Our Explicate Order
Entities in the Explicate Order are a renderings from the Implicate Order. The 3 spatial dimensions and the animate dimension in our reality well are an empty canvas for the Implicate Order to paint on.
The existence of any sentient being seems to be driven by goals. Birds will seek to reproduce, seek food, seek shelter, seek. Humans do the same. Even parasites have a goal. Goal based AI is a powerful concept. It appears there is nothing wrong with adopting this approach. Via a goal set 'organisms' can 'self organise' around the goal. When the goal changes, so can the organisation to satisfy it. The trick seems to be in setting a goal, and the right one. Doing this automatically yields something approaching sentience. In that an entity can be at 'union with its cosmos' by setting a valid goal and achieving it. This holds for propagation of a species of an entity as it does for getting from A to B. Everything can be viewed as a search. So the mystic idea of being at one with the cosmos holds true - for AI as it does for humans and animals. When a mystic talks of being at one with the cosmos, this can be equated as building a model of the cosmos an entity inhabits, so that it can achieve meaningful behaviour within that cosmos. Seeking peace is the ultimate goal, hence the section on it. All bodies will eventually come to rest - or in AI terms - reach a goal or settle into a configuration, be at peace. According to Jack Sarfatti and David Bohm, God does not role dice with the universe in classical physics.God does roll dice with the universe in quantum mechanics. However, God loads the dice with consciousness in post-quantum mechanics. Could 'God loading the dice' be another way of saying 'sets a goal, or direction' ?
What is Intelligence ?
This link considers the 6 Six basic manifestations of co-intelligence.
In the AI swarm, a swarm collectively exhibits intelligence, as does each individual member.
http://www.co-intelligence.org/I-6_CI_manifestations.html
Brain Quantum Information Processing
The argument that brains process information using quantum principles, which holds that searching for global minima is not obtainable in polynomial time and are therefore too inefficient to work in our observable time. Hence the supposition for quantum principles at play. The fact that some posit that the passage of time is relative, makes this theory ambiguous. Some have also argued that the brain must be operating slightly in the future based on measured response time from human subjects. This is still a very important theory to consider and rifles some of the theory here. If the brain is operating slightly into the future, then can it be argued that is is 'virtually' operating in another time frame ? Lets try and work it out - in our new meta-physical language.
A single trace on an Nth circuit can lead to many manifestations in another or the same Nth circuit. Its at this point that """we evade "electromagnetic chauvinism" and realize that "The greatest is within the smallest.""" Its at this point that we perceive of an Implicate presence. Why ? Because at this point, we realise that there exist the concept of abstraction (moving to higher dimensionality) and recombination (moving to a lower dimension). Abstraction is a meta-physical construct that acts as the transition gate between successive orders of dimensionality. It is idempotent. It operates in both directions. The brain is doing this ever so slightly ahead of your nervous system, creating the illusion of time.
Simultaneity
Special relativity has shown that the concept of simultaneity is not universal: observers in different frames of reference will have different perceptions of which events are in the future and which are in the past -- there is no way to definitively identify a particular point in universal time as "the present"[citation needed]. However, each observer could have an individual flow of time, rather than there being a universal present moment.
http://www.fiu.edu/~mizrachs/quantum-process.html
8 brain mind meta-model
This breaks the human brain down into more specific 'gears', or 'circuits'. These are centres of brain 'software' that we all have. This is a hypothesis technically. I use it to partition the semiotics in my artificial bio-cell, that is part of the current model.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8-Circuit_Model_of_Consciousness
Imprint Vulnerability
This is the idea that the circuits above - at key points in the biological entities life (for humans its birth, puberty etc) one or more circuits will be vulnerable to being changed. This is needed to ensure rapid adoption of rules for the entities survival. In an AI network, there may be times when the network is in 'learning mode' and this is the equivalent of being 'imprint vulnerable'.
http://www.deeptrancenow.com/imprints.htm
Jungian Collective Unconscious
This theory from Carl Jung captures the idea that biological entities of a single classification, such as humans, or birds or bees etc, have common traits, both physical, intellectual and behavioural. He argues that some of this 'meta-information' exists deep in the psyche of the biological entity in a virtual place called its collective unconscious. He uses these arguments for further study into things such as Synchronicities (where entities may experience a similar phenomenon, even though the entities are not linked physically - or entities experience events that are linked at a much deeper, closer to implicate order, level)
In an AI network, the rules that may be arrived at dynamically and shared with the group represent a collective unconscious. These rules represent emergence in the biological entity. This yields the meta-physical algebraic and / or possibly the fractal result of 1 + 1 = 3.
http://www.kheper.net/topics/Jung/collective_unconscious.html
Emergence
Emergence is the ability for a system to generate meta-information that has use in its current environment.
The reason this principle is important for biological intelligence is that in ALL intelligent systems something called Emergence occurs at some stage - and this phenomenon is not fully understood at present. It has been recreated in the Lab - but literally only in the last couple years with any tangible real-world success.
Any AI network capable of generating its own meaningful rules is exhibiting emergence. From above, 1 + 1 = 3.
http://technology.newscientist.com/article/dn10319-robot-swarm-works-together-to-shift-heavy-objects.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.