A New Kind of Science: The NKS Forum (http://forum.wolframscience.com/index.php)
- NKS Way of Thinking (http://forum.wolframscience.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=5)
-- NKS one factor in upcoming scientific revolution (http://forum.wolframscience.com/showthread.php?threadid=1484)

NKS one factor in upcoming scientific revolution

The future holds for us a scientific revolution on the discovery that a wide variety of ideas such as Leibniz's Monadology can finally be described mathematically as a result of combining the new technologies and sciences of computing, artificial intelligence, neurology, and quantum mechanics.

It is customary in science to provide evidence for such a bold claim.

exhibit a.

to find quantum gravity, physicists have invented hidden dimensions and branes of reality parallel to our own as homes for the gravitational waves or graviton particles predicted by general relativity or the standard model of particle physics that have never been detected.

exhibit b.

the neurophysicist John Smythies has suggested there is a physical brane and a phenomenal brane.

It follows from exhibit a that mainstream physics research is already looking at the inclusion of worlds beyond our own in its theories.

And from exhibit b there is discussion of how consciousness works with these worlds.

If the conversation has started, as much as I may seem to be an unlikely contributor, I would like to make a suggestion:

In the future, perhaps soon, a computer model of a world will be built that contains an artificial intelligence based on neurology.

To me it seems that encoded within the neural network of the artificial intelligence is a set of data of a new and different nature than the actual data of the computer program.

If that were true, it also seems to me that the mind is the gate between the absolute and relative natures of reality, which confirms the philosophies held by Newton, Einstein, Spinoza, Leibniz, Descartes, Kant, Plato, Zeno, Confuscious, the Buddha, Lau Tzu, Abraham, Isaiah, Jesus, Muhummed, and countless other philosophers and prophets.

Point by point

"The future holds for us a scientific revolution on the discovery that a wide variety of ideas such as Leibniz's Monadology can finally be described mathematically as a result of combining the new technologies and sciences of computing, artificial intelligence, neurology, and quantum mechanics."

Misuse of the term neurology which happens to be study of brain disorders. It is in fact its own area of formal research and has nothing directly to do with AI or anything like what you are speaking of. Though granted math and new advances in science may be applied to it.

Neurology does not equal neuroscience

"exhibit a.

to find quantum gravity, physicists have invented hidden dimensions and branes of reality parallel to our own as homes for the gravitational waves or graviton particles predicted by general relativity or the standard model of particle physics that have never been detected."

How is this evidence of what you stated earlier, this is string theory 101 with some mistakes in it

"exhibit b.

the neurophysicist John Smythies has suggested there is a physical brane and a phenomenal brane."

Thats nice but has yet to be prove just like the idea of branes have yet to be proven.

"It follows from exhibit a that mainstream physics research is already looking at the inclusion of worlds beyond our own in its theories."

This is a revelation, people having been doing this for years. I prescribe string theory, many worlds theory...

"And from exhibit b there is discussion of how consciousness works with these worlds."

Red haring leads nowhere consciousness and branes have little to nothing to do with each other. Unless you are trying to connect them, in which case some formal work needs to be done.

"In the future, perhaps soon, a computer model of a world will be built that contains an artificial intelligence based on neurology."

Nobody will ever build a computer based AI based on neurology, at least not based on what you think neurology means.

"To me it seems that encoded within the neural network of the artificial intelligence is a set of data of a new and different nature than the actual data of the computer program."

The story of every program new data is created through the use of the application no surprise here.

"If that were true, it also seems to me that the mind is the gate between the absolute and relative natures of reality, which confirms the philosophies held by Newton, Einstein, Spinoza, Leibniz, Descartes, Kant, Plato, Zeno, Confuscious, the Buddha, Lau Tzu, Abraham, Isaiah, Jesus, Muhummed, and countless other philosophers and prophets."

This follows how A is not equal to B. I am compelled to ask what does this have to do with NKS?

Thanks

Re: Point by point

Misuse of the term neurology which happens to be study of brain disorders. It is in fact its own area of formal research and has nothing directly to do with AI or anything like what you are speaking of. Though granted math and new advances in science may be applied to it.

Neurology does not equal neuroscience

"To me it seems that encoded within the neural network of the artificial intelligence is a set of data of a new and different nature than the actual data of the computer program."

The story of every program new data is created through the use of the application no surprise here.

Ok fine, what's your deeper meaning?

Thanks

"To me it seems that encoded within the neural network of the artificial intelligence is a set of data of a new and different nature than the actual data of the computer program."


This is a very abstract concept.

The idea is to use one computer program, so that we have initial conditions and rules.

That computer program represents one set of data.

The abstract part is that the one set of data has A.I. in it based on neural networks.

This AI can make observations of its world.

Meaning, the neural network has a whole other set of data encoded within it.

The encoded data is what the AI has observed about its world.

So the deeper meaning is:

1. a single set of data in a computer program

2. yet through AI is able to produce a different set of data of a different nature

Do you understand the two sets of data and how they are different?

Still not a new idea what you have here is a video game that does not need a user and is oriented towards science.

Sorry but you can't make this idea seem new, no matter how convinced you are of its newness it just isn't.

Neural Network and AI are not the same as you seem to think "Meaning, the neural network has a whole other set of data encoded within it."
A neural net can be used in AI applications but is by no means the same thing as.

"1. a single set of data in a computer program

2. yet through AI is able to produce a different set of data of a different nature"

Yes and as I said before even an application like Microsoft Office does this applications that use AI do this, applications that try to assists the user do this. Truly not new.

"Do you understand the two sets of data and how they are different?"

Yes and its still not new and won't be no matter how you phrase it.

Originally posted by tomjones
"1. a single set of data in a computer program

2. yet through AI is able to produce a different set of data of a different nature"

Yes and as I said before even an application like Microsoft Office does this applications that use AI do this, applications that try to assists the user do this. Truly not new.

"Do you understand the two sets of data and how they are different?"

Yes and its still not new and won't be no matter how you phrase it. [/B]

"How are the two sets of data different in nature?"

So here's how it works simply, you write your program it has one set of data, within the program you write an AI code that has its own data set (a subset or not of the programs data set) that is defined within your AI. The AI operates with its data one the rest of the programs data set.

Or you can have your computer program that runs on one data set and then write an AI program that works on that data set this is a video game minus user input, the data contained in the AI is different from the rest of the data.

There you go...

The issue here is you are convinced of the newness of your idea but its not new you just are very sure that it is. Well its not and it won't be.

So now your assignment for the day if you wish to become knowledgeable enough to have an intelligent conversation, go and read some books philosophy, computer programming, AI, physics, mathematics and then come back and when you have some real knowledge about the topics you speak about.

Thanks

Originally posted by tomjones
[B]"How are the two sets of data different in nature?"

So here's how it works simply, you write your program it has one set of data, within the program you write an AI code that has its own data set (a subset or not of the programs data set) that is defined within your AI. The AI operates with its data one the rest of the programs data set.

Why you think they can be in the same memory?

IFF when you speak of computers you speak of current computers and you classify RAM as on memory and so on then sure they can be in the same memory. If your specific then no since only one word can be store per register at a time for the most part and each bit has its own location.

But this conversation is getting away from NKS, you can make up any program you want with AI anywhere you want, but your idea will not work in current computing since AI is not this abstract thing that can just be put in data...

But I fail to see how this relates to NKS... if you want to know how current computers work read a book...

Thanks

Originally posted by tomjones
Why you think they can be in the same memory?

Store them any way you want...

make the AI hardware and have it act on memory, or make it all software where the action happens in the processor and all the data to be processed is in RAM, I don't really care how you do it...

I have no idea what the point you're trying to get to is...

Thanks

Originally posted by tomjones
Store them any way you want...

make the AI hardware and have it act on memory, or make it all software where the action happens in the processor and all the data to be processed is in RAM, I don't really care how you do it...

I have no idea what the point you're trying to get to is...

Thanks

"That's not acceptable because my idea says the two data sets have to be of uniquely different natures."

What do you think that means?

It is what we call philosophical babble...

Not to mention a false conclusion since just because the idea calls for one thing does not make solution necessarily wrong if it does not completely agree with the idea, since the idea may be wrong in part or whole.

Originally posted by tomjones
"That's not acceptable because my idea says the two data sets have to be of uniquely different natures."

What do you think that means?