RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (412) < ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... >   
  Topic: A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin, As big as the poop that does not look< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
fnxtr



Posts: 2153
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,13:45   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,11:29)
I'm still waiting for a sensible way of differentiation trial and error learning from evolution at the conceptual level.

Recognizing differences in the hardware implementation.


Apparently basic chemistry and physics is "intelligent".

Like the old joke about explaining a ThermosTM to the old fart.

"What does it do?"
"It keeps hot things hot, and cold things cold."
"How does it know?"

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Robin



Posts: 1430
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,14:32   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 07 2012,23:25)
Science is no longer about answering questions people have.  It's all about making excuses for not having any answers.

"Maaaaaahhhhmmm! I don't like this mean science stuff! The rules are too hard! And...and...the science types...they expect me to do actual work and SHOW it! Why won't they let me use my own definition of science so that I can prove what I want to without having to do anything!! Waaahhh!! Waaahh!"

I know Barbie, it's tough having to go along with the rules, but you're a big boy now. Time to put on those big boy pants. Oh c'mon. I know, it's so hard...

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,14:44   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,11:29)
I'm still waiting for a sensible way of differentiation trial and error learning from evolution at the conceptual level.

Recognizing differences in the hardware implementation.

In evolution, "who" is doing the learning?  The gene pool?  The universe?

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
JohnW



Posts: 2296
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,15:12   

Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 08 2012,11:45)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,11:29)
I'm still waiting for a sensible way of differentiation trial and error learning from evolution at the conceptual level.

Recognizing differences in the hardware implementation.


Apparently basic chemistry and physics is "intelligent".

Like the old joke about explaining a ThermosTM to the old fart.

"What does it do?"
"It keeps hot things hot, and cold things cold."
"How does it know?"

That's the sense* I got too.  Anything non-random is "intelligent", and he's not sure yet about random.





* Possibly the first ever use of the word "sense" in association with Gary's screed.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Henry J



Posts: 4098
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,15:15   

Quote (keiths @ Nov. 08 2012,13:44)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,11:29)
I'm still waiting for a sensible way of differentiation trial and error learning from evolution at the conceptual level.

Recognizing differences in the hardware implementation.

In evolution, "who" is doing the learning?  The gene pool?  The universe?

I'm inclined to say the gene pool. An evolving gene pool has at least a couple of the attributes we associate with intelligence - it experiments, and it keeps a record of what works. Granted, it doesn't keep a record of what to avoid in the future, it doesn't think ahead, or at all, really.

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2153
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,15:49   

Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 08 2012,13:15)
Quote (keiths @ Nov. 08 2012,13:44)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,11:29)
I'm still waiting for a sensible way of differentiation trial and error learning from evolution at the conceptual level.

Recognizing differences in the hardware implementation.

In evolution, "who" is doing the learning?  The gene pool?  The universe?

I'm inclined to say the gene pool. An evolving gene pool has at least a couple of the attributes we associate with intelligence - it experiments, and it keeps a record of what works. Granted, it doesn't keep a record of what to avoid in the future, it doesn't think ahead, or at all, really.

History is written by the winners.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,15:50   

Quote (keiths @ Nov. 08 2012,15:44)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,11:29)
I'm still waiting for a sensible way of differentiation trial and error learning from evolution at the conceptual level.

Recognizing differences in the hardware implementation.

In evolution, "who" is doing the learning?  The gene pool?  The universe?

you're mom

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 3434
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,15:58   

That was a good question to ask them keiths!  And ironically I did not bother responding to the usual insults, to instead spent some time catching up on other theory related work, including better piecing together the Introduction to the booklet version of the theory (classroom workbook).  This will help provide a coherent answer to your question.

Considering how the text of theory is still being ignored, I'll have to post the Introduction here:


Introduction – Intelligence, Intelligent Cause

The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, a nonrandom force guided self-assembly  process whereby an intelligent entity is emergent from another intelligent entity in levels of increasingly complex organization producing self-similar entities systematically in their own image, likeness. As in a fractal, multiple designs are produced by an algorithm producing emergent fractal-similar designs at the next size scale (atom -> molecule -> cell -> multicellular).



Large arrows show this emergent causative pathway from behavior of matter (a Behavioral Cause) and intelligence from intelligence (an Intelligent Cause). The last arrow to Multicellular Intelligence indicates a predicted sudden event scientifically witnessed by the fossil record known as the Cambrian Explosion which will be covered in a section of its own. Shown in the lower half of the illustration is a simplified block-flow diagram of the same cognitive/intelligence system  that is at each level of the progression shown above it.

Successful designs remain in the biosphere’s interconnected collective (RNA/DNA) memory to help keep going the billions year old cycle of life. We are the result of a molecular learning process that keeps itself going through time by replicating previous contents of genetic memory along with good (better than random) guesses what may work better in the next replication, children. Resulting cladogram shows a progression of adapting designs evidenced by the fossil record where never once was there not a predecessor of similar design (which can at times lead to entirely new function) present in memory for the descendant design to have come from.  

Behavior of matter is produced by electromagnetic force created atomic bonds and intermolecular interactions (covalent, polar covalent, van der Waals polar force, ionic, metallic, hydrogen) and follows the “laws of physics”. This is covered by Atomic Theory, which describes the atoms in the model’s particle system environment. Behavior of matter can only respond to exteroceptive stimuli one way, such as bonding with another molecule or not, therefore has two of four requirements for intelligence (but does not by itself qualify as intelligence). It is not possible to rule out intelligence at this behavior level, but with no scientific evidence existing for this the behavior of matter is assumed to not require intelligence to produce intelligence, the origin of intelligent life.



As in physics algorithms, there is a Time Step.  Each particle/entity in the virtual environment is something to CONTROL that is moved a small amount each time according to surrounding forces/conditions acting upon it.  What response to take in a given condition is stored in a memory that is addressed by sensory that produces a unique action response for each environmental situation the particle can encounter. Memory can be here thought of as a binary digital RAM or analog neural network that has in it a truth table to produce the behavior for each kind of atom.

For modeling purposes where a “Behavior” produces an emergent intelligence the behavior that created it can be thought of as being “all knowing” in the sense that the behavior is inherent, does not have to learn its responses.  A computer model then starts off with this behavior already in RAM or ROM and has no GUESS or CONFIDENCE included in the algorithm, as does intelligence.  Memory contents then never changes, in this model only a GUESS writes data to MEMORY.

Intelligence is not a lifeless mass responding to physical forces by drifting downstream, intelligence can do such things as decide to swim upstream instead. In a complete physics model where all matter obeys physical laws, intelligence is an emergent deterministic internal force inside (then living) things that “at will” becomes an outside force causing change in motion to matter around it.

Intelligent behavior results in an entity with the ability to self-learn.  The flowchart becomes:

 

Intelligence is here operationally defined by how it works: Intelligence is an autonomous sensory-feedback (confidence) guided sensory addressed memory system that through trial-and-error learns new successful actions to be taken in response to environmental conditions.  In addition to something to CONTROL and MEMORY there must be one or more CONFIDENCE levels gauging failure or success of its motor actions towards reaching the goal and a way to GUESS motor actions when a successful response does not yet exist.  A good-guess is based upon existing knowledge.  A random-guess is the last resort and only has to be "random" to the intelligence.  For example where one must produce "random numbers" for another to guess they may use their phone number, which to them is not a random string of numbers, but to the other person who does not know their phone number it is a random string of numbers.  What is most important for something to be "random" is that the intelligence perceives it as such.

Confidence gauges whether it is getting closer to its goal or not.  In0/Out0 is a 4 state (count of 0-3) or more analog signal that recalls confidence level which increases each time the action worked, decreases when it failed, upon reaching 0 a Guess is taken. In a most simple chemotaxis system Guess and Motor are combined, changing motor direction produces a tumble/guess where to go next.  Only a single memory location is then required.

We know when we need to take a guess, or have an action response we are confident will work.  To a newborn baby, almost everything is a new experience. No memory at all of what to do is then sensed by Out0 being 0 which then causes a guess to be taken.  Responses that work are stored with increasing confidence, for as long as it keeps working, but confidence level does not need to increase past 3 for a good model. In bacteria the interoceptive sensors would simply be metabolic pathway molecules reporting motor condition back to the sensory end of the system to provide time delay that through Confidence being restored by that action switches motor back to swimming after tumble has been completed.

There should always be an easily recognizable circuit where each part works with others in a certain way.  This includes motors/muscles where there are expected to be two connections to the memory/brain.  The input connects to the data action outputs of a Random Access Memory controlling it.  The output is a sensory feedback signal to RAM addressing that adds (usually subconscious) awareness of the muscle action.  This sensory output can be from other sensors not directly connected to, such as touch sensors on skin that “feel” muscles moving or eye sensing travel direction.  Without at least indirect sensory feedback of motor actions addressing RAM the system has no way to know whether the motor has in turn produced the expected action, or not.

Although not a circuit requirement (as in the four above) there should be the production of regular detectable synchronized cycles, as the algorithm/system keeps repeating the one thought at a time process.  Where these cycles are no longer present then the intelligence is nonfunctional.

Where a system is missing one or more requirements we have a system that may appear to be intelligent but would only qualify as a protointelligent behavior.  This is true where the sensor(s) connect directly to the motors in a way that keeps the system on course, but does not learn how to control itself.  There must be a memory system between sensors and motors being controlled.  An example so simple it is almost cheating is the E.coli chemotaxis system where chemoreceptors address a single memory location that increases or decreases according to the amount of chemical being sensed, and when it is going the wrong way tumbles to try another direction.

Being self-learning, given enough time, intelligence will produce the next emergent level of intelligence when it learns how to achieve it.  Large numbers of rudimentary intelligences are predicted to have a tendency to spontaneously produce easily detectable and measurable emergent intelligence at the next level.  No computer code is needed, entities learn how to on their own.  Demonstrating this intelligent cause/causation would require many intelligent entities with rudimentary intelligence which self-assemble (at higher complexity is also called self-organize) to produce an emergent intelligence, much the same way a molecular genome produces a living cell, or living cells produced us.

Because of atom by atom computing being too memory intensive to computer model a large volume of matter, macromolecules can be approximated in the next level above atoms where it is no longer an atom by atom particle system physics problem, there are instead (combination of atoms) molecules each with unique behavior that can be summed up as a unique single entity (in the same way as classic Argon particle system describes all argon atoms but instead as molecular binding/reaction site dynamics of all its atoms combined). Macromolecules next self-assemble to form cells, which likewise can also be modeled at the next level by just modeling the cellular detail where a muscle cells are a regular spherical shape that shortens in length during contraction. And that can next be taken another step as is demonstrated by the Intelligence Design Lab where the behavior of many sensors and neurons/synapse is summed up to form the brain that connects to muscle cells that control muscles that can also send dirt particles flying or (as is the case in the Lab) simply propel it on a flat surface without disturbing anything. It is not necessary to start at the atomic level we only need to properly sum up one level to the next to produce a representative model. We must also keep in mind that with a computer it is easy to model a perfect memory that never forgets. In some ways the intelligence may be too perfect to be biologically possible, but at least it is easy to achieve that perfection, here made possible by the reliability of computer RAM to hold data

Reciprocal causation brings all of our complex intelligence related behaviors back to the behavior of matter where it's basic physics, that begins with common particle systems such as for modeling Argon (and other) atoms on a parallel processing GPU. Here all argon atoms are alike, as well as helium, carbon and all of the other elements and their isotopes. This regular atomic structure becomes the fundamental starting point for models like this where atoms combine to form molecules, molecules combine to form cells, and cells combine to produce multicellular organisms.

The reciprocal causation pathway goes from one level to the next but not directly from brain to matter, because just thinking about digging a hole in the ground does not propel virtual soil particles through air. There is first a neural connection between brain and muscle cells, then a neural feedback connection from the muscle cells back to the brain. After the muscle cells successfully receive this signal to contract it next has to convert that signal into a pulling "force" by powering its internal motor protein molecules, and like any other motor it needs energy to make it move on command and where that has run out there will be no digging either because it will then be too weak to move. There is no force applied to the digging limb until the molecular level systems have actually produced muscle force, to apply force to the limb accelerating soil particles into the air to dig a hole in an otherwise perfectly flat environment.

For sake of theory, “consciousness” is considered to be in addition to intelligence, otherwise the most rudimentary forms of intelligence and even simple algorithm generated computer models of intelligent processes would have to be expected to be conscious of their existing inside of a personal computer.  It is not possible to rule-out electronic or algorithmic consciousness existing, therefore even though it is not expected to exist in a computer model it is still possible that any functioning intelligence system is somehow conscious of their existence.  In either case, consciousness is not a requirement for intelligence, and here must be considered to be in addition to intelligence.

http://theoryofid.blogspot.com/....pot....pot.com

--------------
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.

   
Quack



Posts: 1786
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,16:14   

The only thing I'd like to see clarified is the "Ability to take a GUESS". Is the use of UC letters in "guess" of any particular significance? A higher order kind of guess, not just a wet finger in the air to guess which way the wind blows?

The rest is kindergarten stuff.

--------------
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.
                                                                                               Richard Feynman

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3335
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,16:55   

Where is the memory in a bacteria?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 3434
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,17:00   

Quote (Quack @ Nov. 08 2012,16:14)
The only thing I'd like to see clarified is the "Ability to take a GUESS". Is the use of UC letters in "guess" of any particular significance? A higher order kind of guess, not just a wet finger in the air to guess which way the wind blows?

The rest is kindergarten stuff.

The theory has a separate section for each intelligence level, with examples of how a guess is accomplished by each.  A quick answer would be:

Molecular Intelligence:  Transpositions.

Cellular Intelligence: Tumbling.

Multicellular Intelligence: Induced neural response change.

Algorithmic Intelligence: Random generator.

Electronic Intelligence: Zener diode noise into RAM motor Data In pins.

I'm not sure what you mean by "use of UC letters" other than that being part of the RNA alphabet.

--------------
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.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 3434
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,17:05   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 08 2012,16:55)
Where is the memory in a bacteria?

From theory:

Quote
REQUIREMENT #2 of 4 – SENSORY ADDRESSABLE MEMORY

E.coli senses chemoeffector gradients in temporal fashion (recall series of readings/conditions back in time) by comparing current concentrations to those encountered over the past few seconds of travel, a single element reversible methylation temporal memory, to navigate its environment.

Cellular (and molecular intelligence) can include “plasmid exchange” memories which is a very useful form of communication between members of a bacterial colony where all share tiny circular loops of genetic information, mostly only share with its own kind.  When one finds a useful solution to a given environmental situation all others around soon know it ahead of time.  The entire colony of bacteria cells functions as a single organism.  In plasmid exchange cells conjugate, bump into another then wait for plasmids they do not have yet to be copied/learned then look for another to conjugate with.  To a cell, some plasmids can be like a harmful disabling/traumatizing parasite.

Only germline cells that divide to become egg and sperm cells must accurately copy the full genetic memory.  After germline cells fuse (fertilization) they begin to modify their genome as much as is necessary to achieve differentiation into a specialized cell. It is here changing in morphology in response to its environment to be able to survive one cellular lifetime.  During development of the organism many kinds of cells (muscle and skin cells, neurons, etc.) with many cellular intelligence behaviors are produced by the germline cells which remain the same through time to produce the eggs and sperm of another generation.

See:
An overview of E. coli chemotaxis, Parkinson Lab, Department Of Biology – University Of Utah
http://chemotaxis.biology.utah.edu/Parkins....is.html


--------------
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.

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3591
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,17:20   

Quote (keiths @ Nov. 08 2012,14:44)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,11:29)
I'm still waiting for a sensible way of differentiation trial and error learning from evolution at the conceptual level.

Recognizing differences in the hardware implementation.

In evolution, "who" is doing the learning?  The gene pool?  The universe?

The population's genome is the memory being modified by experience.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 3434
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,17:25   

I just noticed that the reference link to the Parkinson Lab overview is down.  Since it is a nice page I'll wait before removing it from the text.  You should be able to easily find more detail by searching with keywords "e.coli chemotaxis" then focus on the motor switching circuit, here the one bit "memory".

--------------
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.

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3335
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,17:46   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 08 2012,17:05)
Let's see if I can translate this properly.

Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 08 2012,16:55)
Where is the memory in a bacteria?

From theory:

 
Quote
REQUIREMENT #2 of 4 – SENSORY ADDRESSABLE MEMORY

E.coli senses chemoeffector gradients in temporal fashion


Actually I'd like a definition of "senses" and if this is internal chemical gradients (chemoeffector is goobledity gook) or external.

It sense them across time... just like everything else.

Quote

(recall series of readings/conditions back in time)

You are assuming memory here, not supporting it.

Quote


by comparing current concentrations to those encountered over the past few seconds of travel

I disagree with that this is how this occurs.  Cite your references that this actually occurs.

Quote

, a single element reversible methylation temporal memory, to navigate its environment.

Again, you're assuming that this is memory, not supporting it.

Quote


Cellular (and molecular intelligence) can include “plasmid exchange”


So, DNA is the memory.  

Do you know why scientists don't consider DNA to be memory?  Here's a hint... Cognitive neuroscientists consider memory as the retention, reactivation, and reconstruction of the experience-independent internal representation.

DNA does not encode experience.

Quote

memories which is a very useful form of communication

Cite a reference for this.  Plasmid exchange is a form of sharing genes... not memories.  Although, you've pretty much changed the definition of memory to the point where it's meaningless.

Quote


between members of a bacterial colony where all share tiny circular loops of genetic information, mostly only share with its own kind.


Cite your evidence for this... because it's wrong.

Quote

 When one finds a useful solution to a given environmental situation all others around soon know it ahead of time.


So, bacteria are precognitive??  Because that's what your words are saying.  That bacteria will know what a useful solution is ahead of the need for it.

But again, since bacteria have no cognitive ability, how are they 'knowing' anything?  But, I guess you think that bacteria are intelligent too.

Quote

 The entire colony of bacteria cells functions as a single organism.


Umm.... no it doesn't.  Only if you redefine "single organism" to include every living thing on the planet.

Quote


 In plasmid exchange cells conjugate, bump into another then wait for plasmids they do not have yet to be copied/learned then look for another to conjugate with.


Is this really what they do?  Cite a reference please.

Quote


 To a cell, some plasmids can be like a harmful disabling/traumatizing parasite.

Cite a reference please.

Quote

Only germline cells that divide to become egg and sperm cells must accurately copy the full genetic memory.

But bacteria don't do this, so what is the point?

Also, you're wrong.  There is no genetic memory.  There is, however, genetic changes in somatic cells that can have major implications for the rest of the organism.  Perhaps you've heard of this situation.  It's called 'cancer'.
Quote


 After germline cells fuse (fertilization) they begin to modify their genome


Bullshit.  I don't believe you.  This is the kind of thing that makes people look at you like you have two heads.  Most of them are thinking "how does he remember to breathe?"

I want any single piece of evidence that the embryo MODIFIES its genome.  I triple dog dare you to link to any peer-reviewed evidence that supports this.

Of course, if you read peer-reviewed research instead of just making shit up, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

So, I'm calling you out on this one.  It is total and complete made-up bullshit.

Quote



as much as is necessary to achieve differentiation into a specialized cell.

Really?  Tell me, do skin cells have a different genome from liver cells?  Because that's what you are saying.

Quote



It is here changing in morphology in response to its environment to be able to survive one cellular lifetime.


So a cell, within its lifetime, can actively change its morphology?!?!?  Citation please.  Because I'm calling BS on this one too.

Do you even know what morphology means?

Quote



 During development of the organism many kinds of cells (muscle and skin cells, neurons, etc.) with many cellular intelligence behaviors


So, your definition of intelligence is behavior?  So, oceans are intelligent.  They have many different behaviors and are affected by and affect their environment.  Waves even transmit information.

Quote



are produced by the germline cells which remain the same through time to produce the eggs and sperm of another generation.


Bullshit.  Citation please.

Quote

See:
An overview of E. coli chemotaxis, Parkinson Lab, Department Of Biology – University Of Utah
http://chemotaxis.biology.utah.edu/Parkins....is.html


You might want to check this link as there appears to be no such thing at utah.edu.  

Several links to the genetics and biology department pop-right up, but this one doesn't seem to exist.

Tell you what, since your link is all busted and everything, let's go see what your favorite resource (Wikipedia) has to say on the subject of chemotaxis.

Chemotaxis is NOT memory... again, unless you totally redefine 'memory'.  

Basically what you are describing, in very complex terms (and with many, many mistakes) is evolution and chemotaxis, which is a chemical response system.

This is just one of those cases where some weird interpretations of words result in complete confusion on his part.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3335
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,17:55   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 08 2012,17:25)
I just noticed that the reference link to the Parkinson Lab overview is down.  Since it is a nice page I'll wait before removing it from the text.  You should be able to easily find more detail by searching with keywords "e.coli chemotaxis" then focus on the motor switching circuit, here the one bit "memory".

It is only arguably memory in that it is, as you said, one bit memory.  

I think you are conflating the existence of memory with intelligence.

Trees "remember" their entire existence in the form of growth rings.  This does not mean that they can discuss their memories.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
fnxtr



Posts: 2153
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,18:06   

Yeah, I gave up at    
Quote
Each particle/entity in the virtual environment is something to CONTROL that is moved a small amount each time according to surrounding forces/conditions acting upon it.  What response to take in a given condition is stored in a memory that is addressed by sensory that produces a unique action response for each environmental situation the particle can encounter.


You are truly unable to distinguish between your virtual environment and the real world, aren't you.

Since you like hyperlinks so much.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 3434
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,18:16   

I just put this one on-deck so it's ready to go at any time.  

Evanescence - What You Want

The conspiracy (as opposed to scientific) theorists at least have perfect timing!  

--------------
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.

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10310
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,19:04   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 08 2012,18:16)
I just put this one on-deck so it's ready to go at any time.  

Evanescence - What You Want

The conspiracy (as opposed to scientific) theorists at least have perfect timing!  

Gary, your highly equivocal use of theory above simpy reinforces the facts that you don't undertand what a scientific theory is and that you don't have one.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,19:26   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Nov. 08 2012,13:50)
Quote (keiths @ Nov. 08 2012,15:44)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,11:29)
I'm still waiting for a sensible way of differentiation trial and error learning from evolution at the conceptual level.

Recognizing differences in the hardware implementation.

In evolution, "who" is doing the learning?  The gene pool?  The universe?

you're mom

'Ras,

Get back to Honey Boo-boo and your Three's Company reruns.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3591
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,19:30   

I don't know who this is in response to, but genomes do encode the experience of populations. Perhaps there is some confusion in terminology because some meanings of experience imply consciousness.

But genomes encode the successful guesses of populations that vary. Experience is encoded because some guesses have higher reproductive success. This may be due to greater fitness or it may be due to luck. But it always encodes fitness.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4511
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,20:20   

Gary seems to think that he can post a bunch of claims, make excuses as to why he shouldn't be held accountable to support or retract them, and that they will eventually be forgotten. This is a time-honored antievolutionist tactic, after all. Who could be bothered to dig back through the forum to see whether he's left things hanging? The answer for that is a periodic posting of a summary of such items, to make sure that folks tuning in late are apprised of just what sort of correspondent they have at hand. And so I give you the first posting of the...




Periodically Posted List of Abandoned or Unsupported Claims: Gary Gaulin Edition

1. Citric Acid Cycle Description

The claim

       
Quote

Control Of Krebs Cycle By Molecular Intelligence

In living things molecular intelligence is seen controlling what self-assembles from the powerful Krebs Cycle that has become the core metabolic cycle of cells. It is the power plant and factory where a dozen or so catalytic molecules (protein, mineral or other) are drawn to metabolic pathway assembly lines that makes a copy of the molecule it started with every time around the circle. It does this by adding a non-chiral (structurally identical) mirror image of the starting molecule then when the cycle is completed it breaks in half resulting in two identical copies.



At any stage through the assembly cycle a molecule of proper fit may be drawn by molecular forces into a nearby self-assembly interaction to where it fits. At least part of the Reverse Krebs Cycle is catalyzed by volcanic clay/dust/mineral in sunlight making it possible that the cycle was once common planetary chemistry.[11][12]

Where there is no molecular intelligence present the Krebs Cycle would not be able to produce cells and exist regardless of molecular intelligence being present or not to control it. A rudimentary intelligence may actually be challenged to keep up with its production rate but not necessarily be destroyed by periods of overproduction.

Intelligence to exploit this cycle could easily form in its local environment. Once active it would have little problem controlling this existing metabolism. We can here predict self-assembly of a precellular starter mechanism that produces a genome from scratch, instead of a genome first being required to produce this intelligence.


The request for documentation

Response

Status: Abandoned. Bizarre, false-to-fact description of the citric acid cycle is left unretracted as if it supported Gaulin's concept of "molecular intelligence".

2. Gaulin Code v. Evolutionary Computation

The claim

       
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 05 2012,06:45)

The theory is for modeling reality. Current EA's and GA's are baby-toys in comparison. Best way to prove that, is for you to try it for yourself.


(Emphasis added.)

     
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 06 2012,22:21)

[...] It's more technologically demanding, but as I earlier mentioned the model puts EA's and GA's to shame, as though they are baby-toys. [...]


(Emphasis added.)

The request for documentation

Response

Status: Abandoned. Complete refusal to divulge the substance of the comparisons that Gaulin claims he already has made.

3. Gaulin Code, the Traveling Salesman Problem, and Computational Complexity Theory

The claim

     
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 07 2012,05:39)

I have no doubt that it would easily solve the Traveling Salesman Problem. [...]


Request for documentation

Response

Status: Abandoned. After making ignorant and bizarre claims about computational complexity theory ("It's a collection of AI techniques"), Gaulin decided to stop responding to requests to demonstrate these claims.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Henry J



Posts: 4098
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,20:40   

At this point, I'm left with the impression that he's taking what science already has, and tacking the word "intelligence" in a bunch of places where it adds nothing useful to the concepts.

Henry

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4511
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,20:45   

Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 08 2012,20:40)
At this point, I'm left with the impression that he's taking what science already has, and tacking the word "intelligence" in a bunch of places where it adds nothing useful to the concepts.

Henry

There are several people who have decided that the best approach is to now re-label unexceptionable parts of science as "intelligent design". Later on, the DI™ components can be smuggled in under the term after this period of rehabilitation.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
OgreMkV



Posts: 3335
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,20:54   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 08 2012,20:45)
Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 08 2012,20:40)
At this point, I'm left with the impression that he's taking what science already has, and tacking the word "intelligence" in a bunch of places where it adds nothing useful to the concepts.

Henry

There are several people who have decided that the best approach is to now re-label unexceptionable parts of science as "intelligent design". Later on, the DI™ components can be smuggled in under the term after this period of rehabilitation.

A very similar approach was just done by AIG.  They created a list of the 'kinds' aboard the Ark.  Shockingly, it looks almost exactly like the 'families' in the modern taxonomic structure.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,21:40   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 08 2012,21:45)
Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 08 2012,20:40)
At this point, I'm left with the impression that he's taking what science already has, and tacking the word "intelligence" in a bunch of places where it adds nothing useful to the concepts.

Henry

There are several people who have decided that the best approach is to now re-label unexceptionable parts of science as "intelligent design". Later on, the DI™ components can be smuggled in under the term after this period of rehabilitation.

1.  find underdetermined systems

2.  label them intelligently designed

3.  run out of the lab like it was on fire

4.  move to seattle

5.  buy my book

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2153
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 08 2012,23:07   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Nov. 08 2012,17:30)
I don't know who this is in response to, but genomes do encode the experience of populations. Perhaps there is some confusion in terminology because some meanings of experience imply consciousness.

But genomes encode the successful guesses of populations that vary. Experience is encoded because some guesses have higher reproductive success. This may be due to greater fitness or it may be due to luck. But it always encodes fitness.

Except that variation is not a "guess".  It's a contingent accident.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 3434
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 09 2012,03:45   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 08 2012,20:20)
Gary seems to think that he can post a bunch of claims, make excuses as to why he shouldn't be held accountable to support or retract them, and that they will eventually be forgotten. This is a time-honored antievolutionist tactic, after all. Who could be bothered to dig back through the forum to see whether he's left things hanging? The answer for that is a periodic posting of a summary of such items, to make sure that folks tuning in late are apprised of just what sort of correspondent they have at hand. And so I give you the first posting of the...

Periodically Posted List of Abandoned or Unsupported Claims: Gary Gaulin Edition

1. Citric Acid Cycle Description

The claim

           
Quote

Control Of Krebs Cycle By Molecular Intelligence

In living things molecular intelligence is seen controlling what self-assembles from the powerful Krebs Cycle that has become the core metabolic cycle of cells. It is the power plant and factory where a dozen or so catalytic molecules (protein, mineral or other) are drawn to metabolic pathway assembly lines that makes a copy of the molecule it started with every time around the circle. It does this by adding a non-chiral (structurally identical) mirror image of the starting molecule then when the cycle is completed it breaks in half resulting in two identical copies.

At any stage through the assembly cycle a molecule of proper fit may be drawn by molecular forces into a nearby self-assembly interaction to where it fits. At least part of the Reverse Krebs Cycle is catalyzed by volcanic clay/dust/mineral in sunlight making it possible that the cycle was once common planetary chemistry.[11][12]

Where there is no molecular intelligence present the Krebs Cycle would not be able to produce cells and exist regardless of molecular intelligence being present or not to control it. A rudimentary intelligence may actually be challenged to keep up with its production rate but not necessarily be destroyed by periods of overproduction.

Intelligence to exploit this cycle could easily form in its local environment. Once active it would have little problem controlling this existing metabolism. We can here predict self-assembly of a precellular starter mechanism that produces a genome from scratch, instead of a genome first being required to produce this intelligence.


The request for documentation

Response

Status: Abandoned. Bizarre, false-to-fact description of the citric acid cycle is left unretracted as if it supported Gaulin's concept of "molecular intelligence".


There is no other place that I know of where this is documented.  And that is what a theory is for, to explain things that have never ever been explained before. Demanding documentation that does not exist, instead of providing evidence to the contrary, is here highly unscientific.

 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 08 2012,20:20)
2. Gaulin Code v. Evolutionary Computation

The claim

           
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 05 2012,06:45)

The theory is for modeling reality. Current EA's and GA's are baby-toys in comparison. Best way to prove that, is for you to try it for yourself.


(Emphasis added.)

           
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 06 2012,22:21)

[...] It's more technologically demanding, but as I earlier mentioned the model puts EA's and GA's to shame, as though they are baby-toys. [...]


(Emphasis added.)

The request for documentation

Response

Status: Abandoned. Complete refusal to divulge the substance of the comparisons that Gaulin claims he already has made.


You are again demanding documentation that does not yet exist.  And I am entitled to my honest opinion of how "realistic" EA'a and GA's are.  That's why I never found them very scientifically interesting, and instead experimented with simple cognitive models that can outperform them.

 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 08 2012,20:20)
3. Gaulin Code, the Traveling Salesman Problem, and Computational Complexity Theory

The claim

         
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 07 2012,05:39)

I have no doubt that it would easily solve the Traveling Salesman Problem. [...]


Request for documentation

Response

Status: Abandoned. After making ignorant and bizarre claims about computational complexity theory ("It's a collection of AI techniques"), Gaulin decided to stop responding to requests to demonstrate these claims.

You sure like to nitpick.  I gave you an example of a fly (intelligence) that just keeps bashing into a window until it knocks itself senseless and never gets out, even where there is a nearby exit.  If that is not utterly being unable to find any solution at all to the Traveling Salesman Problem then you tell me how well it did at finding a solution to the problem after it is one more dead bug on the windowsill that made it no further than that.

--------------
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.

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 09 2012,04:32   

Quote
And I am entitled to my honest opinion of how "realistic" EA'a and GA's are.  That's why I never found them very scientifically interesting, and instead experimented with simple cognitive models that can outperform them.


That's right. And that is all it is, an opinion.

And it's not even an honest one is it?

Quote
simple cognitive models that can outperform them


Don't you get it?

THIS IS A CLAIM:

Quote
simple cognitive models that can outperform them


FURTHERMORE it's an unsupported claim.

It's your claim, so support it!

Quote
You sure like to nitpick.  I gave you an example of a fly (intelligence) that just keeps bashing into a window until it knocks itself senseless and never gets out, even where there is a nearby exit.  If that is not utterly being unable to find any solution at all to the Traveling Salesman Problem then you tell me how well it did at finding a solution to the problem after it is one more dead bug on the windowsill that made it no further than that.


Ah, so you don't need to support the claim because of this world salad?

In what way is a fly flying solving the TSP?

The simple fact is that the number of fly's that become trapped behind windows is trivial compared to the number that do not. So as a selective force, being able to work out what a window is not really up there.

So because a fly can't find it's way out you don't have to demonstrate your specific CLAIM that:
Quote
And I am entitled to my honest opinion of how "realistic" EA'a and GA's are.  That's why I never found them very scientifically interesting, and instead experimented with simple cognitive models that can outperform them.


Why don't you take the TSP challenge Gary? It's from 2006 but you'd be the first ID supporter to attempt it AFAIK.

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archive....gn.html

Quote
I will announce the winners (if any) in a week’s time, and also will present the answer that Evolution came up with. I’m interested in proposed solutions from any and all (you don’t have to be in the ID camp), but am especially interested in solutions by ID advocates, since y’all are saying that the solution is already implicitly defined in the statement of the problem (finding shortest connected networks).


Support your claim or continue to be laughed at. TBH that'll happen either way but at least this way you get to keep a little dignity.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 3434
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 09 2012,04:39   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 08 2012,20:20)
Status: Abandoned. After making ignorant and bizarre claims about computational complexity theory ("It's a collection of AI techniques"), Gaulin decided to stop responding to requests to demonstrate these claims.


And on that point, although I agree that I could have been more precise, if you look again at exactly what I said then it should be more obvious that I was calling attention to what I wanted you to notice in the Wikipedia link (all the nonintelligent AI techniques that are in it).

   
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 07 2012,18:49)
   
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 07 2012,18:03)
Come on, Gary. Just admit that you don't know the least thing about computational complexity theory and you won't have to make up gibberish like that. Hint: it helps if the gibberish at least has some keywords from the topic at hand. Yours doesn't.

It's a collection of AI techniques, many of which I have already modeled/tested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki......._theory

That is all well and good for someone new to AI but it is not "cognitive science".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki.......science

My opinion on this has not changed.  The unfair and unrealistic comparisons only lead to your being easily fooled by unrealistic nonsense.  You are therefore putting plastic artificial flowers under the microscope in order to support your biological conclusions.

--------------
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.

   
  12334 replies since Oct. 31 2012,02:32 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (412) < ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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