Colin, It is of course possible that human intelligence relies upon electromagnetic-field sensing that goes beyond the traditional "five senses."
However, this argument > Functionally, the key behaviour I use to test my approach is "scientific > behaviour". If you sacrifice the full EM field, an AGI would provably be > unable to enact scientific behaviour because the AGI brain dynamics would be > forced to operate *without the dynamics of the EM field*, which is > literally connected to the distal natural world (forming a new I/O stream). > The link to the distal natural world is critically involved in 'scientific > observation'. You can't simulate it because it's what you are actually there > to gain access to. A scientist does not already know what it 'out there' - > an AGI scientist needs what human scientist has in order that the AGI do > science as well as a human. Scientific behaviour easily extends to normal > problem solving behaviour of the kind humans have. Hence 'general > intelligence'. > makes no sense to me. I haven't seen you present any meaningful argument that scientific behavior depends on "extrasensory" phenomena. Do you have such an argument? Ben ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
