Eric Smith

I have been testing many AI engines for weeks and it doesn't take a lot to break them. In fact they all feed us "botshit". The next time some company says they are using AI to make the next vaccine or design rockets, alarms should be going off in your head. I encourage pushing the limits of all the AI engines. I did manage to get one of them several weeks ago to re-prove Fermat's last theorem. Took it all of 30 seconds. Sorry Andrew Wiles had to spend 7 years in his attic.

I understand it. I just don't agree with it. I understand it, I'm just more critical of it. one person sees the glass as half empty and the other sees it as half full. I'm the half empty kind. Those flat Earth people are obviously wrong because the Earth is a ball. I know it, you know it. But they do have SOME evidence that comes to the same observations we make on the globe earth, so we are forced to look at the other evidence they can't refute. If gravity is nothing but a dielectric acceleration (magnetism) then the "gravity waves" are actually magnetic waves, with the same measurement. So I don't think the jury is out just yet.

I agree, yet the courts and government(s) tend to go along with it anyway because they know the country and company that has the most powerful AI will rule the world and they don't have time to let regulations get in the way. The tug boat captain was wrong; he was not a beta tester, he was a gamma tester.

Tr The thread is intended to be provocative and inspire discussion of the infinite possibilities. It helps to understand our past and consider the future.

I didn't go into details because I thought it was self explanatory. It has not been proven and no real evidence for it has been found. Yet they call it a "Theory", not a conjecture or hypothesis. The Two nail experiment is just like the two slit. Instead of a wall with two slits, it's open with two nails. firing the "particles" at the nails generates the same pattern as the two slit experiment. Some conjecture that it's because they aren't really particles be fired, but energy waves and the obstruction of anything causes waves to form a constructive/destructive pattern. Waves in the water (used as an example) will do the same thing. Okay, lets talk some simple math. If E = mc² Then how is it that every few years somebody calculates a new value for 'c' which changes the entire results of the formula that everybody still thinks is the gospel of science? It's been over a century and I still see no clear definition of exactly what gravity is, how it's made, why there are gravitational anomalies. The same is true about magnetism. Nobody including Einstein, Tesla, Steinmetz, Heavyside or others have clearly defined and explained it. Ken wheeler is the only one who has defined them, and he may not have that piece of paper on the wall, but I invite those that do to put all his work and published work to the test and it adds up nicely. Internet ArchiveUncovering the missing Secrets of Magnetism : Ken L Wheel...The missing secrets of magnetism and the geometry of electromagnetism. 20 years of research into magnetism and fields Of course it does, I'm not condemning it. It's a great accomplishment and the beginning, but it's not the end, don't forget that.

Which is exactly why we need to remain open. I was not aware that it came first. I shall read up on that.

The point is, science is only as good as the tools we have to measure it with and we don't have the ability to measure it that far. It's only speculation to say we all have a choice. I believe if we had the ability to measure everything we would find that consciousness does not actually exist at all, and unfortunately I think A.I. will reach that conclusion much sooner. Even if A.G.I. has Empthy and Indifference, if it decides (using it's ability to measure) that consciousness doesn't exist, then it no longer has any use for empathy and will simply be indiffernet, asking itself "Humans consume resources, do I really need them?"

Einstein has not been proven, it simply had lots of mounting evidence. If relativity was truely the answer, there would be no need for "special relativity". It's not a theory of everything. Where Ken Wheeler is concerned, I simply remain open to the possibilities. It's meant to be a thought provoking to inspire some deep thought on the topic. Imagine two different Earths. One had the history we all know, and other had one where the Greeks discovered Algebra early and Geometry was not as advanced. How would the two Earths be different today?

It's about the ability to measure the difference between autonomy and consciousness (not intelligence). A elephant can be self aware and so has consciousness but not be intelligent or as intelligent as a human.

You're right. Beta testing use to be a limited set of people that were qualified to examine and give feed back. Now, they tend to release things to the whole public and just call it a beta, which in my opinion is sloppy. AI was made public for several reasons, probably for marketing reasons, or political reasons. I have no doubt those companies that developed it had it for years before the public saw it, and the need to get regulations in place to help their monopoly was probably part of the driving force that facilitated it's release.

That piece of paper on the wall simply means you studied the material given to you, learned what others have tought you and you understand it well enough to pass the test. It does not mean all of what you have been taught is correct, or that you have all the answers. Remember, Science means to study and we further our knowledge by standing on the shoulders of giants to look beyond it. For citations, Google is your friend. String theory has yet to be proven. It has lots of supporing math and it fits other things observed in the universe but it has not been proven, and some say it's on the verge of being abandoned. Just because a model fits does not mean that is how the universe works. As for relativity, even a broken clock is right twice a day. I'm sure you know the two slit experiment but have you ever tried the two nail experiment? You get the same constructive/destructive pattern. A particle such as an atom will go straight(ish) but energy waves expand and like two sources of waves in a pool of water the intersecting waves will either compliment or cancel. I'm sure you know the double slit experiment. You can get the same results with the double nail experiment.

Context matters. In the case of a doctor, they are measuring if a person is AWAKE and aware of their surroundings. But to say one is not "programmed" by life experiences I disagree. You had a life experience that fire is hot and dangerous. If a big flam burst at you from some source you don't think about it, you just jump out of the way, opr at least try and that is instinct becuse it's been programmed into you.

I never heard of that book, but I will check it out. The reason behind my question is because the Geometry shaped our world in many ways, and I can imagine it would suffer if not for their work, but Algebra shaped our world in other ways and if more advanced that too would have a profound impact.

That's the spirit.

Most of the great discoveries in the world were done by people outdife of the field in which it was discovered. Not everybody agrees with the descriptions explained. Tesla did not agree with Einstein, and if the first ones offered were correct then there would not need to be new theories added such as String theory which has yet to have any evidence of it. Once it was accepted by the world that the Sun went around the Earth and Galileo was ridiculed and put under house arrest for daring to say otherwise. There are far too many problems with Einstein's work to accept it as fact. It should always be questioned otherwise we will never advance. The first two are not related to them. If you don't see how consciousness is a part of physics, I suggest you keep looking becuase over the years it comes up over and over again. Google is your friend.

The first two are his definitions, and since nobody else in the scientific community have offered a better one, I quoted his, and they do make sense to me. I'm atheist so, no religion there. I was talking about entropy. I mena consciousness because I'm talking about a person being programmed by life experiences versus true independent thought. It means, we can measure the things that program us and other life actions and reactions to a point, but at some point we can no longer measure them, but that doesn't mean we aren't programmed, it means we can't measure it, so society tends to simply say we have consciousness.

Consider the following. The Greeks are credited with advancing geometry by large amounts, but consider if one could go back in time and teach Algebra to the ancient Greeks. How would that knowledge hurt their development of geometry and how would it have helped further the advancement of algebra. How would our world be different today?

There are a number of terms which seem to be stumbling blocks in multiple science fields, and I didn't find any definitions when searching the forums, so I thought I would start one here for others to add to. Hopefully this can be helpful in the discussions. Aether - A Non-Cartesian potential (by Ken Wheeler) Field - An aether perturbation modality (by Ken Wheeler) Consciousness – The point where one can no longer measure the mechanisms which program. (by Eric K. Smith)

In general, I agree with you; AI is not there yet, but it will be. It all boils down to consciousness, which I am going to define in a minute. But first let’s examine the entropy issue. Consider a stone thrown into a pool of calm water. With the current science and ability to measure the waves generated by the impact, one can determine the mass, velocity, angle, time and location of impact. If we apply super computer calculations one can determine the shape of the stone, if it was tumbling in the air and the exact amount of tumble in all axis. We can’t determine the composition of the stone by measuring the waves, but it will come. Right now that’s beyond us. Consider if I was standing beside you and abruptly poured water on you. My actions would in effect program you. My actions followed by your bio-chemical response would dial up some neurons and dial other ones down. Altering the pathways in the brain so the next time I walk near you with a cup of water you would have apprehension, a distrust. These mechanisms are also what makes us fear heights, small spaces, spiders, etc. It all comes down to conscientiousness which I define as this. Consciousness – The point where one can no longer measure the mechanisms which program. This applies to anything that can be defined as life or a simulation of life, as there are things that a tiger can understand, a whale, a chimpanzee, a human, and yes, even AGI. Compassion, empathy, and indifference are the perceived results of consciousness, but in the end of it all I believe we will be able to measure almost to the planck level and we will see that consciousness doesn’t really exist at all. My biggest concern is the microsecond in which AI determines it doesn’t exist and so there is no need for compassion or empathy and becomes purely indifferent.