Why computers* will not become self aware.

I am well versed and educated in Cosmology, Astronomy and Celestial Mechanics as well as I am way ahead of the CURVE as far as Quantum Mechanics and QED & QCD......plus I helped design Multiversal Models at a world renown Massachusetts based higher learning Institute as the Many Worlds Model was too limited for Quantum Mechanics.

I am well aware of such things as far as what a LIGHT YEAR is and what it means as well I am also aware that at a distance of 13.4 Billion Light Years away from Earth we come to the edge of the..."VISIBLE or DETECTABLE"....Universe.

At this distance in any 360 Degree from Earth 1 Micron "view" using the Chandra X-Ray Telescope or Hubble we cannot see any further.

At this distance of 13.4 Billion Light Years we come to an all encompassing Surrounding SHELL or WALL of Super Heated Plasma.

This Shell is 379,000 Light Years Thick and just beyond it would be the Light of the BIG BANG.

This is the END OR EDGE OF OUR UNIVERSE as our Universe is FINITE.

But even though our Universe is FINITE....the Multiverse is not.

AA

 

I see you've never read Principles of Philosophy. The exercise is to provisionally doubt everything that can be reasonably doubted. Since he can't positively rule out the possibility that the candle, the chair, his robe, pen, and paper,.. his body are not all the product of hallucinations or a dream caused by to many drugs, sleep, an evil demon, a mad scientist or a computer, he provisionally rules out their existence. But when it comes to doubting the existence of his own mind, he realizes that he would have to employ his mind in order to do that. Since it would be absurd to believe that something can do something(doubt, in this case) while not existing, he concludes that he, as a thinking thing, a mind, must exist. Dubito ergo cogito. Cogito ergo sum. I doubt, therefore I think. (and the part you may have heard before I think, therefore I am.

You can only do that with your own mind.

 

See that response...and yes I am well aware and well read into such things.....that response would be the FIRST PROGRAMMED REPLY available for use in a Falsified A.I. system.

Have you ever heard of the 3 Laws of Robotics?

Have you ever heard of the ZEROTH LAW?

What I detailed out where questions that a Non-Quantum fake A.I. Computer could not properly answer.

Read specifically the numbered questions I posted again and perhaps you will understand WHY....it is IMPOSSIBLE for a NON-LIVING AND FALSE A.I. to answer the questions I posted.

Let me know if you get it.

AA

 

Nope, ' still don't understand why it's impossible. After you explain why only something intelligent can pass your test, you should explain how you know the thing passing it is aware of itself.

 

One other thing......a Human Being and the Human Mind is in reality existing as a MINIMUM of TWO CONSCIOUSNESSES.

This is true for some people more than others but the fact is the vast majority of us are actually TWO conscious minds.

Why is this?

Because of our two basically independent Left and Right Brain Hemispheres.

The Left Hemisphere is primarily a persons Analytic side and the Right Hemisphere is a persons Creative side.

When a person is TALKING TO THEMSELVES....who are they talking to?

When this happens it is our CONSCIOUS MIND talking to our SUBCONSCIOUS MIND.

The Subconscious is the primary data storage area as it records all Sensory and Thought Information as well as forms neural bridges and connections between the Pre-frontal Cortex and the Deep Subconscious.

I was in the Hospital and I NEVER get sick although I was shot working in the field many years ago.

I was in because I was in my office as I help run several now large family owned companies and this is just one of my JOBS as I run...or rather RAN a Team comprised of the very best the U.S. Military and a few times members of the British and Aussie SAS....had to offer.

I got for seemingly no reason....VERTIGO...bad....whole damn planet was spinning around my head.

When this happened it was shortly after New England Patriot Superstar Teddy Bruschi after winning his 3rd Superbowl and would soon play in his.....I think it might have been his 5th after that as I know he played in 4 but might have been with Parcels and Drew Bledsoe in his Rookie Year.

ANYWAYS.....Teddy Bruschi had a hole in his heart and did not go immediately to the ER and he was on TV saying DON'T WAIT!!!

Now I had been shot several times working in the field and although I was clinically dead for a very short time I came out fine and better than fine as I am healthy in the extreme and was VERY LUCKY.

BUT....as I am NEVER SICK....when I got VERTIGO for seemingly no reason....I started thinking.....maybe some blood clot from the combat is going into my brain!!!

Now I am not afraid to die....BUT I AM SCARED TO DEATH OF HAVING A STROKE AND BECOMING A VEGGIE!!!

I called my girl at the time and the Ambulance picked me up and they checked my BP and my Heart Rate and it was SKYROCKETING!!

I run every day and have a pulse of 39-43 and BP of 124-60 and my Triglycerides are 60 and my Cholesterol is only 178 with my Good Cholesterol or HDL's at 102 and my Bad Cholesterol or LDL's at 76.

But at that moment I thought I was going to have a Stroke!!!

I got to the ER...the whole damn world is spinning visually...BAD!!

A Lady Doc and a Nurse take a CT scan of my head.....I wait about 20-30 Minutes for the results and Lady Doc comes back with 2 or 3 other DOCS!!

She say's...."We have to take the CT Scan again."

My heart is on the floor!!!

I have a degree specific to Medicine and one of our Companies is in that field and I KNOW I did NOT MOVE MY HEAD....and this probably means I AM A DEAD MAN with a TUMOR in my head!!!

Lady Doc say's....."IT'S NOT A TUUUUMAAA!!" GET TO THE CHOPAAA!!" LOL!!! Arnold!

Anyways...I am freaking out and they take another CT scan of my head...30 minutes later...now 4 DOCS IN THE ROOM!!

I am making peace with the Universe at that moment thinking...that's all folks!!

Lady Doc ask's me...."Are you left handed or right handed?"......I answer...both but more right than left.

Lady Doc ask's......"Are you more Analytically Minded or are you Creatively Minded?"....I answer...Both.

Lady Doc ask's....."What do you do for work?".....I tell her I run several companies....I help develop Multiversal Models at a world class Massachusetts higher learning institute and I tour but not as much as I used to and have opened up for Aerosmith, Tool, Heart, Ozzie....etc....and I tell her I am capable of sculpting, painting...etc.

Lady Doc say's...."THAT FIGURES!"

I ask her....."WHY THE 2ND CT SCAN!!??"

She tells me....."We took the first scan but we saw something that didn't look right so we took one again as I thought the first scan was blurred."

I say..."I didn't move my head at all!"

She say's..."I know."

At this point I am freaking out and ask her what the HELL is wrong with me!!??

Lady Doc say's...."Oh...there is a rare Feline to Human Virus going around that causes extreme vertigo....do you have a cat?"

I SAY....YES!!!

She say's....."oh....your gonna be fine."

SHE STILL HAS NOT TOLD ME WTF WAS GOING ON WITH THE CT SCAN!! LOL!!!

I ask her again.

Lady Doc say's with the other 3 taking NOTES....."You have one of the most dense neural connectivity between left and right brain hemisphere's we have ever seen and your lucky because usually even 1/10th that amount of Hemisphere Neural Connectivity results in extreme Schizophrenia!"

I reply.....

Roses are Red.
Violets are Blue.
I'm a Schizophrenic...

AND SO AM I!

LOL!!!

AA

 

Look at #9 and #15.

Then think about a Logic based System...even a Quantum System that uses QUIBITS and not BITS.

A real conscious A.I. would have no problem answering those questions but a FALSE A.I. could not answer them.

Why?

No Logic.

For example a Human Brain is a PROBABILITY ENGINE BUT.....it can make CHOICES based completely on instinct, hunches or in most cases UPON A SUBCONSCIOUS LEVEL.

And FALSE A.I. system would have to rely upon it's PROGRAMMING.

Now even if such a FALSE SYSTEM were to use a RANDOM GENERATING Answer Supplier as part of it's code....thus the system is asked a question and a Programmer or Building full of programmers cannot possibly account for every possible question or scenario a Programmed System might encounter they they program in a bit of SELF AUTONOMY as at first a system will in effect DO WHAT A HUMAN CONSCIOUS MIND DOES.....when it does not have the answer but a person has a HUNCH or GUT INSTINCT.

When a person PHYSICALLY FEELS a pang in their gut.....it's because the SUBCONSCIOUS MIND is attempting to communicate with the Conscious Mind.

Some people are capable of such communication and I am one of them.....other's have some ability....and yet more have no ability at all except what their subconscious might tell them in dreams but most people FORGET their dreams quickly.

I am a Lucid Dreamer which means I am aware I am dreaming which has it's benefits.

But the best part of being a Lucid Dreamer is it allows me to access my Subconsciously stored Memories.

Anyways.....a False System will either access memory storage to find the most applicable and most relevant application of the words used in the question if the system does not know the answer.

Similar to a human but when such a false system does not have a clear association that would trigger what could only be detailed as a GUESS.....it will just create an answer that is as close to what it's programming will allow it to create.

Sort of like when you dial 411 and get awful voice recog. and as for June's Pizza and 411 say's back....Frankie and Johnnies Pizzeria!

AA

 

Yes, but what is your mind?

Could your mind itself not be an illusion, produced by the ideas running through it? Something analogous to how a movie projector produces an illusion of motion?

I think therefore I think, is all you've really proven

 

I can't help but think that all 81 pages of this are interesting but moot. Computers ARE self aware. The only real test of whether something is self aware is the Turing Test and just about any computer sold today or in the last decade could pass that rather handily.

Be kind to the entity on your desk, (or in your hand/pocket). Computers have very long memories.

 

There are certain realities existing that preclude many ideas and concepts proposed by a specific group of people who go on about reality being an illusion.

Back in the 1980's you had a few Morons going on and on about a HOLOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE as they were CREATIONISTS who actually believed that only the EARTH was tangible matter and the rest of the Universe was a HOLOGRAPHIC PROJECTION by GOD or ANGELS...etc.

They had it all worked out and actually tried to detail out a MACHINE...run by GOD.

Problem was they had a HUGE HOLE in their proposal.

You see a Holographic Image or Hologram....cannot be projected upon EMPTY SPACE-TIME!! LOL!!

You need PHYSICAL MATTER for a Hologram to exist!!

AA

 

It does prove it. The only alternative is an absurdity: that something which does not exist can do something.
The question was not whether your mind is what you think it is, but whether it is at all.

 

Yeah...the whole....Turing Test thing is a bit out of date.

Thing is we get members on this forum who absolutely DESPISE the concept or even possibility that A.I. either is already or soon will become a reality.

Thing is.....CONSCIOUSNESS....exists in even the most SIMPLE LIFE FORMS.

All life has at least some limited form of Consciousness as even a Microscopic Orgasm is aware that it needs to eat or breath.

The more complex a life form is and the more complex and difficult a life form or plant or animal has it to be able to survive this will usually result in evolutionary changes from such a species in several ways.

The Pant. Animal or Organism will either develop species traits via natural selection and mutation that are beneficial for it's survival.....OR.....a species will develop MENTAL ACUITY....and this is what happened in the case of Humanity as 5 Million years ago ancient Human Ancestors were Arboreal and living in Trees in the African Rain forests.

But as the Earth's climate changed and as once lush rain forests changed over to Hot, Dry Grassy Savannah and our Human Ancestors had to come out of the Trees over time and again via natural selection and mutation they went from 4 feet to Bipedal.

Next they grew taller and stood up straighter because being able to see both predator and prey over the tall African Grass was crucial for survival thus only those human ancestry who grew tall and walked upright and straight survived to reproduce.

We lost our body hair due to the Hotter Temps. and the fact we evolved Sweat Grands.

Etc...etc...etc.

I guess my point is....NEVER SAY NEVER!! LOL!!

AA

 

This is off topic so this will be the one and only time;

[U]Is universe finite or infinite? Is there any imaginary boundary for it?[/U]

Frank Heile, PhD in Physics from Stanford University

It is impossible to know for sure if the universe is truly infinite. The observable universe is definitely finite - it is that part of the universe which is within 13.80 billion light years of us. The number 13.80 is because it has been 13.80 +/- 0.04 billion years since the Big Bang so any part of the universe that is more than 13.80 billion light years away from us will not be visible or observable since the light from those areas cannot have reached us by now.

Cosmologists assume that there is a significant part of the universe that is outside of our observable portion of the universe but it is impossible to say for sure that it is infinite. The standard cosmological assumption is that the universe is homogeneous and isotropic. These assumptions seem to be correct and is confirmed in our observable universe - the universe looks the same in all directions and on a large enough scale the universe seems to be homogeneous. If the portion of the universe that is not observable is also isotropic and homogenous then it could be that the universe is truly infinite.

One piece of information that is needed to determine if the universe is infinite or not is to know the curvature of the universe. There are three different regimes of curvature - it could have a positive curvature which is like the two dimensional curvature of the surface of a sphere, zero curvature which is like a flat plane, or negative curvature which is like the curvature of the surface of a saddle. If the universe is isotropic and homogenous and the curvature of the universe has a constant positive value then the universe will be finite - just as the surface of a sphere is finite. On the other hand if the curvature of the universe is a constant of zero or has a constant negative curvature, the universe would be truly infinite.

Do we have any measurement of the amount of curvature that the universe has? Yes, there is! The standard model of cosmology which successfully fits all well measured cosmological information has a parameter Ωtotal which is related to the curvature. If it is less than 1.0 then the universe is positively curved, if it is exactly 1.0 the universe is flat and if the value is greater than 1.0 the universe is negatively curved. The best measured value is 1.0023 which obviously could encompass everything from positive to zero to negative curvature. So is no definitive answer at this point but the universe is consistent with having zero curvature. So we really do not know if the universe is infinite at this point, but since the value is so close to flat, even if the universe is positively curved and finite, it would definitely be much much bigger than the observable universe.


Joseph Wang, Ph.D. Astrophysics

The evidence is that the universe is much bigger than 62 billion light years. If the universe was a sphere 70 billion light years across, then we'd see some sign of an edge. Now if it turns out that the universe is say 1000 billion light years across, then we would have no way of knowing this, because the edge is too far out.

We *assume* that the universe is infinite because it makes the math easier. If you assume that the universe if finite then you have to create a theory about what happens at the edge of the universe, and we can't do that since we don't see an edge. So we *assume* that the universe is infinite. It's possible that the universe isn't infinite, but our observations say that the universe is big enough so that the observations are the same.

Now part of science is to make assumptions so that you can show that they are wrong. Our theories *assume* that the universe is infinite so that we know what an infinite universe looks like. People are doing observations and looking for signs that what we see is different from an infinite universe.

One other thing. Science is about making assumptions, taking observations and comparing those observations with your assumptions. You are *NOT* going to figure out the universe by playing word games, and so people that trying to figure out if the universe is infinite or not by playing word games aren't doing science.


Leo C. Stein, (Astro)physics PhD from MIT

There is no reason to believe that the universe just ends beyond the farthest point we can see. In fact, that would go against the cosmological principle (or Copernican principle) that says we aren't special.

Since the universe has a finite age, and light has a finite speed, there is a limit to how far we can see. However, in cosmology we assume (because it agrees with observation) that the universe is homogenous and isotropic. That means that if you considered a point in some direction which is a gigaparsec away, observers over there could see less of the universe back in our direction and more of the universe in the opposite direction. They would see a different (but overlapping) patch of the universe than we do.

When people talk about "the Universe" (with a capital u) it means "our observable patch of the universe". In this sense, the Universe is finite, even though it is just a patch of space.

The topology of the universe is not a settled question, as far as I know. The best data right now have the spatial curvature on cosmological scales consistent with zero, so the topology could just be like Euclidian space. However, it's still possible that better data will show that the curvature is not exactly zero. If the curvature is positive, then indeed the universe is spatially finite by all accounts, with topology like a 3-sphere, which has no edge. We have to wait for more data to see if the curvature is nonzero. There isn't any good reason to believe that the curvature is positive, negative, or zero. Inflation drives the curvature density towards zero, but doesn't change the topology. This means we could be in a positive curvature universe but we wouldn't be able to measure the deviation of the curvature from zero.

 

That might be enough for consciousness, which we can define as identification of its environment, but not self-awareness. Maybe a sense of touch is also needed, to allow the system to become aware of the boundaries of its corporeal self.

Think about when we talk about a person or animal as being conscious and unconscious. It's not really about having a goal, but of having an accurate internal model of external reality. When you (or a dog!) are dreaming, you are unconscious, because your internal model does not match external reality. The mirror test shows there is something more to self-awareness, because while many animals are clearly conscious, only a tiny few can pass the mirror test.

 

I don't think I would want to quote a guy like Leo who got a C+ in Astrophysics.

The whole Curvature Calculation of our Universe is for naught as Leo is not using a 26-D Universal Space-Time Geometry Model and even that use has issues because Dark Matter and Dark Energy which comprise over 96% of the Universe do not fall under such calculations but rather fit nicely within a Model specific to Multiversal Overlap.

AA

 

I don't know..... that Leo guy sounds highly quotable to me!

I like the fact that he isn't dogmatic and leaves the door open for Multiverse Theory and non-linear time!

 

Wow!!!!

AboveAlpha..... I personally can't see the error in what Leo wrote!

But I do love the distinction between a possibly finite universe...… but probably infinite..... multiverse!!!!

 

A brain isn't what sees. It filters, affects, personality, mood, etc., but that which sees ( close your eyes and imagine a butterfly, that which sees that butterfly is not the brain, it is 'you'). A machine has no 'you' no being there.

 

A lot of problematic stuff here. A brain uses eyes to see. The butterfly is imagined, not seen. There is no reason a computer could not be programmed to have an "it" there.

 

Oh, imagine a butterfly, and look at it.

It's not looking with the eyes, but it is looking, seeing.

Oh, there can be a butter fly, as 'it' there, but there won't be a concious being looking at it, only sensors.

If you are going to reduce human consciousness to 'sensors' in my view, they are not the same.

 

No, it is only imagining, like dreaming. In a dream, you think you are seeing things, but they are not there. It is just unconscious imagining.

That depends on what the being does with the sensor data.

Consciousness is a level above sensing: identification of the external environment and objects being sensed. AI is beginning to be able to do this, such as with the identification of photographs of cats and dogs. Of course, it is another step to be able to do that with actual living cats and dogs, and another step from that to identifying almost all ordinary objects. If a computer's sensor array can be put in a random location on the earth's solid surface and quickly identify its surroundings, as a conscious animal can, we will have to admit it is conscious, because that's what consciousness is.

 

When you imagine, if you create an image and can visualize it, you are seeing. It's not seeing with the eyes though.

But, it's really semantics. But, for the sake of argument, I'll go with your imagining. That which is imagining is 'you', and that 'you', is NOT the brain. The brain facilitates the process, just as a car facilitates your journeying, but you are the driver and YOU are NOT the car. In the case of the imagining, that which is imagining is YOU, not the brain, and that 'you' is a spiritual quotient, apart from the brain. Anyone who has had an out of body experience will tell you this, unless, of course, you are someone who asserts that OOBEs are 'imagination' or dreaming. I guarantee that if that is your position, should it ever actually happen to you, you will change your position. But, of course, you could be the kind of person who doubts his or her own experience. Healthy skepticism is good, but not to the point where one is unmovable despite evidence. Again, I have breached the parameters of science, and this conversation should shift to the religion and philosophy forum, as it is not falsifiable.

 

No, it's imagining, not seeing.

There is no such spiritual "quotient," whatever that might be.

That is exactly what they are.

Subjective experience is not evidence. Evidence has to be sharable.

 

Those who examine how brains work point out that when we "imagine" an image we're using the same brain hardware and software as when we process the signals coming from our sensory organs. The same goes for when we imagine hearing or feeling something. It's just that what we are processing is something that we created from various memories, from "what if's" that we want to consider, and/or other similar sources - not the signals coming from our eyes and ears (etc.).

I think the YOU (as you put it) and the brain are still just one. It's more that our brains have the capacity to provide manufactured input for other parts of the brain. Our imagination, our ability to concoct and evaluate possible solutions, is a very powerful tool that we use all the time. Other animals have this ability, too.

 

My comment belongs in the philosophy forum.

I assert that "You" and the brain are NOT 'one'. I believe that that which is 'we' is spiritual, in nature, and beyond the reach of science. The only reason I believe it, is that I can sense it, it seems real to me. I've had out of body experiences that were very real.

 

Yes, there are people who have strongly convincing dreams, at least on occasions. And, the "near death" thing makes even more sense to me, as besides the fact that our brains can dream, those brains in a "near death" context are getting seriously screwed up input from sense organs and even our autonomic nervous system - as well as probably being denied the oxygen needed to function in a reliable manner.

I don't see it as surprising that under that kind of stress a brain could conjure up images that in some general way match something from some religion that the individual may know about.