Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 Do we need to start the Butlerian Jihad… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luzifer's right hand Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 (edited) It all started going downhill when writting was invented. Outsourcing your memory. Disgusting! Edited July 4, 2023 by Luzifer's right hand JGP 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 4, 2023 Author Share Posted July 4, 2023 38 minutes ago, Luzifer's right hand said: It all started going downhill when writting was invented. Outsourcing your memory. Disgusting! Socrates would agree… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liffguard Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 There's always a relevant xkcd Ser Scot A Ellison, Iskaral Pust, Prince of the North and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maarsen Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 The latest AI can take an IQ test and score at 155 but a simple question such as "what is the name of the father of Sebastian's children?" can completely stump it. This is from the latest Scientific American. Roger Penrose maintains that AI will never amount to much as it is limited by Godel's theorem in the end. Ser Scot A Ellison and Spockydog 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 4, 2023 Author Share Posted July 4, 2023 17 minutes ago, maarsen said: Roger Penrose maintains that AI will never amount to much as it is limited by Godel's theorem in the end. I sincerely hope Dr. Penrose is correct. Prince of the North 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maarsen Posted July 4, 2023 Share Posted July 4, 2023 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I sincerely hope Dr. Penrose is correct. He does have a better track record than just about anyone else. Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IFR Posted July 6, 2023 Share Posted July 6, 2023 That's a good video. I also highly recommend Godel's Proof by Nagel - it's an excellent book. Penrose is obviously a respectable figure, with many accomplishments in the mathematics of physics. And I quite enjoyed his book The Road to Reality, though I think it's functionally useless on its own, and can only serve as a fun hobby read for those who already have a background in the material it's trying to teach. But Penrose has many unconventional and controversial ideas, and his thoughts on these matters are far from the inviolable truth. Anyway, my thoughts on AI and its current benefits and potential future benefits have been made clear in my thread on this topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 6, 2023 Author Share Posted July 6, 2023 1 hour ago, IFR said: That's a good video. I also highly recommend Godel's Proof by Nagel - it's an excellent book. Penrose is obviously a respectable figure, with many accomplishments in the mathematics of physics. And I quite enjoyed his book The Road to Reality, though I think it's functionally useless on its own, and can only serve as a fun hobby read for those who already have a background in the material it's trying to teach. But Penrose has many unconventional and controversial ideas, and his thoughts on these matters are far from the inviolable truth. Anyway, my thoughts on AI and its current benefits and potential future benefits have been made clear in my thread on this topic. Penrose’s idea that consciousness and the collapse of the probability wave being related… is interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 5 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Penrose’s idea that consciousness and the collapse of the probability wave being related… is interesting. Related lol Ok, I’ll bite. How so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 On second thought, belay that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 7, 2023 Author Share Posted July 7, 2023 (edited) 5 hours ago, JGP said: Related lol Ok, I’ll bite. How so? He doesn’t know. I’m getting this comment from Sabine Hossenfelder’s book Existential Physics. She has an interview with Penrose. Penrose, like Einstein, thinks Quantum Physics is “incomplete”. And he dislikes “shut up and compute”. He’s particularly critical of the Copenhagen Interpretation conclusion that observation creates reality by collapsing the probability wave. So, in an interesting conflative speculation he reverses the process. Rather than conscious observation somehow (and bizarrely) “creating reality” he asks whether that wave function collapse perhaps plays a role in the creation of sapient consciousness. It is speculation. But interesting speculation that is well beyond my ability to fully understand or develop. Edited July 7, 2023 by Ser Scot A Ellison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 I gathered after doing some googling, ergo my belay that. Turns out post rationalizing rationalization isn’t very interesting after all :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 7, 2023 Author Share Posted July 7, 2023 19 minutes ago, JGP said: I gathered after doing some googling, ergo my belay that. Turns out post rationalizing rationalization isn’t very interesting after all :p Penrose’s speculation makes a thousand times more sense than the “Copenhagen interpretation”. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 16 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Penrose’s speculation makes a thousand times more sense than the “Copenhagen interpretation”. [brow quirks] As a theory for consciousness? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 7, 2023 Author Share Posted July 7, 2023 8 minutes ago, JGP said: [brow quirks] As a theory for consciousness? The Copenhagen Interpretation grants magical power to consciousness suggesting that reality isn’t fixed (the schrodinger’s cat experiment) until it is observed by a consciousness bearing entity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 (edited) 53 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: The Copenhagen Interpretation grants magical power to consciousness suggesting that reality isn’t fixed (the schrodinger’s cat experiment) until it is observed by a consciousness bearing entity. It's been a while, mind [sips coffee] but I don't think 'consciousness bearing entity' is, or ever was, an integral component of the measurement/observation in regard to the Copenhagen Interpretation. Nor was the latter an attempt to explain consciousness itself. Anyway, it was the consciousness part of 16 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Penrose’s idea that consciousness and the collapse of the probability wave being related… is interesting. that intrigued me. Maybe I'll dive in later to get a sense of wtf he may or may not be talking about, but imagine it's less an explanation and more a contextual refutation. Edited July 7, 2023 by JGP Ser Scot A Ellison 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IFR Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 6 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: The Copenhagen Interpretation grants magical power to consciousness suggesting that reality isn’t fixed (the schrodinger’s cat experiment) until it is observed by a consciousness bearing entity. This is indeed an inaccurate characterization of the copenhagen interpretation. Hopefully someone else will expound further. If not, I'll try to clear it up myself when I have more time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted July 7, 2023 Author Share Posted July 7, 2023 6 minutes ago, IFR said: This is indeed an inaccurate characterization of the copenhagen interpretation. Hopefully someone else will expound further. If not, I'll try to clear it up myself when I have more time. How is the that inaccurate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted July 7, 2023 Share Posted July 7, 2023 Well, sticking with the double slit experiment, start with the presupposition, Scot. The inference that the particular photon is created by the collapse of the wave function is wrong, right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.