RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (25) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Jerry Don Bauer's Thread, Lather, Rinse, Repeat< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 5299
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 07 2012,00:24   

Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 06 2012,22:59)
But the "intelligence" in the described simulator is in the simulator, not in the thing being simulated.

What people here are objecting to is the implied claim that the object of the simulation has intelligence, but when the object being simulated is merely reacting, and not thinking or remembering, it doesn't. That's whether what it's reacting to is a fundamental force, or a smell that attracts or repels.

When modeling something that is intelligent such as an insect or even human it is in the simulator because it's also in what is being modeled.

It is not until Confidence and/or Guess is no longer in the circuit that it is merely reacting, not thinking or remembering. When all four requirements are there it is very "aware" in a robotic sense, be it that awareness does not have to be consciousness.

It just so happens that Jerry's hypothesis (that there is something intelligent at the QM behavior of matter level that they predicted is true) led to where you must passionately predict it is has to be false = not intelligent. I think the odds are in your favor, so I'm more or less with you there. And your odds would increase where it is not that hard to get the QM based model to be all-knowing, not need to be intelligent. But if for some reason (I can't think of either) it makes a great model only when it remains intelligent then Jerry's hypothesis would have odds of being true going in their favor.  

Being able to include what "intelligence" adds to a model then take that away (so it's then only like you said "merely reacting") actually does make it ideal for testing Jerry's hypothesis. If you do not think so then show me a better model to test it with and we'll go with that instead.

Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 06 2012,22:59)
Oh, and for simulations of atoms that may have more than one electron, the state of the atom would have to include the energy levels of the electrons (i.e., which shell and subshell are they in).


Energy states can be important. I expect though that the best memory usage and results are at the more elementary particle level where bots represent quarks and such, not atoms. Atoms should hold together and achieve energy states on their own. You then know all the variables and data needed, is much easier to sum that group behavior to single atom/particle behavior.

The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

  740 replies since Nov. 21 2012,08:55 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (25) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]