From: Simon Gordon (sim_dizzy@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Aug 16 2004 - 15:56:21 MDT
Hi Randall, thanks for keeping this sub-thread going.
:))
--- Randall Randall <randall@randallsquared.com>
wrote:
> On Aug 13, 2004, at 1:54 PM, Simon Gordon wrote:
> > This topic
> > has profound implications for AI. I am basically
> > saying that human intelligence is not necessarily
> > reducible to math, and even if it was, that would
> be
> > irrelevant to the functioning of the intelligence
> > anyway. If we want to replicate human intelligence
> in
> > a machine from the ground-up, the "all is math"
> > mentality needs to change.
>
> But machines are math. :)
> I actually agree with you that it isn't clear that
> our universe *is* math,
Actually that is not my view. To me it *is* clear that
this universe is math because this universe is a
well-defined unique space, all such spaces occupy
their place in the mathematical subsector of the
platonosphere. Even if there was no compressiblity or
no TOE to unify the regularities, in essence it would
still be just a bunch of numbers.
However human intellect is sufficiently complex as to
have the capability of understanding and abstractly
manipulating things which are not even part of this
universe and therefore not necessarily reducible to
math. Examples of this are: parallel universes,
qualia, software programs, memetics, possible
sociopolitical orders, kilometers, set theory,
infinity, fairytales, etc -the list is pretty much
endless. Some of these are obviously math-based, some
not so; but none of them are actually part of the
physical hardware of this universe. Humans are not
number crunchers; we dont understand all these
abstractions via reduction to numerals and equations,
we understand them via neighbouring concepts,
associations, metaphors and analogues.
Personally I believe that this kind of higher level
reasoning doesnt correlate at all well to the
mathematical underpinnings of our chemical/physical
wetware and it might well be proven that some "neural
knots" might be just implicitly too complex to
untangle. In those cases language might have a better
shot at actually translating what cannot be expressed
in pure math. I can already think of several examples
of concepts which havent got a hope in hell of being
written down in mathematical notation, yet can be
expressed with a single word...
If someonone wants to tell me to shutup for 2 months,
i wont be offended. :-)
Simon Gordon.
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:22:43 MST