Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2009-01-01 Thread Steve Richfield
J. Andrew, On 1/1/09, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > > > On Jan 1, 2009, at 2:35 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > >> Since "digital" and "analog" are the same thing computationally ("digital" >> is a subset of "analog"), and non-digital computers have been generally >> superior for several decades, this

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2009-01-01 Thread Abram Demski
Ben, A few points concerning the central argument: --Reading the argument again, I again mistakenly interpreted it the way I had the first time (until I recalled the details of our previous discussion). The presentation of the argument causes me to assume that U is some kind of oracle directly ac

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2009-01-01 Thread J. Andrew Rogers
On Jan 1, 2009, at 2:35 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: Since "digital" and "analog" are the same thing computationally ("digital" is a subset of "analog"), and non-digital computers have been generally superior for several decades, this is not relevant. Gah, that should be *digital* computers

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2009-01-01 Thread J. Andrew Rogers
On Dec 30, 2008, at 11:45 AM, Steve Richfield wrote: Bingo! You have to "tailor" the techniques to the problem - more than just "solving the equations", but often the representation of quantities needs to be in some sort of multivalued form. What I meant is that if the standard algebraic r

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-30 Thread Steve Richfield
J. Andrew, On 12/30/08, J. Andrew Rogers wrote: > > > On Dec 30, 2008, at 12:51 AM, Steve Richfield wrote: > >> On a side note, there is the "clean" math that people learn on their way >> to a math PhD, and then there is the "dirty" math that governs physical >> systems. Dirty math is fraught wit

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-30 Thread Ben Goertzel
I'm heading off on a vacation for 4-5 days [with occasional email access] and will probably respond to this when i get back ... just wanted to let you know I'm not ignoring the question ;-) ben On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 1:26 PM, William Pearson wrote: > 2008/12/30 Ben Goertzel : > > > > It seems t

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-30 Thread William Pearson
2008/12/30 Ben Goertzel : > > It seems to come down to the simplicity measure... if you can have > > simplicity(Turing program P that generates lookup table T) > < > simplicity(compressed lookup table T) > > then the Turing program P can be considered part of a scientific > explanation... > Can yo

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-30 Thread Ben Goertzel
It seems to come down to the simplicity measure... if you can have simplicity(Turing program P that generates lookup table T) < simplicity(compressed lookup table T) then the Turing program P can be considered part of a scientific explanation... On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 10:02 AM, William Pearson

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-30 Thread William Pearson
2008/12/29 Ben Goertzel : > > Hi, > > I expanded a previous blog entry of mine on hypercomputation and AGI into a > conference paper on the topic ... here is a rough draft, on which I'd > appreciate commentary from anyone who's knowledgeable on the subject: > > http://goertzel.org/papers/CognitiveI

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-30 Thread J. Andrew Rogers
On Dec 30, 2008, at 12:51 AM, Steve Richfield wrote: On a side note, there is the "clean" math that people learn on their way to a math PhD, and then there is the "dirty" math that governs physical systems. Dirty math is fraught with all sorts of multi- valued functions, fundamental uncertai

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-30 Thread Steve Richfield
Ben, I read your paper and have the following observations... >From 1968-1970, I was the in-house numerical analysis and computer consultant at the University of Washington departments of Physics and Astronomy. At that time, Ira Karp, then the physics grad student who had been a grad student long

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-29 Thread J. Andrew Rogers
On Dec 29, 2008, at 1:22 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote: Well, some of the papers in the references of my paper give formal mathematical definitions of hypercomputation, though my paper is brief and conceptual and not of that nature. So although the generic concept may be muddled, there are cert

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-29 Thread Ben Goertzel
Well, some of the papers in the references of my paper give formal mathematical definitions of hypercomputation, though my paper is brief and conceptual and not of that nature. So although the generic concept may be muddled, there are certainly some fully precise variants of it. This paper survey

Re: [agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-29 Thread J. Andrew Rogers
On Dec 29, 2008, at 10:45 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: I expanded a previous blog entry of mine on hypercomputation and AGI into a conference paper on the topic ... here is a rough draft, on which I'd appreciate commentary from anyone who's knowledgeable on the subject: http://goertzel.org/pap

[agi] Hypercomputation and AGI

2008-12-29 Thread Ben Goertzel
Hi, I expanded a previous blog entry of mine on hypercomputation and AGI into a conference paper on the topic ... here is a rough draft, on which I'd appreciate commentary from anyone who's knowledgeable on the subject: http://goertzel.org/papers/CognitiveInformaticsHypercomputationPaper.pdf Thi