Mark Waser wrote:
On 4/26/07, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Can you point to an objective definition that is clear about which
things are more intelligent than others, and which does not
accidentally
include things that manifestly conflict with the commonsense definition
(by false negatives or false positives)?
Wow. The silence was deafening after my last attempt . . . .
How about if I rephrase slightly dufferently as:
Intelligence is
the size of the space containing all world-states that the entity can
successfully reach
minus
the size of the space containing all world-states that the entity
cannot successfully avoid.
Try:
Entity in question is any particle in the universe.
States that it is trying to avoid: collision with its antiparticle.
Size of space containing all world-states that the entity can
successfully reach is then almost all of the states of the universe
except the extremely rare ones in which it hits an antiparticle.
Size of the space containing all world-states that the entity cannot
successfully avoid: only the extremely rare ones in which it hits an
antiparticle.
Conclusion: Intelligence of chosen particle = pretty damn big.
Bet it would be smarter than me.... but then again, do I notice an
evaluation problem here? How are you going to count the number of
successful states I can reach? And are you sure, now, before you work
out all the math, that my 'waser-intelligence' (W) is higher than the W
for that there pesky particle trying to avoid its antiparticle?
Richard Loosemore
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
