Artificial Intelligence
In the following emails, Craig Gayner raises the question whether the principle of circle mathematics in the context of computer programming could become a basis for artificial intelligence.
1. Craig Gayner:
Dear sir,
I have spent the last two days reading your essays relating to circle math, and
have toyed with the notion of its interactive patterns that occur in our
perceived reality.
"The only constant in life, is the variables", I know not where I
first read this (or for that matter if I ever did) but I can see that it has a
direct relationship to circle math.
Ok, here is where it gets hard for me to explain........
By theoretically making every variable a constant.... yes a notion that would
be impossible by using one single base of calculations.... however by using
circle maths, i.e. accounting for all bases and variations there of, it can be
shown that all possible outcomes for any one event can be contained within a
circle. By eliminating possibilities the circle becomes a smaller circle inside
the original, ......... and so one until the circles become so small that the
outcome of the situation becomes obvious.
Unfortunately I know not of a means to calculate this enormous algorithm.......
yet.
But further to this if one was to use the principle of circle math in the
computer programming context, especially if the base number for any
calculations was changing with the possibility of random base selection.....
would this not be the basis for Artificial Intelligence?
Well thank you for submitting the essay for perusal, I now have a lot to think
about................
Craig G
2. Stephen Taylor:
Craig
This is an interim response to your email. I will look forward to
responding more thoughtfully in a few days time.
Yes, I agree this (use of circlemath) would be the basis for
Artificial Intelligence, and the reason I say this, is that I see it
as the basis of intelligence itself, as this exists intrinsically in
all living things, and in us (as human) resolves into the study of
neurology.
Please do not hesitate if you wish to add any further thoughts. We are
currently reorganizing our site and one of the changes I am keen to
institute is a forum for the discussion of whatever proves to be of
interest to readers.
Stephen (or Steve) Taylor
3.
Craig Gayner:
On further thought, the problem with
Artificial Intelligence is that apart from the processes of thinking there is
the relationship with emotion being attached to thought......... which in turn
affects the result. The emotion is derived from previous life experiences,
which determines the thought channels (processes) that are taken........ in
turn creating a personality.
This then raises the question as to how to create artificial emotions........
and therefore artificial personalities.
Moral issues then come to light, as to who (if anyone) will have the
responsibility to act as a 'god' by instilling the above-mentioned
emotions/personalities.
But I rather fancy toying with the paradoxical notion that we have been raised
using the decimal system as a standard for our thinking allowing a standardised
measure for our surrounding circumstances whereby the outcomes are
unpredictable, but using circle math by way of a non-standardised way of
thinking allows for the outcomes to be determined therefore becoming
predictable....... reverse thinking, by way of differing bases.
The use of circlemath, I predict, could
become invaluable by both the defence and the I.T community..... imagine the
encryption and security that could be devised by using a different math
system...... oh how my mind swims!
till later,
Craig G
4. Stephen Taylor:
Terrific Craig
I will get back to you
As before, send when/as you wish.
s
5.
Craig Gayner:
Steve,
The weekend brought to me an interesting notion....... the circle math that you
speak of could be seen as only half complete.
In actual fact, there is a pattern that presents itself through viewing
everything in our perceived existence. That being that For every good there is
an evil of equal value/scope..... for every life there is a death, for every in
there is an out, for there to be a north pole there has to be a south, and so
on.... My point being that for every positive there is a negative, a mirrored
image. This would be represented by a "infinite' symbol. I guess that
these circles could be seen as overlaying one another, therefore seeming to be
only one circle but they would be two entities nonetheless. This is what causes
a balance in nature, without this balance turmoil would overrule....
The 'infinite' symbol is also relevant as it demonstrated that there is an
ongoing never finishing
Nature holds the answers, man needs to ask the right questions.
Good V's Evil
Craig G
6. Stephen Taylor:
Craig
In this I answer only your email of 4June/04. In that, you raised the
question of an algorithm to enable calculation within the circular
system. At the moment we are in the middle of reorganizing our website
layout, hopefully within the week. It will page a discussion column,
and I would be pleased if you would OK our correspondence to appear in
that (so, eg, your email as below). Just for the moment though, I will
respond on the question of algorithms.
The algorithm is universal, meaning that it works unchanged in every
base. The first meaning of universal here is to see that one can use
it to calculate the answer to any and every mathematical problem
currently resolved by conventional means. It is more powerful than
those means, not only because it embraces and includes them, but also
because, applicable uniformly in every base, one can calculate
simultaneously in two or more bases (or any base of choice) and
project the answer into (one's chosen base of application).
The second meaning (which is a practical finding), is that it lends
itself to mental arithmetic. Granted, it takes years to become
proficient in its use, but this is exactly what children do in their
math classes at school. For the same, or less time children can
acquire a much more powerful mathematical capability than is currently
obtainable. This is a problem for educational departments whose
teachers are trained to teach math upon rail-track-like guidelines and
we are asking them to consider airplanes. Nevertheless, the method is
there and available.
s
7. Craig Gayner:
S,
It is fine to publish our correspondence, as knowledge should be free.
If it invokes thought and has no victims there is no harm!
Craig G
8. Stephen Taylor
Craig
My article on emotion is now posted (under General) as a contribution to our thought on the A.I. model. I believe that we can fathom the mechanism that operates in thought, and consequently reproduce its lineaments in model form, just as we can construct artificial limbs, kidneys and lungs. This can only help the support we can extend to those who are mentally afflicted and unwell. I will be very pleased to have your response and opinion.
Steve