Long ago the Greeks asked,
"What more accurately characterizes existence,
being or becoming?"
(Which is more important,a state or a process?)
(Potential or current flow?)
(etc.)
Nowadays we have an even more fundamental question,
upon which is based
all human activity attempts to reverse engineer the universe
and mankind.
No doubt you realize that I am referring to the age-old
SEARCH FOR THE INTELLECTON
Semi-intelligent, Semi-Random, Semi-Jocular
Thoughts and Semi-thoughts about Intelligence and Semi-
intelligence
............................................................................
(C) B Maccabee, 1998, 2001
...........................................................................
QUESTION:
What is intelligence, MIND, or is it MATTER?
If you answer ***NEVER MIND, DOESN'T MATTER***,
you may as well stop reading now and get on with your life.
However, if you wish a less trite answer, consider the following:
Intelligence
manages to establish
some sort of "unnatural order" of
natural things... order that exists
"outside nature".....
In order to determine
the degree of order there must be time
and dimension and memory.
(Why do time theorists often seem to ignore memory?
Without memory there is no "memory" of "time passing.")
In ordinary space we notice differences
by comparing a configuration of "things" with a reference
configuration (sometimes called "reference frame" or "coordinate
system). Memory is needed in order to allow
for comparison between one "thing" - a configuration in
dimension/space - and another "thing" - another configuration.
This is memory of state or arrangement.
(And comparison requires time.)
Memory is like a sort of "temporal inertia."
(You heard it here first, folks.)
Just as mechanical inertia can establish a reference frame in space
(send three balls flying along mutually perpendicular axes
and they will travel "forever" defining 3 axes in space),
memory provides a means for establishing a reference frame in time.
That is, we recognize that "things have changed", i.e., the "new"
configuration of things is different from the "old" configuration
by using memory of the old to compare with the new.
Without memory, and the time and ability to make a comparison,
there could be no realization of time.
Any physics of the universe plus life that leaves out an
understanding or meaning of memory is not complete.
Memory introduces a non-symmetry in time.
The non-symmetry comes as follows: we don't "remember"
future events, or at least not as well as we remember past events. Even the
terminology is non-symmetric: remember means to bring to the
present a configuration
from the past so that the present and past configurations can
be compared to see if there was change.
The "opposite" is prediction
or bringing from the future a configuration to compare with the
present to find out if things will change.
But then there is this past-future polarity that must be taken into
account: comparison shows there is a difference. Only by
taking into account the polarity of the difference (positive or neegative) will we know whether
the difference is between the present and the past, or the present
and the future! (You heard it here first, folks,.....and that requires
memory and comparison.)
Comparison is a process which requires time....time to make the
comparison. But, on the other hand, time requires memory....
otherwise, who or what would know that "time had passed"
or that "time will come"?
All is comparison.
All is difference.
With no differences,
variations, in space and time there would be sameness...a complete
lack of information.
Being.
States of Being. These must show differences or there is no
change, no information,
nothing.
All is Being.
And yet, time is important
because without time there could be no comparision...
There would be no "becoming" ...
All is Becoming.
!!!*** WELL, WHICH IS IT?
(The ancient Greeks would be understand our quandry.)
We need references for comparison.
Can we Self-reference? Or do we need to get "out of
the system" a la Godel, in order to "know?"
Who would know? Who is outside the system?
(That which created the system?)
Without memory or "prediction" (= memory of the future)
of the arrangement of "things" there would be no way
of comparison to determine whether or not there are differences. There
would be no information
... no intelligence
....no intellecton.
Bear with me:
I imagine myself in an enclosure of uniform grey.
I can see, feel, hear only grey.
There are no differences.
It is the ultimate "DC level."
There is no information.
I die.
(Bored to death, no doubt!)
Within some volume of
of Space-Time-Other
(herein called STO; where Other stands for other dimensions or
other degrees of freedom, such as charge, spin, etc.)
there is a
form or ordered arrangement of "some things"
which can be created and, at a later date,
measured.
Matter and energy
in the universe have a crude form of "memory."
This memory is manifested in conservation laws,
one of which is related to what is generally called
inertia, but I call it "Newtonian memory." A piece of matter
"remembers" which direction and how fast it was traveling after a
collision (conservation of momentum in some STO). A large
Newtonian memory bank (non-relativistic) could be constructed of
"stupid matter" particles in which the input of information causes
them all to move in various directions along simple trajectories in
STO.
This is stupid memory. A bunch of hockey pucks.
Each particle carries
at least two types of information: direction and speed. (It could
also carry charge, spin and values of the other allowed degrees of freedom.)
If, later on in time, we needed to know some of this
stored information we would simply measure the directions and speeds in
which they are moving.
Well, not so "simply measure." If these are subatomic particles then we
have the quantum measurement problem that there is "inaccuracy" built into
the measurement. A sort of inherent fuzzy memory.
Assuming there were no modifications to their inertially
determined paths, the directions
and speeds at STO(2) (the second space-time-other position)
would be the same as at STO(1) (the first or initial STO position).
(Of course, collisions between these stupid particles are not allowed.)
On the other hand, if these particles are small enough to be
"quantum mechanical" or are noticably affected by the continual
buffeting of "zero point fluctuations" then
the memory will have a "decoherence time." Quantum effects
destroy the precision of stupid memory.
Direction and speed are relative to
some reference in STO and both must be measureable in some way.
If the measurement destroys the reference frame, may as well
forget it (forgetting is like negative memory).
However, if the measurement destroys the remembered information by altering
the particles, that may be OK if we can re-store the information
in a new set of particles... a "dynamic" memory.
If a stupid particle endowed with inertia could measure its own
direction and speed with respect to STO or some reference frame it
could have "Newtonian memory." If it could act on this information
and do something "smart", something not bound by conservation laws,
it would no longer be stupid.
It would have a sort of self-awareness.
It might be an intellecton.
What is an intellecton?
QUESTION:
Is there such a thing as a subunit or building block of intelligence?
Where does intelligence start in the scale of STO?
Intelligence
manages to establish
some sort of "unnatural order" of
natural things... order that exists
"outside nature".....
Is the universe intelligent?
Is a galaxy intelligent?
Is a star intelligent?
Is a planet intelligent?
Is an animal intelligent?
Is a bacterium intelligent?
Is a cell intelligent?
Is a molecule intelligent?
Is an atom intelligent?
Is an electron intelligent?
Is the field around an electron intelligent?
Is a quark intelligent?
Is a gluon intelligent?
Is the vacuum intelligent?
Is intelligence localized at a point or distributed throughout a volume?
Is intelligence "inside" our universe.....
or is it "outside" our universe...
.....perhaps in a "multiverse?
We now know about nanobacteria.
There are recent suggestions that the precursors
of life exist in comets and that in the cold of space
the addition of ultraviolet (UV) radiation to the carbon
compounds that adhere to tiny grains of material may be able
to create cells. Perhaps nanobacteria are created from
random processes involving carbon compounds and
UV light. If so, this would imply that the
precursors of life were created soon
after the "big bang" that
started the universe.
Did these precursors have a rudimentary form of intelligence?
If so, does this mean that intelligence grew with
increasing complexity of the universe?
Or did intelligence already exist
as a "field" into which the
universe has expanded?
(A "field" is a measurable something that has a value
at all locations in STO, or at least all the locations of
interest in STO.)
As the scale size shrinks does intelligence drop out in a
"quantum step" or does it fade gradually away to a
minimum level at some scale size, the
scale size of the intellecton,
below which there is only
non-intelligence?
Does intelligence reside in some tiny volume of STO
or is it distributed throughout STO?
Does basic intelligence reside in a subunit of matter
or a "volume" of some field (EM,gravity,weak,strong, other)?
Or does intelligence reside in groups of elements of matter
and or volumes of field?
Does intelligence require the presence of
matter for anything other than memory and
comparison?
.... for Being and Becoming?
Or is it superimposed from "another reality" or a "higher dimension" of
STO onto our version of STO?
Perhaps the intellecton knows.
But how would we know?
Are we smart enough to reverse engineer intelligence? Can we
understand ourselves? Does a group of intellectons have the
capability of understanding a single intellecton?
Or are we sufficiently imbedded in it to be
unable to recognize it?
Is it impossible for us to prove ourselves?
("Godel imbedding").
(I can imagine a situation in which an intelligent entity is
not sufficiently intelligent to understand itself.)
How do we determine the presence of intelligence?
Intelligent "things" perform activities or
processes within STO which unintelligent things
(Non-Intellectons; NIs) don't perform.
Intelligent things have may have "free will."
NIs don't have free will.
NI's are perfectly random in their activities when free of
"binding forces."
When not free of binding forces,
NIs are constrained to obey "conservation rules" of the forces.
These rules force the NIs to act according to some order.
Their actual motions may appear random to semi-intellectuals
like us, but they are, in fact, acting strictly according to
rules of the interacting forces.
They are the ultimate "hockey pucks." They do not
"kick against the pricks of chance"
but rather allow themselves to be buffetted by the
activities around them.
This is true of NIs.
If you don't believe me, just watch one.
Watch for a few nanoseconds,
or a few microseconds, or a few seconds, or
a few days/months/years/eons/ages of the solar system, etc.
Did you see a NI do anything that is "smart?"
Of course not.
On the other hand, you can't be sure.
Perhaps this "candidate NI" is
actually an intellecton.
How would you know? After all, you haven't watched forever.
Perhaps the candidate NI will
do something intelligent after you stop watching.
Perhaps it will resist the pricks of chance.
Perhaps it will go someplace not dictated by the
actions of stupid force fields and other particles.
Perhaps it did something non-random before you started watching.
After all, you didn't start watching when the universe began.
And, even while you watch for intelligent activities by NIs,
you can't watch on an extremely small or extremely large scale in STO.
Therefore you can't determine
whether the activities are perfectly random or not.
Perhaps an electron/proton/quark,etc. does something
intelligent (disobeys simple physics) within a time
period of 1 femtosecond (=1/10,000,000,000,000 of
a second) once every
microsecond or millisecond or second or .... or once every eon.
How would you know? Can you watch for a millisecond with
a time resolution of a femtosecond? Probably not.
But even if you did, you might be watching the wrong
electron/proton/quark/etc.
Perhaps the electron/proton/quark, etc.
does something intelligent within a space of 1
picometer everytime it travels 1 nanometer.
You would never know.
Perhaps the basic building block of
intelligence has "free will" for short
periods of time and space...
perhaps there is a very short "lifetime"
or "decoherence time" of fundamental "free will."
You would never know.
Perhaps "macroscopic intelligence" arises when there are so many
(millions, billions, zillions)
of intellectons in a small volume of STO so that in any small
interval of time (but much larger than the time it takes for light...
or at least the speed of information transmission... to
cross the volume) many (thousands or millions or billions) of these are
exercising their short-term "free will." In other words, perhaps
intelligence is a time average of the sporadic activities of many
individual intellectons, each of which has a very short "intelligence
lifetime."
We don't know, but perhaps the intellecton knows.
Just how big does an intelligence have to be
before we recognize it as such?
Is the scale size or order parameter
1 m or 1 cm or 1 mm or 1 micron or 1 nm or 1 fm......
or should we go the
other way.... 1 Megameter, 1 Terameter, 1 parsec, ......?
What if non-perfectly-random/non-perfectly ordered "free will" activities
are being carried on on a scale of 1 femtometer or 1 megameter.
Would we know?
Could the intellecton be the size of a nucleus or the size of a universe?
Could it be outside the universe but penetrating at one point in time
and all space...
or one point in space and all time?
Is a nucleus just a NI, bouncing stupidly around at the whimsy of four (or
more) forces of nature? Or does it occasionally exercise its "free will?"
How would we know?
Can we measure the activities of a nucleus?
If it has inertia and therefore basic "Newtonion memory,"
can it exhibit intelligence?
Where can we find an intellecton?
WIthin a brain?
Within a group of cells in a brain?
Within a single cell in a brain? (Is a bacterium intelligent?)
Within a portion of a cell? (Is a mitochondrian or cell wall intelligent?)
Within molecule of a portion of a cell? (Is a gene intelligent?
Is a virus intelligent? Is a protein intelligent?)
Within an atom of a molecule? (Is hydrogen or oxygen intelligent?)
Within the constituents of an atom? (Is an electron/proton intelligent?)
Or is the intellecton superimposed from without?
Is the arrangement of atoms/molecules/cells within a brain
actually an antenna into another reality or dimension?
Is the brain our connection with a universe of intelligence?
Or is intelligence just an accident of...or perhaps guaranteed by...the complexity of certain
arrangements of stupid atoms and molecules?
Is the intellecton actually acting over a large scale size in STO in such a way as to give
groups of NIs (stupid electrons/quarks/atoms/molecules) the ability to act non-random...as if
they had "free will?" And, if the intellecton is huge in STO, does it create pathways for the
transmission of information between groups of NIs (e.g., "telepathons")? Could it cause
communication at a distance? Remote Viewing? Superuminal transference of information?
All subunits or matter have Newtonian memory (conservation of momentum) which decoheres over a
very,very short time because of collisions between the subunits. Yet, groups of
atoms/molecules/chemical
compounds/cells, in which the subunits are held fixed in certain places relative to one
another, seem to possess another sort of memory with a relatively long coherence. Is the memory
built into the binding of the atoms/molecules, a binding which lasts longer than stupid
Newtonian memory/coherence? Is the memory built into the substrate upon which the intellectons
exist (the vacuum state)?
And what about the other part of intelligence, the action part. An
intellecton is as an intellecton does. If it does nothing then it
provides no evidence of intelligence. There is just no change.
No information. No "becoming." Just a steady state..."being."
Death.
An intellecton must do something "unnatural."
Something. Becoming.
It uses the forces and energies and vibrations to
help it carry out its "free will" either alone or in concert with other
intellectons. The intellecton is the ultimate freeloader, living off the
continual activity of the NIs which reside in and make up the STO.
Can we build an artificial intellecton? If so, would it resemble a "natural
intellecton?" Would an artificial intellecton have the same capabilities
and "free will" as a natural intellecton?
(And, speaking of artificial intelligence, once you know that Other
Intelligences - OI - as manifested by the UFO phenomenon are real and
messing around in human affairs, and perhaps have been doing so for
eons, you can ask....
are we the artificial intelligence?)
.......................................................
THIS HAS BEEN CHAPTER 1,234,567,etc.... OF AN UNENDING SEARCH
FOR THE INTELLECTON.
brought to you by the International UBB (Universal Brotherhood of Backengineers....reverse
engineering the Universe for the good(?) of mankind...and mainly because we want to know WHAT
THE HELL IS GOING ON, ANYWAY!!!!)
The intent has been to cause your intellectons to get together and
think about this. The questions above may be considered rhetorical....
no specific answers needed.
...........................................................................
(copyright by Bruce Maccabee, Universal Vision Unlimited,1998, 2001)
_______________________________________\
DISCUSSION:
prompted by a reader who wrote:
>Fascinating...
>I would say that an Intellecton is a Force Quanta -- the >fundamental
>impenetrable in principle, yielding classical physics, >unity existence,
>>infinite morphology ordered by itself, and all kinds of >apparently-non-local
>behaviors possible. What physics calls an Electron is a >good candidate for
>this fundamental...
<
TO WHICH I RESPONDED
Perhaps....
I certainly raised the question, is the electron the
fundamental "unit of intelligence."
The idea of such a fundamental unit makes some sense if our
brain is like a "hive mind" where a bunch of creatures, each
complete in its ability to sense the surroundings and to
affect its surroundings (e.g., ants, bees), can act
together to accomplish "great things." In fact, I suppose
one could speculate that all intelligence is a form of "hive
mind", with the hive being either internal to the creature
or external...or both. (INTERNAL: the BRAIN as a "hive
mind" as all the "little neurons/cells" work together while
living "independently..in a wram bath of nourishing
fluid.... to accomplish....life of a human!!! You read it
here first, folks!) Humans, too, act in concert.... so this
could be a "hive mind" activity of humans.
Thus one might have a heirarchy as follows:
1)fundamental unit of intelligence (capable of sensing
surrounding and acting on it): intellecton
2) correlation or group intelligence is an (quantum
"entangled"(?)) collection of intellectons within
one larger scale individual (e.g., with the brain of an ant
or a dog or a human)
3) "hive mind" is a correlation between "larger scale
individuals" (e.g., correlation between ants, dogs, humans)
The level of intelligence we typically assign is based on
the operationally observed capabilities of individual
creatures. Humans (apparent) can do more things than any
other creature and hence are considered the most
intelligent. Furthermore, human's can work together to
create a "hive."
On the other hand, this does not rule out the possibility of
a "hive mind" composed of a group of entities such that the
collection "hive mind" is more intelligent than a single
human or perhaps even more intelligent than all humans taken
together.
It is thinking like this which establishes a three-
dimensional size scale for intelligence and it was reversing
this sort of thinking that caused me to go back to
asking.....just what is the smallest scale for which we
could attribute intelligence? And how do we know
intelligence as opposed to random activities, anyway?
And then there is memory.
Without memory there is "nothing." Well, there may as well
be nothing because without memory no one would be able to
realize change... or even to realize realization... because
it all takes "time" and time is tied up with "memory", as
described in the above paper on the intellecton.
Unfortunately in many (or most? or all?) theories of
consciousness the importance of memory gets left behind.
Emperical fact: messing with the brain screws up or loses
memories! Certainly sounds as if the "meat computer" stores
information in hardware...... unless....
(bizarre) the brain is a communicator with "another world"
where memories are stored and the ADDRESS LOCATIONS in the
other world are what is stored in the brain, so that cutting
out a piece of the brain can remove the address locations
and hence the access to the memories.
Hmmmmm.Sounds like another science fiction movie possible
here!
(You read it here first, folks. Universal Vision Unlimited.)
