Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
WTF does this have to do with AGI or Singularity? I hope the AGI gets here soon. We Stupid Monkeys get damn tiresome. - samantha On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:06 AM, gifting wrote: On 29 Jan 2008, at 14:13, Vladimir Nesov wrote: On Jan 29, 2008 11:49 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, but why can't they all be dumped in a single 'normal' multiverse? If traveling between them is accommodated by 'decisions', there is a finite number of them for any given time, so it shouldn't pose structural problems. The whacko, speculative SF hypothesis is that lateral movement btw Yverses is conducted according to ordinary laws of physics, whereas vertical movement btw Yverses is conducted via extraphysical psychic actions ;-)' What differentiates psychic actions from non-psychic so that they can't be considered ordinary? If I can do both, why aren't they both equally ordinary to me (and everyone else)?.. Is a psychic action telepathy, for example? If I am a schizophrenic and hear voices, is this a psychic experience? What is a psychic action FOR YOU, or in your set of definitions? Do you propose that you are able of psychic actions within a set frame of definitions or do you experience psychic actions and redefine your environment because of this? Or is it all in the mind? Isn't it only ordinary, if experienced repetitively . Gudrun -- Vladimir Nesov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/?-3ffb4f - 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/?; - 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=4007604id_secret=92965434-81f3fd
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
WTF (I can only assume what that stands for) are you such an angry person. Or is linear thinking the only possible solution for your VotW (guess what that stands for)? Never heard of rhizome (theory). Sometimes stupid monkey things for stupid monkeys like all of us and you are not that bad at all. Talking about AGI (or strong AI or whatever it is called), there are many roads to Rome. There is enough space for AGI (and not all people think the same about it) on this thread, or so I would hope. Don't forget that many ideas, possibly singularity too, have their roots in Science Fiction. A bit of fantasizing should be allowed!! Gudrun On 2 Feb 2008, at 08:54, Samantha Atkins wrote: WTF does this have to do with AGI or Singularity? I hope the AGI gets here soon. We Stupid Monkeys get damn tiresome. - samantha On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:06 AM, gifting wrote: On 29 Jan 2008, at 14:13, Vladimir Nesov wrote: On Jan 29, 2008 11:49 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, but why can't they all be dumped in a single 'normal' multiverse? If traveling between them is accommodated by 'decisions', there is a finite number of them for any given time, so it shouldn't pose structural problems. The whacko, speculative SF hypothesis is that lateral movement btw Yverses is conducted according to ordinary laws of physics, whereas vertical movement btw Yverses is conducted via extraphysical psychic actions ;-)' What differentiates psychic actions from non-psychic so that they can't be considered ordinary? If I can do both, why aren't they both equally ordinary to me (and everyone else)?.. Is a psychic action telepathy, for example? If I am a schizophrenic and hear voices, is this a psychic experience? What is a psychic action FOR YOU, or in your set of definitions? Do you propose that you are able of psychic actions within a set frame of definitions or do you experience psychic actions and redefine your environment because of this? Or is it all in the mind? Isn't it only ordinary, if experienced repetitively . Gudrun -- Vladimir Nesov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/?-3ffb4f - 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/?; - 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/?; d09758 - 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=4007604id_secret=92987600-02e3ac
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
Hi, Just a contextualizing note: this is the Singularity list not the AGI list so the scope of appropriate discussion is not so restricted. In my view, whacky models of the universe are at least moderately relevant to Singularity. After the Singularity, we are almost sure to discover that our current model of the universe is in many ways wrong ... it seems interesting to me to speculate about what a broader, richer, deeper model might look like -- Ben Goertzel (list owner, plus the guy who started this thread ;-) On Feb 2, 2008 3:54 AM, Samantha Atkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: WTF does this have to do with AGI or Singularity? I hope the AGI gets here soon. We Stupid Monkeys get damn tiresome. - samantha On Jan 29, 2008, at 7:06 AM, gifting wrote: On 29 Jan 2008, at 14:13, Vladimir Nesov wrote: On Jan 29, 2008 11:49 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, but why can't they all be dumped in a single 'normal' multiverse? If traveling between them is accommodated by 'decisions', there is a finite number of them for any given time, so it shouldn't pose structural problems. The whacko, speculative SF hypothesis is that lateral movement btw Yverses is conducted according to ordinary laws of physics, whereas vertical movement btw Yverses is conducted via extraphysical psychic actions ;-)' What differentiates psychic actions from non-psychic so that they can't be considered ordinary? If I can do both, why aren't they both equally ordinary to me (and everyone else)?.. Is a psychic action telepathy, for example? If I am a schizophrenic and hear voices, is this a psychic experience? What is a psychic action FOR YOU, or in your set of definitions? Do you propose that you are able of psychic actions within a set frame of definitions or do you experience psychic actions and redefine your environment because of this? Or is it all in the mind? Isn't it only ordinary, if experienced repetitively . Gudrun -- Vladimir Nesov mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/?-3ffb4f - 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/?; - 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/?; -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller - 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=4007604id_secret=92990369-76f3f1
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
On Saturday 02 February 2008, Samantha Atkins wrote: I am not angry. I am bored with what seems like endless often off subject prattling going nowhere. Then go build something? - Bryan Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ - 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=4007604id_secret=93013637-fdacf1
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
OK, but why can't they all be dumped in a single 'normal' multiverse? If traveling between them is accommodated by 'decisions', there is a finite number of them for any given time, so it shouldn't pose structural problems. The whacko, speculative SF hypothesis is that lateral movement btw Yverses is conducted according to ordinary laws of physics, whereas vertical movement btw Yverses is conducted via extraphysical psychic actions ;-)' ben - 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=4007604id_secret=90975788-c6f349
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
On Jan 29, 2008 11:49 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, but why can't they all be dumped in a single 'normal' multiverse? If traveling between them is accommodated by 'decisions', there is a finite number of them for any given time, so it shouldn't pose structural problems. The whacko, speculative SF hypothesis is that lateral movement btw Yverses is conducted according to ordinary laws of physics, whereas vertical movement btw Yverses is conducted via extraphysical psychic actions ;-)' What differentiates psychic actions from non-psychic so that they can't be considered ordinary? If I can do both, why aren't they both equally ordinary to me (and everyone else)?.. -- Vladimir Nesovmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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=4007604id_secret=91036630-4898ad
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
On 29 Jan 2008, at 14:13, Vladimir Nesov wrote: On Jan 29, 2008 11:49 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, but why can't they all be dumped in a single 'normal' multiverse? If traveling between them is accommodated by 'decisions', there is a finite number of them for any given time, so it shouldn't pose structural problems. The whacko, speculative SF hypothesis is that lateral movement btw Yverses is conducted according to ordinary laws of physics, whereas vertical movement btw Yverses is conducted via extraphysical psychic actions ;-)' What differentiates psychic actions from non-psychic so that they can't be considered ordinary? If I can do both, why aren't they both equally ordinary to me (and everyone else)?.. Is a psychic action telepathy, for example? If I am a schizophrenic and hear voices, is this a psychic experience? What is a psychic action FOR YOU, or in your set of definitions? Do you propose that you are able of psychic actions within a set frame of definitions or do you experience psychic actions and redefine your environment because of this? Or is it all in the mind? Isn't it only ordinary, if experienced repetitively . Gudrun -- Vladimir Nesovmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/?; -3ffb4f - 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=4007604id_secret=91059575-25896c
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
Can you define what you mean by decision more precisely, please? OK, but why can't they all be dumped in a single 'normal' multiverse? If traveling between them is accommodated by 'decisions', there is a finite number of them for any given time, so it shouldn't pose structural problems. Another question is that it might be useful to describe them as organized in a tree-like structure, according to navigation methods accessible to an agent. If you represent uncertainty by being in 'more-parent' multiverse, it expresses usual idea with unusual (and probably unnecessarily restricting) notation. -- Vladimir Nesovmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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/?; -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller - 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=4007604id_secret=90503257-2c3931
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
On Jan 28, 2008 2:17 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you define what you mean by decision more precisely, please? That's difficult, I don't have it formalized. Something like application of knowledge about the world, it's likely to end up an intelligence-definition-complete problem... -- Vladimir Nesovmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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=4007604id_secret=90505077-ab77a2
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] we can think about a multi-multiverse, i.e. a collection of multiverses, with a certain probability distribution over them. A probability distribution of what? John K Clark - 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=4007604id_secret=90356259-99a37a
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
On Jan 27, 2008 9:29 PM, John K Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] we can think about a multi-multiverse, i.e. a collection of multiverses, with a certain probability distribution over them. A probability distribution of what? Exactly. It needs stressing that probability is a tool for decision-making and it has no semantics when no decision enters the picture. -- Vladimir Nesovmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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=4007604id_secret=90386232-2d2891
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
On Jan 27, 2008 5:26 PM, Vladimir Nesov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jan 27, 2008 9:29 PM, John K Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] we can think about a multi-multiverse, i.e. a collection of multiverses, with a certain probability distribution over them. A probability distribution of what? Exactly. It needs stressing that probability is a tool for decision-making and it has no semantics when no decision enters the picture. Probability theory is a branch of mathematics and the concept of decision does not enter into it. Connecting probability to human life or scientific experiments does involve an interpretation, but not all interpretations involve the notion of decision. De Finetti's interpretation involves decisions, for example (as it has to do with gambling); but, Cox's interpretation does not... -- Ben - 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=4007604id_secret=90404327-911f15
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
Nesov wrote: Exactly. It needs stressing that probability is a tool for decision-making and it has no semantics when no decision enters the picture. ... What's it good for if it can't be used (= advance knowledge)? For other purposes we'd be better off with specially designed random number generators. So it's more like tautology that anything useful influences decisions. In another context, I might not be picky about the use of the word decision here ... but this thread started with a discussion of radical models of the universe involving multi-multiverses and Yverses and so on. In this context, casual usage of folk-psychology notions like decision isn't really appropriate, I suggest. The idea of decision seems wrapped up with free will, which has a pretty tenuous relationship with physical reality. If what you mean is that probabilities of events are associated with the actions that agents take, then of course this is true. The (extremely) speculative hypothesis I was proposing in my blog post is that perhaps intelligent agents can take two kinds of actions -- those that are lateral moves within a given multiverse, and those that pop out of one multiverse into another (surfing through the Yverse to another multiverse). One could then talk about conditional probabilities of agent actions ... which seems unproblematic ... -- Ben G - 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=4007604id_secret=90464629-d2f914
[singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
Fans of extremely weird and silly speculative pseudo-science ideas may appreciate my latest blog post, which posits a new model of the universe ;-_) http://www.goertzel.org/blog/blog.htm (A... after a day spent largely on various business- related hassles, the 30 minutes spent writing that was really refreshing!!!) ben -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] If men cease to believe that they will one day become gods then they will surely become worms. -- Henry Miller - 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=4007604id_secret=90160582-7ccb62
Re: [singularity] Multi-Multi-....-Multiverse
On Friday 25 January 2008, Ben Goertzel wrote: Fans of extremely weird and silly speculative pseudo-science ideas may appreciate my latest blog post, which posits a new model of the universe ;-_) Interesting post. I wonder, are you familiar with cosmological natural selection and the likes of Lee Smolin? (Other names to latch on to are John Baez, Kauffman and Brockman (the publisher), but only Smolin deals with CNS). Selection principles can be integrated into your idea somehow, to sprinkle in some anthropic thought as well as cellular automaton laws at the same time, etc. What interested me was your idea that consciousness would then mean work that shifts one into another realm of possibilities. I don't posit this hypothesis all that seriously, but I'm going to throw it out there anyway: It seems possible to conceive of consciousness as a faculty that facilitates movement between multiverses! You change realities: but do you change the fundamental laws by which it operates? I have sometimes wondered what it would mean if I end up making a certain choice in a binary option. Would it mean that I have influenced the laws of physics and that it is my novelty that has led me to the result? Or am I somehow limiting myself by leading myself down a path of (what you call) multiverses to a land where the laws mandate my death? Could the difference between physical action and mental action be that the former has to do with movement between sibling Yverses, whereas the latter has to do with movement between parent and child Yverses? Hm. I admire that you are dealing with an idea that otherwise might seem unworthy of note, but it is fun to deal in ideas and figure out what may or may not be useful, and I think there may be some things that we can usefully extract from this subject in general. The mindset that I am trying to apply to your yverse model is from Egan's Luminous short-story, the one that Baez once quoted (week123): Think about it. Once you start trying to prove a theorem, then even if the mathematics is so `pure' that it has no relevance to any other object in the universe... you've just made it relevant to yourself. You have to choose some physical process to test the theorem - whether you use a computer, or a pen and paper... or just close your eyes and shuffle neurotransmitters. There's no such thing as a proof which doesn't rely on physical events, and whether they're inside or outside your skull doesn't make them any less real. (Somehow there would have to be a generative force allowing the development of 'theorems' just out there in an abstract landscape, for all things must be based on simpler things all the way back to the primal source (an open force?). This is probably where the cellular automata comes in at.) Egan also describes how physical events can pioneer mathematics, like mathematicians shuffling around neurotransmitters, or even supernovae that produce processes that also test various theorems of mathematics. To integrate this into your yverse model, re: consciousness, perhaps each thought that you have is an expression of a mathematical theorem (of the sort Egan is talking about), and is particularly adding to the rules and laws of the universe, building up theorems. In the story, (spoiler alert), the heroes try to rapidly close the border so that no 'evil' theorems can enter the landscape and shuffle everything up, via intense computational work to go over all sorts of theorems to tie up the border between 'taken' and 'untaken' theorems. This is, perhaps, somewhat like what you are proposing for consciousness (except without MWI- which you are free to sprinkle in if you want). So, in this interpretation, consciousness is not the only thing that is able to facilitate the elucidation of the laws of the local reality, but really anything is, and consciousness just happens to be a neat way to get quick results of complex theorems and so on (even if the math we write on paper is simple, our neurons in our brain are wired in trillions of different ways, proving all sorts of theorems in graph theory). Thoughts? - Bryan Bryan Bishop http://heybryan.org/ - 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=4007604id_secret=90167672-80d674
