(C) Lee Kent Hempfling 2/20/1996
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS: “Multi-disciplinary field encompassing computer science, neuroscience, philosophy, psychology, robotics, and linguistics; and devoted to the reproduction of the methods or results of human reasoning and brain activity.”
The Artificial Intelligence Dictionary…edited by Ellen Thro
What IS wrong with this picture? First of all….Is there more than one method of mental computation? If there was, there would be different brains in humans and we all know, no matter how much the bigots will scream, THERE IS ONLY ONE TYPE OF HUMAN BRAIN.
.
So by reading the definition above isn’t the term ARTIFICIAL defined by the presence of robotics, linguistics, and computer science? Of course it is. Robotics is the study of the output of the muscles and it is not real. Linguistics is just the study of the output of the mouth and it is only real when someone is there to hear it. And computer science is the least real of all. THERE IS NOT A SINGLE THING IN EXISTENCE THAT IS EITHER ON OR OFF. There are many that are off and they simply do not exist anymore. But anything that is ON is ON in varying degrees. So the absolutes of computer science lends itself well to a computer but not to the study of the living brain.
.
Intelligence is best observed by philosophy and studied by psychology. Only neuroscience holds a candle to the possibility of determining what exactly happens in the brain that results in the intelligence philosophy and psychology can wonder about. Yet neuroscience is concerned with the chemical condition. The question then remains…. why isn’t physics listed in that definition?
.
If the reader will refer to the article OBJECT BASED REASONING in these web pages it will be seen how the term ‘reproduction’ sets up the end results we see today. Reproduction is not replication. It is a facsimile thereof. Not a real replica.
.
The methods listed in the definition are wide spread. Constraint Programming. Case Based Reasoning. Expert Systems. Genetic Algorithms. Neural Networks. It can be seen by the diversity of the approaches that there is not one definition as to what exactly happens inside the brain to result in what the study of AI has attempted to reproduce.
.
Something is indeed wrong with this picture.
.
If all of the avenues of study were equal there might be a chance for the real thing to emerge. But that is not the case. No matter which venue is taken the end result is an attempt to make what seems to duplicate the results of intelligence that is framed to fit the device that will do the duplication. The digital computer. Isn’t that backwards?
.
Shouldn’t the desire to duplicate the brain be accomplished in the same method the brain functions in? That at least would eliminate the question of whether the suit should be cut to fit the man or if the man should be cut to fit the suit.
.
The process that is before you in these web pages is making the suit fit the man. It is not attempting to make a duplication of the observed results of the brain. It replicates the process of the brain which therefore results in what is perceived to be the outcome of the brain. But it will be , as it has been by almost every scientist who has studied it, a completely foreign procedure.
.
The issues raised here are not definitive. These papers are not written in the scientific method. They can’t be. These pages are for the purpose of building the machine. No matter how much effort goes into a machine that replicates human intellect, consciousness and output control it will not be accepted by any scientist until it can be observed. But before it can be observed it has to be built.
.
The digital mentality of accepting something artificial as a stand in for the real thing has driven science to the point where the real thing is questioned since it is not digital. One of the largest objections I have received from scientists who have read some of these works is that it appears to be an analog system, which to them is archaic. If it isn’t state of the art digital it must not be real. It must be a scam. It must a hoax. It is very difficult for a person who has lived a lie to see the truth. The lie becomes normal while the truth appears false. Digital is a lie. It is a square wave function that only mimics a sine wave by the increasing speed of it’s computations. Reality does not function at such speeds nor in such patterns.
.
I have presented the mathematics to selected scientists . The discussions I had regarding the formula with a few of them resulted in their reaching the conclusion that since it was so simple it could not be real. What I might ask… is complicated? Complication is only in the eye of the observer’s ability or input to understand. What appears complicated to one person may be quite normal and quite understandable to another.
.
Of course the formula was not complete. It did not give the entire formula as it is for the human brain (that will be posted in these pages on some future date, after the company is started and has constructed the proof machine.) But it did give enough repetition where some people studying it were able to discern what was happening. It was and still is so simple that a person determined to find complexity would ignore it. That same person would most likely take a walk in a forest and miss the beauty.
.
Perhaps the term Artificial Intelligence is very correct. Artificial as there is nothing on the market now that is anywhere close to approximating the actual method of mental computation. Intelligence as there is surely something not-stupid about a machine or a program that follows directions. After all we consider a person who will not follow simple directions to be impaired. So a machine that does what it’s told may be considered intelligent. Especially if it does it correctly. But that same machine or program will never be able to do what this protocol does.
.
Know it has been presented with a choice. Make the choice based on intellect without first having to have experienced an event before. And make the choice without the prompting of a command or program. At a speed 900 times faster than the input. In other words. This project will build the machine that will REPLICATE the human brain.
.
In the mean time it will be ignored by those who disagree with the above. And it will be laughed at by those who think they know how they think but haven’t got a clue. And it will be funded by someone or some organization that sees the potential of knowing how we think. That sees the potential to all of mankind of having a machine that will be able to replicate the ills of the mind. That will permit the creation of mental disease to better prepare the cure. All without any programming. Without instructions. Without code. That special someone will get filthy rich. As well they should.
.
But in the mean time the artisans of the field of AI will continue to ponder on and weave their neural webs and be delighted when they create a disease on purpose in their programs that others get paid to remove when it is called a BUG.
.
This process will quietly go on.
.
I was turned down prototype money from the Arkansas Science and Technology Authority two years ago because the process is not digital. Of course it isn’t. But then of course that organization did fund a $50,000.00 grant for the study of the effects of swine on foliage. TRUE!
.
They must have been digital swine in a virtual reality garden. Is that picture any different than the one you first observed on this page?