[write4u, post #435, topic:7725]
[kurvature66, post #433 topic:7725]
… Let me define God first:
_____ “God” is a universal biologically caused perceptual phenomenon which causes: An "artificial 15% magnification of spatial reality and a concurrent 15% " over speeding" of visual reality caused by the fact the average person’s phenotype is 15% short of his genotype !
[Write4u]
This is your definition, no?
[Hammond …kurvature66]
… It certainly is my (Hammond) definition. And I am utterly amazed that you noticed it !
… Hey, there is a hell of a winter storm here and the Internet keeps crashing and going in and out. I don’t know when I’ll be able to get back to you, could be tomorrow?
GH
I feel like dancing the pas de deux … if my wife would not hit me over the head with a frying pan.
We can always make it a folie a trois
A folie a deux is a mental disorder that two people share and experience at the same time. If you and your best friend are convinced that her dog can speak English, it may be a folie a deux. … Folie à deux means “shared madness,” or “madness for two” in French. If three people share the delusion , it’s a “folie a trois.”
Hell, we may start a mass delusion!!!
A “controlled hallucination”. When we all agree, we call it reality!
[quote=“martin-peter-clarke, post:437, topic:7725”]
A quasi-intelligent meaningful universe was/is the product of our evolving Human Mindscape. Period.
[/quote] That is where you misunderstand me… The quasi-intelligent universe existed long before man made his entrance in the world.
Intelligence
Intelligence has been defined in many ways: the capacity for abstraction, [logic]
Intelligence is most often studied in humansbut has also been observed in both non-human animals and in [plants]
(Plant cognition - Wikipedia) despite controversy as to whether some of these forms of life exhibit intelligence.[[1]]
It is clear that the term intelligence has abstract qualities in addition to its application to anthropological meaningful awareness and understanding.
With the addition of the prefix “quasi”, the analogy is perfectly suitable to describe the mathematical deterministic aspects of universal mechanics.
Again mate, I don’t misunderstand. You misunderstand that I don’t. I understand that you believe the universe is quasi-intelligent. That doesn’t work for me except as poetry and insight in to your belief mechanism.
Your interpretation of the proposition of plant cognition is not mine either. I’d love it to true, as I would group selection in evolution. But it’s not necessary yet.
I forgive your compulsive patronization. You can’t help it. I know what AI is.
The universe and plants and existence and murmurations and evolution and slime molds can be apparently but not really; seemingly, almost, as if they were intelligent. But they actually, scientifically, rationally are not. Until their behaviour cannot be explained without it. It can.
If we generalize intelligence to be the ability to perceive or infer information, and to retain it as knowledge to be applied towards adaptive behaviors within an environment, then slime molds and other swarms, including bots, arguably have that. The universe doesn’t.
[quote=“martin-peter-clarke, post:446, topic:7725”]
If we generalize intelligence to be the ability to perceive or infer information, and to retain it as knowledge to be applied towards adaptive behaviors within an environment, then slime molds and other swarms, including bots, arguably have that. The universe doesn’t.
And that is where we disagree. I see the environment itself as having deterministically ordering principles, a quasi-intelligent functionality. The proof lies in the ability to translate all natural “laws” with intelligent equations.
Universal Intelligence
Universal Intelligence is a term used by some to describe what they see as organization, or order of the universe. It has been described as “the intrinsic tendency for things to self-organize and co-evolve into ever more complex, intricately interwoven and mutually compatible forms.”[1]
In attempting to design an artificial machine intelligence, the term universal intelligence is a descriptive term based on a mathematical formula. Universal Intelligence - wikidoc
And so are all universal functional potentials. It does not require awareness, only sensitivity and mathematically ordered response to external causalities.
The very definition of “function” suggests a quasi-intelligent process. Nothing to do with religion, although religion tries to hijack the principles to justify belief in a universal conscious agency, based on the human model of conscious intelligence and Free Will. The Universe has no free will, it does what it must by mathematically (logically) permittive and restrictive laws.
As to the appearance of patronization, please do not misunderstand. I am open to learning as much as anyone else, but when I state my opinion I just do not qualify it as “probative” awaiting correction which seldom is offered, other than “you are wrong”, which is a meaningless remark, IMO.
It’s not my definition. So your disagreement isn’t with me. It’s with the consensus.
Function suggests that to you. It doesn’t transfer. And I won’t misunderstand. When I said you were wrong, that was a matter of fact about, as far as your knowing, virtual particles travel faster than light.
That is not a fair comparison. Quantum field behaviors rest on different laws although “c” does seem to have a certain mathematical regularity that may be described as a quasi-intelligent function.
A mathematical function is the quasi-intelligent processing of data in accordance with logical operands.
FUNCTION (mathematics)
See definitions in: Computing, Mathematics, Chemistry
noun
an activity or purpose natural to or intended for a person or thing.
“bridges perform the function of providing access across water”
Similar: purpose, ask, use, role, reason, basis, justification, responsibility, duty, concern, province, aim, activity, assignment, obligation, charge, chore, job, errand, mission, detail, undertaking, commission, capacity, post, situation, office, occupation, employment, business, operation, raison d’être, line of country, thing, bag, pigeon,
MATHEMATICS a relationship or expression involving one or more variables.
“the function (bx + c)”
What am I comparing with what? No one but you defines c in that idiosyncratic way. No scientist. None. It’s not an argument. It’s how you feel about it.
It’s really a little bit more than that. I like to look at things from different perspectives than the everyday definition used for narrow utility.
Let’s unpack the function of “c”.
First : How do you define “c” as a function?
Special relativity and the speed of light
Because energy is equal to mass times the speed of light squared, the speed of light serves as a conversion factor, explaining exactly how much energy must be within matter. Aug 18, 2021
IOW, SOL can be used as a mathematical function, such as in the equation “E = Mc^2”
Nothing mysterious or exotic about that . It’s just that this is not popularly used in discussions on the properties of light.
No religion or metaphysics. Just mathematics and I consider mathematical functions as quasi intelligent logical processes.
A bit more than what?
c isn’t a mathematical function.
E is a function of M.
Your consideration is unique for you and does not transfer.
It only has meaning for you.
Why do you quote from wikidoc about Universal Intelligence, which is a mere usage. None of the links from it work. And it’s used in two pseudosciences there. Chiropractic is one. You’ll never guess what the the other is. As you obviously didn’t read it. You couldn’t have done unless you cherry picked after having done so, despite it.
[qkurvature66, post: #442, topic:7725]
[write4u, post #435, topic:7725] [kurvature66, post #433 topic:7725]
… Let me define God first:
_____ “God” is a universal biologically caused perceptual phenomenon which causes: An "artificial 15% magnification of spatial reality and a concurrent 15% " over speeding" of visual reality caused by the fact the average person’s phenotype is 15% short of his genotype !
[Write4u] This is your definition, no?
[Hammond …kurvature66]
… It certainly is my (Hammond) definition. And I am utterly amazed that you noticed it !
… Hey, there is a hell of a winter storm here and the Internet keeps crashing and going in and out. I don’t know when I’ll be able to get back to you, could be tomorrow?
GH
[Hammond …kurvature66]
… Okay W4u, I’m back. It wasn’t the storm that crashed my computer – and after hours of talking to Verizon help in India at 4 AM and getting nowhere, and thinking I probably had to call Comcast and switch back to cable instead of DSL, I got some young girl with a heavy backwoods Appalachian Kentucky accent who told me: “just pull the plug out of the wall on the modem and count to 5 and then plug it back in and you’ll be all set”
… Sure enough that instantlyrestored my new Win-10 --DSL set up to its normal scintillating performance !
… The point is, technical advance like any other advance is all about a person with the right answer, at the right time in the right place. And that “Hammond the scientific definition of God” which you suddenly took notice of, is just exactly that ! So before you go on beating your head against the wall trying to prove that there is an “intelligent universe” you better come to grips with the fact that someone has discovered the world’s first scientific proof of God, and proven it !
…Just a kindly piece of scientific advice !
…
I appreciate the advice, except I never claimed there was an intelligent universe. My claim is that there is a Quasi-intelligent mathematical universe. And that renders moot the claim of an intelligent God.
I am sorry you never discovered my use of the term “quasi-intelligent.” which apparently is my invention as I can find no reference to a “quasi-intelligent” universe. I do find many references to artificial intelligence, which of course belongs to the family of quasi intelligent agencies, but apparently that doesn’t count …
I understand that. The intent here is to show that I am not the only one who has proposed this perspective.
Here is one link from that site. It uses the term co-evolution which I do not particularly like. I like the descriptive nature of “quasi-intelligent mathematics” which is based on fundamental logical operations.
Persuade me that God must have motivated intent and how that becomes manifest.
Human create intelligently design objects such as pyramids. We can fashion circular objects and mark them with regularly distributed markings.
Even then the relationship to Pi is purely accidental because of the use of the Trundle Wheel. Pi is a mathematical property of all circular objects. The Egyptians had no idea, yet the unintentional use of this natural measuring tool created some of the grandest man-made structures on earth.
Measuring wheels are used in road construction, horticulture and landscaping to measure plots, sports grounds and fields. They are also used by the police or other specialists to take official measurements, such as in the event of an accident.
The possible uses of measuring wheels are very diverse, as is the range of different models and versions.
Well, ID has been debunked in the Kitzmiller trial where the fundamental ID arguments rests on the existence of “irreducible complex” objects assembled by a sentient and seeing supernatural watchmaker.
There is no irreducible complexity and therefore no need for intelligent design.
