A human in a straightjacket, locked in a padded room, would have similar difficulties.
From: Friam <[email protected]> on behalf of Prof David West <[email protected]> Date: Monday, June 9, 2025 at 12:26 PM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Free will—ghost in the machine or just clever wiring? Chat GPT does not have free will, because unlike a human being, it cannot commit suicide. davew On Mon, Jun 9, 2025, at 2:11 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: Could someone please take a definite position? Can ChatGPT have free will or not. If not, why not? From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm Sent: Monday, June 9, 2025 12:01 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Free will—ghost in the machine or just clever wiring? If you want to explain free will by entanglement then I would say free will is the opposite - a kind of un-entanglement or emergence. A biological system which grows while learning a language is an entangled system where two systems are merged into one, both entangled in the same structures. It is based on different codes stored in the same substance. Then you start to untangle them - for instance by self-consciousness - and get the biological animal on the one hand and the ghost in the machine on the other hand. A free will which is neither trapped by biological needs nor by advertising, brands and marketing would be the essence of a ghost in the machine, right? Although ghost buster Gilbert Ryle says such thing does not exist. -J. -------- Original message -------- From: Marcus Daniels <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> Date: 6/9/25 6:19 PM (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Free will—ghost in the machine or just clever wiring? Here’s an idea that’s been helping me to procrastinate. 1. Suppose that spacetime is an embedding of entanglement. An evolved quantum error correcting code (QEC) that enables a network to form geometries like the reality we see. 2. Suppose the Big Bang the result of a unifying supermassive black hole. 3. Like other black holes, it had high entropy. 4. That final black hole, lacking an exterior, launches a new universe. 5. The new universe might appear to be smooth in its geometric expansion, but that would only because of the embedded QEC. It would be rich with unseen entanglement that was not subject to the QEC. 6. In this view, universes could evolve or even be nested. Universes with no or crude QECs would be unstable and prone to collapse. Universes with strong QECs could have orderly environments where life could emerge, as Eric describes in his book. 7. A Big Crunch would be like checkpointing a virtual machine. The evolved QECs could still be in the checkpoint and cause the next version of the universe to inherit its desirable properties. Maybe it would be like a junkyard with some interesting parts that would find novel uses in the next go. 8. Speculating further, very sophisticated civilizations (after billions of years) might discover how to stack the deck to invent new metaphysics at the next Big Bang. Simple beings, like humans – not being billions of years old -- might invent words for that like God. 9. The whole thing could be deterministic and not facilitate any free will! Now I should get back to work. From: Friam <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Pieter Steenekamp <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Sunday, June 8, 2025 at 10:38 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [FRIAM] Free will—ghost in the machine or just clever wiring? Seth Lloyd’s Turing test for free will (https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/lloyd/Turing_Test.pdf <https://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/scientists/lloyd/Turing_Test.pdf>) is to consciousness what EPR was to quantum physics: a challenge to the theory's completeness. EPR said quantum weirdness must hide something deeper; Bell said “let's test that”—and nature replied, “nope, it’s weird all the way down.” Nobel Prize, case closed. Lloyd asks: can we prove the mind is just machinery? His test says: build a machine that behaves indistinguishably from a human and believes it has free will. If you succeed—great. But failure proves nothing. Unlike Bell’s inequality, this test can only confirm, never deny. No ghost-busting here. Until then? It’s speculation. The Standard Model explains almost everything—except the quantum gremlins and how observation messes things up. So maybe the mind still has an ace up its sleeve. Or a soul. Or a bug in the code. .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://bit.ly/virtualfriam> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ <http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/> Attachments: * smime.p7s
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
