainly for 
two reasons: a) In order so we don't wreck havoc in thought-responsive 
environments (Imagine you take some LSD-like substance and suddenly everything 
you think becomes reality and there is no way to stop that experience - an 
untrained consciousness would go insane within such a thought-responsive 
non-physical environment.) This physical reality serves as some sort of 
chaos/entropy-sink - it limits the damage our collective and individuals 
insanity can cause to a limited portion of virtual spacetime - and b) so we can 
actually operate in non-physical realms without identifying with random 
entities. (Imagine you own a company that runs large scale simulations and all 
your employees keep identifying with random entities within the simulation ... 
basically rendering them incapable of operating within the actual superset of 
said simulation.)

We are living within a playground for consciousness. We are capable of sending 
cars into space but we completely forgot about all the core teachings of all 
the liberated masters who told us to become aware of our true nature and to 
transcend the illusion of being a human in order to be able to continue our 
evolutionary journey beyond the limited planes of this virtual physical 
reality. Fermi's Paradox is irrelevant once you put this tiny virtual training 
ground into perspective.

"The vast distances that separate the stars are providential. Beings and worlds 
are quarantined from one another. The quarantine is lifted only for those with 
sufficient self-knowledge and judgment to have safely traveled from star to 
star." -- Carl Sagan

Carl Sagan almost had it right ... what quarantines us from one another aren't 
virtual and irrelevant distances within a virtual environment but ignorance of 
the true nature of consciousness ... thus preventing us from taking the 
singular exit and shifting our attention out of this tiny, tiny virtual 
physical reality. At the aforementioned LAN-Party you will find plenty of 
people once your focus shifts from World of Warcraft towards your more 
fundamentally real environment.

https://books.google.at/books?id=RYHtBPiZVgsC=PA1=PA113#v=onepage=false



On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 3:30 PM Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI 
mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote:
In a nutshell, are we saying that - first, there was consciousness?
Artificial General Intelligence List<https://agi.topicbox.com/latest> / AGI / 
see discussions<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + 
participants<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery 
options<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups> 
Permalink<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M4a1ccfad0921f0d063fff929>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M2458b928eb048dc50c694e2e
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Giacomo Spigler via AGI]

And you are the only one to know the truth because...?


On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 5:08 PM, just camel via AGI 
wrote:

> So what really prevents us from discovering and interacting with "aliens"
> (or rather individuated forms of consciousness) isn't a lack of technology
> but a lack of mastery of ourselves. The singular gateway to the entire
> universe is "inside" of us and not external. Once you operate outside of
> illusory spacetime there is no distance to overcome and no delay when
> communicating with any other chunk of consciousness out there.
>
> I tell you ... "they" are waiting for us to evolve our consciousness and
> not our rocket engines and "they" are not even far away as distance is a
> meaningless concept outside this tiny 3D playground. There are Zen monks
> communicating with non-physical entities while SETI discovers nothing ...
> that's the real paradox of our time.
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:10 PM just camel  wrote:
>
>> In a nutshell: Consciousness came up with virtual 3D worlds as a way to
>> enhance evolution of consciousness. Not-so-evolved consciousness follows
>> and identifies with avatars (human beings) in order to learn fundamental
>> lessons. (Just like children do when they play computer games.) By using
>> human avatars in a 3D world individuated consciousness can mature and
>> converge towards low entropic states of love, compassion, non-attachment
>> and understanding. As consciousness evolves it becomes de-attached from the
>> human experience (what we call ego-loss, liberation or spiritual
>> enlightenment) and ultimately moves on to operate in non-physical realms
>> (nirvana, kingdom of heaven, great spirit ... or other contemporary
>> analogies and metaphors).
>>
>> This process is very fundamental. We need to undergo this process mainly
>> for two reasons: a) In order so we don't wreck havoc in thought-responsive
>> environments (Imagine you take some LSD-like substance and suddenly
>> everything you think becomes reality and there is no way to stop that
>> experience - an untrained consciousness would go insane within such a
>> thought-responsive non-physical environment.) This physical reality serves
>> as some sort of chaos/entropy-sink - it limits the damage our collective
>> and individuals insanity can cause to a limited portion of virtual
>> spacetime - and b) so we can actually operate in non-physical realms
>> without identifying with random entities. (Imagine you own a company that
>> runs large scale simulations and all your employees keep identifying with
>> random entities within the simulation ... basically rendering them
>> incapable of operating within the actual superset of said simulation.)
>>
>> We are living within a playground for consciousness. We are capable of
>> sending cars into space but we completely forgot about all the core
>> teachings of all the liberated masters who told us to become aware of our
>> true nature and to transcend the illusion of being a human in order to be
>> able to continue our evolutionary journey beyond the limited planes of this
>> virtual physical reality. Fermi's Paradox is irrelevant once you put this
>> tiny virtual training ground into perspective.
>>
>> "The vast distances that separate the stars are providential. Beings and
>> worlds are quarantined from one another. The quarantine is lifted only for
>> those with sufficient self-knowledge and judgment to have safely traveled
>> from star to star." -- Carl Sagan
>>
>> Carl Sagan almost had it right ... what quarantines us from one another
>> aren't virtual and irrelevant distances within a virtual environment but
>> ignorance of the true nature of consciousness ... thus preventing us from
>> taking the singular exit and shifting our attention out of this tiny, tiny
>> virtual physical reality. At the aforementioned LAN-Party you will find
>> plenty of people once your focus shifts from World of Warcraft towards your
>> more fundamentally real environment.
>>
>> https://books.google.at/books?id=RYHtBPiZVgsC=PA1=
>> PA113#v=onepage=false
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 3:30 PM Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI <
>> agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In a nutshell, are we saying that - first, there was consciousness?
>>>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M2accdb41d314336bdecb5bf2
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[just camel via AGI]

So what really prevents us from discovering and interacting with "aliens"
(or rather individuated forms of consciousness) isn't a lack of technology
but a lack of mastery of ourselves. The singular gateway to the entire
universe is "inside" of us and not external. Once you operate outside of
illusory spacetime there is no distance to overcome and no delay when
communicating with any other chunk of consciousness out there.

I tell you ... "they" are waiting for us to evolve our consciousness and
not our rocket engines and "they" are not even far away as distance is a
meaningless concept outside this tiny 3D playground. There are Zen monks
communicating with non-physical entities while SETI discovers nothing ...
that's the real paradox of our time.

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:10 PM just camel  wrote:

> In a nutshell: Consciousness came up with virtual 3D worlds as a way to
> enhance evolution of consciousness. Not-so-evolved consciousness follows
> and identifies with avatars (human beings) in order to learn fundamental
> lessons. (Just like children do when they play computer games.) By using
> human avatars in a 3D world individuated consciousness can mature and
> converge towards low entropic states of love, compassion, non-attachment
> and understanding. As consciousness evolves it becomes de-attached from the
> human experience (what we call ego-loss, liberation or spiritual
> enlightenment) and ultimately moves on to operate in non-physical realms
> (nirvana, kingdom of heaven, great spirit ... or other contemporary
> analogies and metaphors).
>
> This process is very fundamental. We need to undergo this process mainly
> for two reasons: a) In order so we don't wreck havoc in thought-responsive
> environments (Imagine you take some LSD-like substance and suddenly
> everything you think becomes reality and there is no way to stop that
> experience - an untrained consciousness would go insane within such a
> thought-responsive non-physical environment.) This physical reality serves
> as some sort of chaos/entropy-sink - it limits the damage our collective
> and individuals insanity can cause to a limited portion of virtual
> spacetime - and b) so we can actually operate in non-physical realms
> without identifying with random entities. (Imagine you own a company that
> runs large scale simulations and all your employees keep identifying with
> random entities within the simulation ... basically rendering them
> incapable of operating within the actual superset of said simulation.)
>
> We are living within a playground for consciousness. We are capable of
> sending cars into space but we completely forgot about all the core
> teachings of all the liberated masters who told us to become aware of our
> true nature and to transcend the illusion of being a human in order to be
> able to continue our evolutionary journey beyond the limited planes of this
> virtual physical reality. Fermi's Paradox is irrelevant once you put this
> tiny virtual training ground into perspective.
>
> "The vast distances that separate the stars are providential. Beings and
> worlds are quarantined from one another. The quarantine is lifted only for
> those with sufficient self-knowledge and judgment to have safely traveled
> from star to star." -- Carl Sagan
>
> Carl Sagan almost had it right ... what quarantines us from one another
> aren't virtual and irrelevant distances within a virtual environment but
> ignorance of the true nature of consciousness ... thus preventing us from
> taking the singular exit and shifting our attention out of this tiny, tiny
> virtual physical reality. At the aforementioned LAN-Party you will find
> plenty of people once your focus shifts from World of Warcraft towards your
> more fundamentally real environment.
>
>
> https://books.google.at/books?id=RYHtBPiZVgsC=PA1=PA113#v=onepage=false
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 3:30 PM Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI <
> agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:
>
>> In a nutshell, are we saying that - first, there was consciousness?
>>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M94ca8a822e9fa6490614f7a3
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[just camel via AGI]

In a nutshell: Consciousness came up with virtual 3D worlds as a way to
enhance evolution of consciousness. Not-so-evolved consciousness follows
and identifies with avatars (human beings) in order to learn fundamental
lessons. (Just like children do when they play computer games.) By using
human avatars in a 3D world individuated consciousness can mature and
converge towards low entropic states of love, compassion, non-attachment
and understanding. As consciousness evolves it becomes de-attached from the
human experience (what we call ego-loss, liberation or spiritual
enlightenment) and ultimately moves on to operate in non-physical realms
(nirvana, kingdom of heaven, great spirit ... or other contemporary
analogies and metaphors).

This process is very fundamental. We need to undergo this process mainly
for two reasons: a) In order so we don't wreck havoc in thought-responsive
environments (Imagine you take some LSD-like substance and suddenly
everything you think becomes reality and there is no way to stop that
experience - an untrained consciousness would go insane within such a
thought-responsive non-physical environment.) This physical reality serves
as some sort of chaos/entropy-sink - it limits the damage our collective
and individuals insanity can cause to a limited portion of virtual
spacetime - and b) so we can actually operate in non-physical realms
without identifying with random entities. (Imagine you own a company that
runs large scale simulations and all your employees keep identifying with
random entities within the simulation ... basically rendering them
incapable of operating within the actual superset of said simulation.)

We are living within a playground for consciousness. We are capable of
sending cars into space but we completely forgot about all the core
teachings of all the liberated masters who told us to become aware of our
true nature and to transcend the illusion of being a human in order to be
able to continue our evolutionary journey beyond the limited planes of this
virtual physical reality. Fermi's Paradox is irrelevant once you put this
tiny virtual training ground into perspective.

"The vast distances that separate the stars are providential. Beings and
worlds are quarantined from one another. The quarantine is lifted only for
those with sufficient self-knowledge and judgment to have safely traveled
from star to star." -- Carl Sagan

Carl Sagan almost had it right ... what quarantines us from one another
aren't virtual and irrelevant distances within a virtual environment but
ignorance of the true nature of consciousness ... thus preventing us from
taking the singular exit and shifting our attention out of this tiny, tiny
virtual physical reality. At the aforementioned LAN-Party you will find
plenty of people once your focus shifts from World of Warcraft towards your
more fundamentally real environment.

https://books.google.at/books?id=RYHtBPiZVgsC=PA1=PA113#v=onepage=false



On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 3:30 PM Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI <
agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:

> In a nutshell, are we saying that - first, there was consciousness?
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M4a1ccfad0921f0d063fff929
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI]

In a nutshell, are we saying that - first, there was consciousness?

From: just camel via AGI 
Sent: Wednesday, 11 July 2018 2:48 PM
To: agi@agi.topicbox.com
Subject: Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

See, even not so narrow minded people from this very list understand that 
consciousness is non-local and more fundamental than body and brain ...

http://multiverseaccordingtoben.blogspot.com/2015/03/paranormal-phenomena-nonlocal-mind-and.html

Or Tom's book starting at page 113 ...

https://books.google.at/books?id=RYHtBPiZVgsC=PA1=PA113#v=onepage=false

"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from 
consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk 
about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." -- Max 
Planck

It's what Hindus, Buddhists, Sufis, native Indians, Shamans, etc. have been 
telling us for ages ... and Fermi's Paradox is a symptom of being ignorant to 
the fundamental nature of this physical reality.

... I stopped reading at "So you are saying I can stop playing Super Mario Land 
and navigate in the super-set of Super Mario Land?"

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:14 PM Giacomo Spigler via AGI 
mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote:

I stopped reading at "your consciousness is capable of communicating with 
gazillions of other entities from outside this physical realm/plane anytime."

G


On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:51 AM, just camel via AGI 
mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote:

Fermi's Paradox ...

Once upon a time, a 10 year old child became addicted to Super Mario Land. He 
played so much that he forgot that he was a child among millions of other 
children and kept asking himself "Where are all the other Marios? There must be 
many more Marios? I will call this Fermi's Paradox!"

Already today thousands of advanced meditators will tell you that Fermi's 
Paradox is only a paradox as long as you don't realize that your consciousness 
is focusing on one particular and very narrow experience (called a human being) 
when your consciousness is capable of communicating with gazillions of other 
entities from outside this physical realm/plane anytime.

When you attend a LAN-Party and play World of Warcraft and only find 5 of the 
5000 LAN-Party participants in the game then clearly you realize that you are 
looking in the wrong spot and you shift your attention "outwards" and out of a 
subset of reality into a broader set of reality.

An advanced civilization will probably cease to use manifested avatars on the 
physical plane once it has overcome the tendency to identify with narrow 
experiences. Just as children tend to overcome the tendency to identify with a 
narrow experience in the form of a computer game. The answer to Fermi's paradox 
lies in the words of Buddha, Jesus and all the other liberated/enlightened 
beings ... it lies in the realization that our physical reality is just an 
illusion within the field of consciousness ... it's a mix of John Smarts 
"transcension hypothesis" and in some sense Bostrom's work ... in so far that 
our perceived physical virtual reality is just a very tiny subset of a much 
larger reality.

Physical death as well as spiritual enlightenment are singular processes 
decoupling your consciousness from one particular experience (from identifying 
with one human being) and they will introduce you to said much broader reality 
in which there exists no Fermi's paradox.


On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:50 PM Giacomo Spigler via AGI 
mailto:agi@agi.topicbox.com>> wrote:

Artificial General Intelligence List<https://agi.topicbox.com/latest> / AGI / 
see discussions<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + 
participants<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery 
options<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups> 
Permalink<https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M10bd175212c66624852606eb>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M05b2898c6b56b205b0705c9f
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[just camel via AGI]

See, even not so narrow minded people from this very list understand that
consciousness is non-local and more fundamental than body and brain ...

http://multiverseaccordingtoben.blogspot.com/2015/03/paranormal-phenomena-nonlocal-mind-and.html

Or Tom's book starting at page 113 ...

https://books.google.at/books?id=RYHtBPiZVgsC=PA1=PA113#v=onepage=false

"I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from
consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk
about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness." --
Max Planck

It's what Hindus, Buddhists, Sufis, native Indians, Shamans, etc. have been
telling us for ages ... and Fermi's Paradox is a symptom of being ignorant
to the fundamental nature of this physical reality.

... I stopped reading at "So you are saying I can stop playing Super Mario
Land and navigate in the super-set of Super Mario Land?"

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 12:14 PM Giacomo Spigler via AGI <
agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:

>
> I stopped reading at "your consciousness is capable of communicating with
> gazillions of other entities from outside this physical realm/plane
> anytime."
>
> G
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:51 AM, just camel via AGI  > wrote:
>>
>> Fermi's Paradox ...
>>
>> Once upon a time, a 10 year old child became addicted to Super Mario
>> Land. He played so much that he forgot that he was a child among millions
>> of other children and kept asking himself "Where are all the other Marios?
>> There must be many more Marios? I will call this Fermi's Paradox!"
>>
>> Already today thousands of advanced meditators will tell you that Fermi's
>> Paradox is only a paradox as long as you don't realize that your
>> consciousness is focusing on one particular and very narrow experience
>> (called a human being) when your consciousness is capable of communicating
>> with gazillions of other entities from outside this physical realm/plane
>> anytime.
>>
>> When you attend a LAN-Party and play World of Warcraft and only find 5 of
>> the 5000 LAN-Party participants in the game then clearly you realize that
>> you are looking in the wrong spot and you shift your attention "outwards"
>> and out of a subset of reality into a broader set of reality.
>>
>> An advanced civilization will probably cease to use manifested avatars on
>> the physical plane once it has overcome the tendency to identify with
>> narrow experiences. Just as children tend to overcome the tendency to
>> identify with a narrow experience in the form of a computer game. The
>> answer to Fermi's paradox lies in the words of Buddha, Jesus and all the
>> other liberated/enlightened beings ... it lies in the realization that our
>> physical reality is just an illusion within the field of consciousness ...
>> it's a mix of John Smarts "transcension hypothesis" and in some sense
>> Bostrom's work ... in so far that our perceived physical virtual reality is
>> just a very tiny subset of a much larger reality.
>>
>> Physical death as well as spiritual enlightenment are singular processes
>> decoupling your consciousness from one particular experience (from
>> identifying with one human being) and they will introduce you to said much
>> broader reality in which there exists no Fermi's paradox.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:50 PM Giacomo Spigler via AGI <
>> agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:
>>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M10bd175212c66624852606eb
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Giacomo Spigler via AGI]

I stopped reading at "your consciousness is capable of communicating with
gazillions of other entities from outside this physical realm/plane
anytime."

G


On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:51 AM, just camel via AGI 
wrote:

>
> Fermi's Paradox ...
>
> Once upon a time, a 10 year old child became addicted to Super Mario Land.
> He played so much that he forgot that he was a child among millions of
> other children and kept asking himself "Where are all the other Marios?
> There must be many more Marios? I will call this Fermi's Paradox!"
>
> Already today thousands of advanced meditators will tell you that Fermi's
> Paradox is only a paradox as long as you don't realize that your
> consciousness is focusing on one particular and very narrow experience
> (called a human being) when your consciousness is capable of communicating
> with gazillions of other entities from outside this physical realm/plane
> anytime.
>
> When you attend a LAN-Party and play World of Warcraft and only find 5 of
> the 5000 LAN-Party participants in the game then clearly you realize that
> you are looking in the wrong spot and you shift your attention "outwards"
> and out of a subset of reality into a broader set of reality.
>
> An advanced civilization will probably cease to use manifested avatars on
> the physical plane once it has overcome the tendency to identify with
> narrow experiences. Just as children tend to overcome the tendency to
> identify with a narrow experience in the form of a computer game. The
> answer to Fermi's paradox lies in the words of Buddha, Jesus and all the
> other liberated/enlightened beings ... it lies in the realization that our
> physical reality is just an illusion within the field of consciousness ...
> it's a mix of John Smarts "transcension hypothesis" and in some sense
> Bostrom's work ... in so far that our perceived physical virtual reality is
> just a very tiny subset of a much larger reality.
>
> Physical death as well as spiritual enlightenment are singular processes
> decoupling your consciousness from one particular experience (from
> identifying with one human being) and they will introduce you to said much
> broader reality in which there exists no Fermi's paradox.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:50 PM Giacomo Spigler via AGI <
> agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:
>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M5fc6907de7c19a0962fb8352
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[just camel via AGI]

Fermi's Paradox ...

Once upon a time, a 10 year old child became addicted to Super Mario Land.
He played so much that he forgot that he was a child among millions of
other children and kept asking himself "Where are all the other Marios?
There must be many more Marios? I will call this Fermi's Paradox!"

Already today thousands of advanced meditators will tell you that Fermi's
Paradox is only a paradox as long as you don't realize that your
consciousness is focusing on one particular and very narrow experience
(called a human being) when your consciousness is capable of communicating
with gazillions of other entities from outside this physical realm/plane
anytime.

When you attend a LAN-Party and play World of Warcraft and only find 5 of
the 5000 LAN-Party participants in the game then clearly you realize that
you are looking in the wrong spot and you shift your attention "outwards"
and out of a subset of reality into a broader set of reality.

An advanced civilization will probably cease to use manifested avatars on
the physical plane once it has overcome the tendency to identify with
narrow experiences. Just as children tend to overcome the tendency to
identify with a narrow experience in the form of a computer game. The
answer to Fermi's paradox lies in the words of Buddha, Jesus and all the
other liberated/enlightened beings ... it lies in the realization that our
physical reality is just an illusion within the field of consciousness ...
it's a mix of John Smarts "transcension hypothesis" and in some sense
Bostrom's work ... in so far that our perceived physical virtual reality is
just a very tiny subset of a much larger reality.

Physical death as well as spiritual enlightenment are singular processes
decoupling your consciousness from one particular experience (from
identifying with one human being) and they will introduce you to said much
broader reality in which there exists no Fermi's paradox.


On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:50 PM Giacomo Spigler via AGI <
agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:

> The idea has interesting implications for the Fermi Paradox, both in terms
> of potential Great Filters ahead of us and in terms of the possible
> development of advanced intelligent civilizations and their potential
> desire to communicate or colonize the galaxy.Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M49cef0784efffba35b508c58
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via AGI]

Jim stated: "The 'physics' of the universe could be so extensive that even a 
p=np simulation environment might not be able to discover the hidden principles 
of science or even discover the logical discrepancies of the science of the 
day."

I'd like to wing a comment here please. Unless it could be proven that  P= NP, 
no such simulation would be reliable. This introduces the notion of the 
experiencing "us" existing within individual versions of illusion and 
holographic reality. In such a context, what would simulation be a class of?

Considering heuristics, isn't a very principle of everything (including 
science) the omnipresence of algorithms? Likewise, we may enquire: Does a 
singularity, or a paradox exist within/without an algorithm?

Pertinently, does P=NP exist as an algorithm?

"Stephen Cook showed in 1971 that any NP problem can be converted in polynomial 
time to the specific problem SAT, the Satisfiability Problem for Propositional 
Calculus clauses."
(http://www.inf.ed.ac.uk/teaching/courses/propm/papers/Cook.pdf p.1)

Since then, SAT has been proven to be both NP-Hard and NP-Complete. (Cook-Levin 
Theorum).

P is a subset of NP (Refer wiki.c2.com/?NpComplete), but algorithmically, 
boundary P, within boundary NP keeps on growing, even to a state where P and NP 
= NP-Complete.

In theory, an X-boundary point where P=NP may eventually be reached. And from 
that X-boundary point onward, what would emerge? Would we discover how quantum 
entanglement and a dual-singular boundary would co-exist in a pure, fractal 
state, as a simulation of paradox? Perhaps we would simply discover yet another 
dot of the finitely-infinite universe, but not the tapestry itself?

As such, it seems possible that if P and NP co existed within the same 
simulation, that all of the universe - as we know it- formed part of such a 
simulation. In other words, what we might be discussing would possibly only be 
an instance of a never-ending simulation.

Rob

From: Jim Bromer via AGI 
Sent: Monday, 09 July 2018 2:00 PM
To: AGI
Subject: Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

Could a logical simulation discover hidden principles of science if
p=np ? The 'physics' of the universe could be so extensive that even a
p=np simulation environment might not be able to discover the hidden
principles of science or even discover the logical discrepancies of
the science of the day. For example, the wave-particle duality is a
great candidate for an artifact of p<>np. (If we had p=np then it is
much more likely that people could discover the solution to what seems
like a paradox.)  The problem is that the range of effects of particle
physics could be so extensive - or just so wrong - that more extensive
simulations still might not be able to find evidence to support an
explanation or an alternative elementary theory for physics. On the
other hand, following the primary motivation (if not the methods or
conclusions) of the logical positivists the p vs np dilemma certainly
looks like it might be a fundamental problem of contemporary science.
Jim Bromer


On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 7:29 AM, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via
AGI  wrote:
> Following this conversation with interest. I think, the complexity of life,
> as we know it, cannot be explained by P alone. The stronger contention might
> be that P and NP must both be present at all times. If we could satisfy this
> contention for "simulation", then logic indicates both NP-Hard and
> NP-Complete have to exist within the context of this "Simulation".
>
> Is it relevant whether we experience reality as a simulation, or not? How
> would we even know if it was a simulation, unless we could find a window in
> the simulation to climb through and look at it from the outside? That is the
> problem of scalable deabstraction, which is also 100% resident within the
> context of reducing NP to P. Is it heuristic enough to flow through
> boundaries as if they do not exist?
>
> Rob
> ________________
> From: Jim Bromer via AGI 
> Sent: Monday, 09 July 2018 10:54 AM
> To: AGI
> Subject: Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox
>
> Effective world knowledge is based on practical advancements and most
> practical advancements cannot be made in pure simulations (like those
> that can overtake the advancements in the real world). Something like
> a triple abstraction principle in mathematics including the
> transformational algorithms that would go with them could be gained in
> simulations, so a n=np algorithm, if one is feasible, might be found
> in a simulation like this. And it might go unnoticed by the human
> operators of the simulation.
> Jim Bromer
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Stefan Reich via AGI
>  wrote:
>> Where's the relati

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Jim Bromer via AGI]

Could a logical simulation discover hidden principles of science if
p=np ? The 'physics' of the universe could be so extensive that even a
p=np simulation environment might not be able to discover the hidden
principles of science or even discover the logical discrepancies of
the science of the day. For example, the wave-particle duality is a
great candidate for an artifact of p<>np. (If we had p=np then it is
much more likely that people could discover the solution to what seems
like a paradox.)  The problem is that the range of effects of particle
physics could be so extensive - or just so wrong - that more extensive
simulations still might not be able to find evidence to support an
explanation or an alternative elementary theory for physics. On the
other hand, following the primary motivation (if not the methods or
conclusions) of the logical positivists the p vs np dilemma certainly
looks like it might be a fundamental problem of contemporary science.
Jim Bromer


On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 7:29 AM, Nanograte Knowledge Technologies via
AGI  wrote:
> Following this conversation with interest. I think, the complexity of life,
> as we know it, cannot be explained by P alone. The stronger contention might
> be that P and NP must both be present at all times. If we could satisfy this
> contention for "simulation", then logic indicates both NP-Hard and
> NP-Complete have to exist within the context of this "Simulation".
>
> Is it relevant whether we experience reality as a simulation, or not? How
> would we even know if it was a simulation, unless we could find a window in
> the simulation to climb through and look at it from the outside? That is the
> problem of scalable deabstraction, which is also 100% resident within the
> context of reducing NP to P. Is it heuristic enough to flow through
> boundaries as if they do not exist?
>
> Rob
> 
> From: Jim Bromer via AGI 
> Sent: Monday, 09 July 2018 10:54 AM
> To: AGI
> Subject: Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox
>
> Effective world knowledge is based on practical advancements and most
> practical advancements cannot be made in pure simulations (like those
> that can overtake the advancements in the real world). Something like
> a triple abstraction principle in mathematics including the
> transformational algorithms that would go with them could be gained in
> simulations, so a n=np algorithm, if one is feasible, might be found
> in a simulation like this. And it might go unnoticed by the human
> operators of the simulation.
> Jim Bromer
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Stefan Reich via AGI
>  wrote:
>> Where's the relation there?
>>
>> Maybe our simulation is run on supercomputers of NP power.
>>
>> On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 at 07:52, Shashank Yadav 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> If we are living in a simulation, then P equals NP, I think.
>>>
>>> -
>>> Shashank
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 08:53:31 +0530 Mark Nuzz via AGI
>>>  wrote 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Matt Mahoney via AGI
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Recursive self improvement in a closed environment is not possible
>>> because
>>> intelligence depends on knowledge and computing power. These can only
>>> come
>>> from outside the simulation.
>>>
>>>
>>> I generally agree with this. But let's go into the esoteric world for a
>>> moment and consider: Suppose we ourselves are living in a simulation,
>>> then
>>> what implications does this have?
>>> Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions +
>>> participants + delivery options Permalink
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stefan Reich
>> BotCompany.de // Java-based operating systems
>> Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions +
>> participants
>> + delivery options Permalink
> Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + participants
> + delivery options Permalink

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M84eaa9a05c11b4dc3a3d0c58
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Jim Bromer via AGI]

Effective world knowledge is based on practical advancements and most
practical advancements cannot be made in pure simulations (like those
that can overtake the advancements in the real world). Something like
a triple abstraction principle in mathematics including the
transformational algorithms that would go with them could be gained in
simulations, so a n=np algorithm, if one is feasible, might be found
in a simulation like this. And it might go unnoticed by the human
operators of the simulation.
Jim Bromer


On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Stefan Reich via AGI
 wrote:
> Where's the relation there?
>
> Maybe our simulation is run on supercomputers of NP power.
>
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 at 07:52, Shashank Yadav 
> wrote:
>>
>> If we are living in a simulation, then P equals NP, I think.
>>
>> -
>> Shashank
>>
>>
>>  On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 08:53:31 +0530 Mark Nuzz via AGI
>>  wrote 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Matt Mahoney via AGI
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Recursive self improvement in a closed environment is not possible because
>> intelligence depends on knowledge and computing power. These can only come
>> from outside the simulation.
>>
>>
>> I generally agree with this. But let's go into the esoteric world for a
>> moment and consider: Suppose we ourselves are living in a simulation, then
>> what implications does this have?
>> Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions +
>> participants + delivery options Permalink
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Stefan Reich
> BotCompany.de // Java-based operating systems
> Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see discussions + participants
> + delivery options Permalink

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-Me0100f542204177a8baade1f
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Stefan Reich via AGI]

Where's the relation there?

Maybe our simulation is run on supercomputers of NP power.

On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 at 07:52, Shashank Yadav 
wrote:

> If we are living in a simulation, then P equals NP, I think.
>
> -
> Shashank
>
>
>  On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 08:53:31 +0530 *Mark Nuzz via AGI
> >* wrote 
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Matt Mahoney via AGI <
> agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:
>
> Recursive self improvement in a closed environment is not possible because
> intelligence depends on knowledge and computing power. These can only come
> from outside the simulation.
>
>
> I generally agree with this. But let's go into the esoteric world for a
> moment and consider: Suppose we ourselves are living in a simulation, then
> what implications does this have?
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>
>
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>


-- 
Stefan Reich
BotCompany.de // Java-based operating systems

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-Me6962bd1223019a24b7c7a32
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Steve Richfield via AGI]

Some solutions, especially in game theory, REQUIRE the use of random number
generators. If they are simulatable, then they definitely are NOT random.

Steve

On Jun 26, 2018 1:47 AM, "Giacomo Spigler via AGI" 
wrote:

>
> That's an interesting point, however:
>
> 1) it wouldn't be a closed environment, as progress could/would involve
alternation between work performed inside the simulation (progress given
the current state of the art and computational resources) and outside the
simulation (performing experiments designed inside the simulation, building
the newly designed hardware and computers to improve the computational
capacity). Also note that even if no development was performed inside the
simulation, if Moore's law holds, the same simulation could be sped up
exponentially over time, so that it may still reach extreme temporal
speedups within a few decades.
>
> 2) the simulation needs not simulate the whole external world. A
simulation restricted to a relatively small volume (e.g., Baxter (2001) )
would suffice, as well as an imperfect simulation.
> Notably, scientific and engineering development already benefits from
"simulated" design, at least for part of the process. Also, some research
endeavours such as in philosophy, mathematics or computer science do not
need access to the real world.
>
> I also like Mark's thought on the implications of these points to the
Simulation Hypothesis!
>
> Cheers,
> Giacomo
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 5:15 AM, Matt Mahoney via AGI <
agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:

>> Recursive self improvement in a closed environment is not possible
because intelligence depends on knowledge and computing power. These can
only come from outside the simulation.
>>
>> Nor can any simulation model the outside world exactly because Wolpert's
theorem prohibits two computers from mutually simulating each other even if
each computer has the other's source code and initial state as input.
Proof: suppose the two computers played rock scissors and each could
predict the other's next move by simulating them. Who wins?
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018, 8:51 AM Giacomo Spigler via AGI <
agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:

>>> Hi everybody,
>>>
>>> some of you may be interested in a philosophical / futurological paper
in which I propose a new “Temporal Singularity” as a special instance of
the Technological Singularity, that was accepted at AGI-18 and that I will
present there in August. The idea has interesting implications for the
Fermi Paradox, both in terms of potential Great Filters ahead of us and in
terms of the possible development of advanced intelligent civilizations and
their potential desire to communicate or colonize the galaxy.
>>>
>>> Title: “The Temporal Singularity: time-accelerated simulated
civilizations and their implications”
>>> 
>>> https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.08561 
*>>>*
*>>> Abstract.* Provided significant future progress in artificial
intelligence and computing, it may ultimately be possible to create
multiple Artificial General Intelligences (AGIs), and possibly entire
societies living within simulated environments. In that case, it should be
possible to improve the problem solving capabilities of the system by
increasing the speed of the simulation. If a minimal simulation with
sufficient capabilities is created, it might manage to increase its own
speed by accelerating progress in science and technology, in a way similar
to the Technological Singularity. This may ultimately lead to large
simulated civilizations unfolding at extreme temporal speedups, achieving
what from the outside would look like a Temporal Singularity. Here we
discuss the feasibility of the minimal simulation and the potential
advantages, dangers, and connection to the Fermi paradox of the Temporal
Singularity. The medium-term importance of the topic derives from the
amount of computational power required to start the process, which could be
available within the next decades, making the Temporal Singularity
theoretically possible before the end of the century.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Giacomo Spigler
>>>
>>>
>
> Artificial General Intelligence List  /
AGI / see discussions  + participants
 + delivery options
 Permalink


--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-Mfa36794e0760c500db498527
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Giacomo Spigler via AGI]

That's an interesting point, however:

1) it wouldn't be a closed environment, as progress could/would involve
alternation between work performed inside the simulation (progress given
the current state of the art and computational resources) and outside the
simulation (performing experiments designed inside the simulation, building
the newly designed hardware and computers to improve the computational
capacity). Also note that even if no development was performed inside the
simulation, if Moore's law holds, the same simulation could be sped up
exponentially over time, so that it may still reach extreme temporal
speedups within a few decades.

2) the simulation needs not simulate the whole external world. A simulation
restricted to a relatively small volume (e.g., Baxter (2001) ) would
suffice, as well as an imperfect simulation.
Notably, scientific and engineering development already benefits from
"simulated" design, at least for part of the process. Also, some research
endeavours such as in philosophy, mathematics or computer science do not
need access to the real world.

I also like Mark's thought on the implications of these points to the
Simulation Hypothesis!

Cheers,
Giacomo



On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 5:15 AM, Matt Mahoney via AGI 
wrote:

> Recursive self improvement in a closed environment is not possible because
> intelligence depends on knowledge and computing power. These can only come
> from outside the simulation.
>
> Nor can any simulation model the outside world exactly because Wolpert's
> theorem prohibits two computers from mutually simulating each other even if
> each computer has the other's source code and initial state as input.
> Proof: suppose the two computers played rock scissors and each could
> predict the other's next move by simulating them. Who wins?
>
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018, 8:51 AM Giacomo Spigler via AGI <
> agi@agi.topicbox.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi everybody,
>>
>> some of you may be interested in a philosophical / futurological paper in
>> which I propose a new “Temporal Singularity” as a special instance of the
>> Technological Singularity, that was accepted at AGI-18 and that I will
>> present there in August. The idea has interesting implications for the
>> Fermi Paradox, both in terms of potential Great Filters ahead of us and in
>> terms of the possible development of advanced intelligent civilizations and
>> their potential desire to communicate or colonize the galaxy.
>>
>> Title: “The Temporal Singularity: time-accelerated simulated
>> civilizations and their implications”
>>
>> https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.08561
>>
>> *Abstract.* Provided significant future progress in artificial
>> intelligence and computing, it may ultimately be possible to create
>> multiple Artificial General Intelligences (AGIs), and possibly entire
>> societies living within simulated environments. In that case, it should be
>> possible to improve the problem solving capabilities of the system by
>> increasing the speed of the simulation. If a minimal simulation with
>> sufficient capabilities is created, it might manage to increase its own
>> speed by accelerating progress in science and technology, in a way similar
>> to the Technological Singularity. This may ultimately lead to large
>> simulated civilizations unfolding at extreme temporal speedups, achieving
>> what from the outside would look like a Temporal Singularity. Here we
>> discuss the feasibility of the minimal simulation and the potential
>> advantages, dangers, and connection to the Fermi paradox of the Temporal
>> Singularity. The medium-term importance of the topic derives from the
>> amount of computational power required to start the process, which could be
>> available within the next decades, making the Temporal Singularity
>> theoretically possible before the end of the century.
>>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Giacomo Spigler
>>
>>
>> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-Mcc1d0f47af7d817a7410bd26
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Shashank Yadav]

If we are living in a simulation, then P equals NP, I think. - Shashank  On 
Tue, 26 Jun 2018 08:53:31 +0530 Mark Nuzz via AGI  wrote 
 On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Matt Mahoney via AGI 
 wrote: Recursive self improvement in a closed 
environment is not possible because intelligence depends on knowledge and 
computing power. These can only come from outside the simulation. I generally 
agree with this. But let's go into the esoteric world for a moment and 
consider: Suppose we ourselves are living in a simulation, then what 
implications does this have?  Artificial General Intelligence List / AGI / see 
discussions + participants + delivery options Permalink
--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M2747e766fd047fc2fea2e6e5
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Mark Nuzz via AGI]

On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Matt Mahoney via AGI 
wrote:

> Recursive self improvement in a closed environment is not possible because
> intelligence depends on knowledge and computing power. These can only come
> from outside the simulation.
>
>
I generally agree with this. But let's go into the esoteric world for a
moment and consider: Suppose we ourselves are living in a simulation, then
what implications does this have?

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-M6129a0a1fba92e97e0a87843
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups

Re: [agi] New Paper - Temporal Singularity and the Fermi Paradox

[Matt Mahoney via AGI]

Recursive self improvement in a closed environment is not possible because
intelligence depends on knowledge and computing power. These can only come
from outside the simulation.

Nor can any simulation model the outside world exactly because Wolpert's
theorem prohibits two computers from mutually simulating each other even if
each computer has the other's source code and initial state as input.
Proof: suppose the two computers played rock scissors and each could
predict the other's next move by simulating them. Who wins?

On Mon, Jun 25, 2018, 8:51 AM Giacomo Spigler via AGI 
wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> some of you may be interested in a philosophical / futurological paper in
> which I propose a new “Temporal Singularity” as a special instance of the
> Technological Singularity, that was accepted at AGI-18 and that I will
> present there in August. The idea has interesting implications for the
> Fermi Paradox, both in terms of potential Great Filters ahead of us and in
> terms of the possible development of advanced intelligent civilizations and
> their potential desire to communicate or colonize the galaxy.
>
> Title: “The Temporal Singularity: time-accelerated simulated civilizations
> and their implications”
>
> https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.08561
>
> *Abstract.* Provided significant future progress in artificial
> intelligence and computing, it may ultimately be possible to create
> multiple Artificial General Intelligences (AGIs), and possibly entire
> societies living within simulated environments. In that case, it should be
> possible to improve the problem solving capabilities of the system by
> increasing the speed of the simulation. If a minimal simulation with
> sufficient capabilities is created, it might manage to increase its own
> speed by accelerating progress in science and technology, in a way similar
> to the Technological Singularity. This may ultimately lead to large
> simulated civilizations unfolding at extreme temporal speedups, achieving
> what from the outside would look like a Temporal Singularity. Here we
> discuss the feasibility of the minimal simulation and the potential
> advantages, dangers, and connection to the Fermi paradox of the Temporal
> Singularity. The medium-term importance of the topic derives from the
> amount of computational power required to start the process, which could be
> available within the next decades, making the Temporal Singularity
> theoretically possible before the end of the century.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Giacomo Spigler
>
>
> *Artificial General Intelligence List *
> / AGI / see discussions  +
> participants  + delivery
> options  Permalink
> 
>

--
Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI
Permalink: 
https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T81817474dba9a838-Mec208f563a9a49d77a40683d
Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups