Evolution - before and after genetics

international | sci-tech | opinion/analysis Tuesday May 09, 2006 06:13 by Seán Ryan

Chapter VII from Book II

A very short chapter that looks at illogical relationships proposed and adopted by Science. Explores Artificial Intelligence and takes a swipe at the Turing Test.

Imagine that some computer whiz kid discovers the holy grail of computing; he discovers an algorithm that allows a computer to become self conscious.

The whole of our understanding of life itself becomes unravelled. Up until this point we will have had many explanations as to what life is exactly, the only common denominator being that life is cellular. When and if a machine ever becomes conscious, Biology automatically becomes incomplete and incorrect.

Let’s look at an interesting chain: Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Psychology. Everything in Science derives from Mathematics. Physics depends on mathematical models to interpret the universe for us. Chemistry is the science of interactions between elements and molecules and is derived from Physics. Biology is the science of life and is derived from Chemistry. Psychology is the science of the mind and requires Biology to exist in order that it may exist.

However if it is possible to give a machine life, then the assumption that Psychology is consequential to Biology is wrong. Also the assumption that Biology is consequential to Chemistry must also be wrong.

In fact if it is possible to give life to a machine then we can state simply that psychology is thus far consequential to Physics but is not consequential to Biology as it is currently understood.

However if psychology is computable then it is derived from Mathematics and is not consequential to Physics.

For people who believe A.I. (Artificial Intelligence) cannot exist, it is time for them to ask themselves some very deep questions.

A person who doesn’t believe in the possibility of A.I. must also believe that the mind cannot be modelled mathematically. In other words, the mind is independent of existence itself.

This is kind of similar to what I’ve been preaching so far. But, there is one major difference in the way I think. I believe the mind pre-exists both creation and mathematics. However I believe A.I. is achievable.

If I were to create an Artificial Intelligence I would have to fulfil four conditions to succeed. Firstly, my creation would have to believe it existed. Secondly, my creation would have to believe it existed somewhere and some time. Thirdly, my creation would have to be capable of independent, and I suppose in some way rational thinking that is beyond my ability to predict. Finally my creation must be capable of passing the Turing test. This is a test whereby my creation would have to have a conversation with some human volunteers who must try to ascertain whether my creation is a machine or another human by talking to it and asking it questions, and if enough humans think it’s another human then it will have passed.

Well those are the conditions, but wouldn’t you know it, I’ve got a problem with the Turing test. It is based on two assumptions, the first being that a created lifeform is capable of rational communication with its creator, and the second being that the creator could understand this communication. Neither a tree nor a chimpanzee will pass the Turing test.

The very idea of the test itself bars the way forward in the search for A.I. If I am a creation of God, could I be expected to convince other Gods that I too was a God?

Now just for the pure headfuck value of it, if I have to prove to another God that I too am a God I must be capable of engineering a lifeforce myself and A.I. must be a possibility.

In my opinion the Turing test is unsound as it presumes that life has been defined and that it is understood. It isn’t.

Jumping on the grave of Alan Turing is not my intent here; nonetheless it seems he is part of the collateral damage left in my wake. Allow me to make some amends by addressing historians, educators and computer experts everywhere.

Wakey wakey, you dense motherfuckers! Charles Babbage did not invent the computer, he built the first computer working directly on the principles discovered and or invented by Alan Turing. Alan Turing invented the computer and Charles Babbage built it.

Of course if you really want to split hairs on it; the computer was invented by the Irish more than 6,000 years ago when we built Newgrange. (This particular computer has been running the same program without interruption or error for 6,000 years and is proof that the quality of software these days is total shite with respect to the good old days.)