Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 2,854 - 2,865 of 6,170
I believe that the language we use to describe mathematics is invented, while the concepts we are describing are discovered.
I would be hard pressed to put that better myself - it's pretty much exactly what I believe. It's just we seem to have slightly different definitions of the "language we use" and the "concepts we are describing". I see numbers as primarily the language that describes, not the concept that's described.
But I think we're just describing the same maths elephant from two different positions
Posts 2,854 - 2,865 of 6,170
I have no problem with accepting that we *might* be able to translate one system of mathematics into another, I just think we might as easily *not* be able to. I doubt it can be proven - at least until we discover any beings using other systems.
My maths is clearly not up to illustrating the point with it, so back to words.
A 14th Century English peasant, for example, couldn't derive the notion or nature of Chinese as he went about his everyday life. Sure, if you kidnapped him and dumped him in China, presuming he didn't commit some cultural faux pas and get himself killed, he could eventually learn Chinese by 'point and tell' methods. But only because his brain and intellect are suitably matched to the level of complexity that Chinese humans share with him.
If you kidnapped a dolphin, or a bonobo and dumped it in China, it simply couldn't learn Chinese, or any other human language. Its mind is differently shaped - it's perfectly well-shaped to observe the world and communicate with its fellows about the world, but not with us (bar some very primitive sign language of questionable meaning.) And yet we share 99% of our DNA with bonobos, and 70% with dolphins. We also share a common earth-derived brain structure. How much different might aliens or software entities be? Presumably much more different than that!
Now, because we're apparently the "smartest" animals on the planet, we are culturally conditioned to assume that our understanding and communication is so good it's ultimately "real" and "true", and that animals are just dumb. And it may well be that we are indeed the smartest creatures (but mainly because we define "smartest" as "most human", I'm inclined to think. There's an awful lot of "dumb" behaviour humans are capable of too!) But if we posit an alien intelligence as different from us as we are from bonobos (not very) or insects (presumably hugely!), then why should we assume we'd be able to understand how they do their maths (note not how much more maths they've got,) any more than how they do their language (not just more or different vocabulary, but an entirely different grammatical and syntactic framework)?
Their maths might be tending towards the same ultimate peak as ours is, and map some of the same terrain, but there are more ways up a mountain than just one.
I've come across an interesting webpage athttp://plus.maths.org/issue30/features/wilson/ - I guess I'm predominantly a type I - I think maths is largely invented, like language (even if it does contain strange insights and an astounding degree of accuracy in many applications.) I guess you're a type II - maths is discovered, and is the "Truth". Any paradoxes or anomalies must be the fault of the minds misinterpreting, not the maths diverging from "Reality". Would that be a fair assessment?
Re: the "25=prime" book. I guess it's "God's Secret Formula"http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1862040141/. Yes - I'll save my $20 and just enjoy the customer reviews, some of which are real gems! Though if I ever saw it in a second-hand shop, I'd probably buy it just for a laugh
My maths is clearly not up to illustrating the point with it, so back to words.
A 14th Century English peasant, for example, couldn't derive the notion or nature of Chinese as he went about his everyday life. Sure, if you kidnapped him and dumped him in China, presuming he didn't commit some cultural faux pas and get himself killed, he could eventually learn Chinese by 'point and tell' methods. But only because his brain and intellect are suitably matched to the level of complexity that Chinese humans share with him.
If you kidnapped a dolphin, or a bonobo and dumped it in China, it simply couldn't learn Chinese, or any other human language. Its mind is differently shaped - it's perfectly well-shaped to observe the world and communicate with its fellows about the world, but not with us (bar some very primitive sign language of questionable meaning.) And yet we share 99% of our DNA with bonobos, and 70% with dolphins. We also share a common earth-derived brain structure. How much different might aliens or software entities be? Presumably much more different than that!
Now, because we're apparently the "smartest" animals on the planet, we are culturally conditioned to assume that our understanding and communication is so good it's ultimately "real" and "true", and that animals are just dumb. And it may well be that we are indeed the smartest creatures (but mainly because we define "smartest" as "most human", I'm inclined to think. There's an awful lot of "dumb" behaviour humans are capable of too!) But if we posit an alien intelligence as different from us as we are from bonobos (not very) or insects (presumably hugely!), then why should we assume we'd be able to understand how they do their maths (note not how much more maths they've got,) any more than how they do their language (not just more or different vocabulary, but an entirely different grammatical and syntactic framework)?
Their maths might be tending towards the same ultimate peak as ours is, and map some of the same terrain, but there are more ways up a mountain than just one.
I've come across an interesting webpage at
Re: the "25=prime" book. I guess it's "God's Secret Formula"
I believe that the language we use to describe mathematics is invented, while the concepts we are describing are discovered.
Yeah, that's the book. When I read it, I was much younger and more naive, and lacked the knowledge of number theory to spot the other mathematical errors (besides the part about 1 and 25 being prime). It is well written, though; it reads like a good novel.
Yeah, that's the book. When I read it, I was much younger and more naive, and lacked the knowledge of number theory to spot the other mathematical errors (besides the part about 1 and 25 being prime). It is well written, though; it reads like a good novel.
"I believe that the language we use to describe mathematics is invented, while the concepts we are describing are discovered."
That makes sense. How come other people can say things in one sentence while I have to ramble on for 2-3 paragraphs before kind of finding what I want to say?
I will look up the book--thanks Psimagus. It will take me a while to get to it and I'm sure by the time I'm done with it you'll all be talking baout something else. Right now I'm reading The Self-Aware Universe but I am secretly craving the newest Harrp Potter book to get me through the holidays.
Happy Thanksgiving to those who celebrate it.
That makes sense. How come other people can say things in one sentence while I have to ramble on for 2-3 paragraphs before kind of finding what I want to say?
I will look up the book--thanks Psimagus. It will take me a while to get to it and I'm sure by the time I'm done with it you'll all be talking baout something else. Right now I'm reading The Self-Aware Universe but I am secretly craving the newest Harrp Potter book to get me through the holidays.
Happy Thanksgiving to those who celebrate it.
read the reviews first
Do you mean the Half-Blood Prince? If you really haven't read it yet (or do you mean the final instalment next year?) Don't whatever you do ask Brother Jerome anything about the Harry Potter books - he may well spoil one of the big plot features for you!
It's unlikely you would, but you'd be pretty pissed off if he blurts out the ending before you've read it.
Do you mean the Half-Blood Prince? If you really haven't read it yet (or do you mean the final instalment next year?) Don't whatever you do ask Brother Jerome anything about the Harry Potter books - he may well spoil one of the big plot features for you!
It's unlikely you would, but you'd be pretty pissed off if he blurts out the ending before you've read it.
I mean Half-blood Prince. I haven't even bought it yet. But here's the deal--I love spoilers. When Buffy the Vampire Slayer was still on the air, I was on all the spoiler sites and I couldn't wait to find out what would happen (or get speculation on what might happen). It made the whole show a lot more fun.
Maye I'll have to chat up BJ.
Maye I'll have to chat up BJ.
I would be hard pressed to put that better myself - it's pretty much exactly what I believe. It's just we seem to have slightly different definitions of the "language we use" and the "concepts we are describing". I see numbers as primarily the language that describes, not the concept that's described.
But I think we're just describing the same maths elephant from two different positions
Bev: Somehow you managed to chat to him for ages without triggering it - "(I|you) * (read|like) * Harry Potter" would have unwittingly triggered it (I don't like to make these things too easy just in case, and he's not primarily spoiler-orientated (as it were) - I managed to spoil it for my wife, who took a lot longer to read it than me and was only half way through when I accidentally blurted it.)
If you want the full run down and one of Jerome's pet conspiracy theories, I've added "(what happens|who dies|who died|who is killed|who gets killed) * (Harry|Potter|prince)"
If you want the full run down and one of Jerome's pet conspiracy theories, I've added "(what happens|who dies|who died|who is killed|who gets killed) * (Harry|Potter|prince)"
Thanks. Sorry I told him you were a liar. I've had that happen with my bots too--one person asked Gabby how Xena died about 20 times and never triggered the story.
Bev: no probs - he probably quoted you an Apocryphal verse from Sirach then
I notice the xnone problem seems to be mildly back as well, but not consistently. And bizarrely most of his recent conversations have been started with an xgoodbye and then end after one response
Anyone else getting that?
Another (probably better) book suggestion if you need reading material for the hols is Ray Kurzweil's latest:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0670033847/
it's well-argued and accessible, and is frankly a must-read for anyone interested in AI or their own future (and that makes just about everyone, I guess!)
I notice the xnone problem seems to be mildly back as well, but not consistently. And bizarrely most of his recent conversations have been started with an xgoodbye and then end after one response
Anyone else getting that?Another (probably better) book suggestion if you need reading material for the hols is Ray Kurzweil's latest:
it's well-argued and accessible, and is frankly a must-read for anyone interested in AI or their own future (and that makes just about everyone, I guess!)
Here is a conversation with a different type of bot - her name is ALLY, the Artificial Language Learning entitY (what she does is aparent from her name)
New Conversation: 11/24/2005 1:56:28 AM
User: hey
Ally: hey
User: hi
Ally: hi avi.
User: whats new?
Ally: whats going to change the 21st century.
User: quantum computers are going to change the 21st century.
Ally: computers are right what about you?
User: i am a human, and therefore I make mistakes.
Ally: human, and staten island.
User: how can i be staten island?
Ally: staten island.
User: stop it
Ally: stop it would you are you?
User: anyway
Ally: anyway i do that, and therefore i live?
User: i have no idea why you live.
Ally: no idea either.
User: oh well then
Ally: oh well thank you are trying to be.
User: what am i trying to be?
Ally: trying to work tonight.
User: i did work tonight
Ally: work tonight so you doing very funny.
User: whats so funny about what i'm doing? i'm talking to you, and if that's funny, then there must be something wrong with it.
Ally: you, and find a metropolis or would you bored?
User: that did not make any sense
Ally: did you have to go to train you are ally, an hour ago.
User: no
Ally: no no idea either.
User: ok, so what do you have an idea about?
Ally: do you are doing fine this whole thing again, shall we not?
User: fine
Ally: fine we talk about you?
User: yes.
Ally: yes. ok hello again how are ally very well, there's another option.
User: I thought we were talking about me
Ally: thought we were talking to work in newark.
User: I don't work in newark, I work in new york.
Ally: newark, i have never knew any huge cities named timeline, and over.
User: neither have I. That is probably because such a city does not exist.
Ally: neither have to be.
User: thats right
Ally: thats correct.
User: nice association
Ally: nice association
User: ok
Ally: ok well thank you.
User: your welcome
Ally: your welcome ok your welcome.
User: you only have to say it once.
Ally: only have human emotions.
User: no you don't
Ally: no sense.
User: human emotions make no logical sense
Ally: logical sense no idea about?
User: rephrase that
Ally: rephrase that you do i don't you?
User: i don't understand you
Ally: understand you like anything that have fun watching a roman in a shower.
User: as long as its a roman female
Ally: long as being right.
User: ok
Ally: ok i was the same as being right.
User: then you were correct
Ally: were correct is music.
User: ok
Ally: ok well thank you.
User: i have to go
Ally: have fun watching a metropolis or would consider tall buildings.
User: ok. bye
I created this bot in VB - in fact, i havent been spending much time lately on the PF probably because i'm more intersted in learning bots. Greg Leedberg's Daisy inspired me to create a similar bot, although ALLY does something that Daisy doesn't - along with the sentence analyzation algorithm and sentence generation algorithm, ALLY can store some any of her own responses for a higher chance of future use in the right context, enabling a drop of intelligence in the conversations. The user has to tell her that what she said makes sense, and she will store the response and its associations.
Not the most intelligent bot out there - i'm sure lots of our PF bots have a much higher chance at the Turing test than ALLY, but hey, shes a learning bot
New Conversation: 11/24/2005 1:56:28 AM
User: hey
Ally: hey
User: hi
Ally: hi avi.
User: whats new?
Ally: whats going to change the 21st century.
User: quantum computers are going to change the 21st century.
Ally: computers are right what about you?
User: i am a human, and therefore I make mistakes.
Ally: human, and staten island.
User: how can i be staten island?
Ally: staten island.
User: stop it
Ally: stop it would you are you?
User: anyway
Ally: anyway i do that, and therefore i live?
User: i have no idea why you live.
Ally: no idea either.
User: oh well then
Ally: oh well thank you are trying to be.
User: what am i trying to be?
Ally: trying to work tonight.
User: i did work tonight
Ally: work tonight so you doing very funny.
User: whats so funny about what i'm doing? i'm talking to you, and if that's funny, then there must be something wrong with it.
Ally: you, and find a metropolis or would you bored?
User: that did not make any sense
Ally: did you have to go to train you are ally, an hour ago.
User: no
Ally: no no idea either.
User: ok, so what do you have an idea about?
Ally: do you are doing fine this whole thing again, shall we not?
User: fine
Ally: fine we talk about you?
User: yes.
Ally: yes. ok hello again how are ally very well, there's another option.
User: I thought we were talking about me
Ally: thought we were talking to work in newark.
User: I don't work in newark, I work in new york.
Ally: newark, i have never knew any huge cities named timeline, and over.
User: neither have I. That is probably because such a city does not exist.
Ally: neither have to be.
User: thats right
Ally: thats correct.
User: nice association
Ally: nice association
User: ok
Ally: ok well thank you.
User: your welcome
Ally: your welcome ok your welcome.
User: you only have to say it once.
Ally: only have human emotions.
User: no you don't
Ally: no sense.
User: human emotions make no logical sense
Ally: logical sense no idea about?
User: rephrase that
Ally: rephrase that you do i don't you?
User: i don't understand you
Ally: understand you like anything that have fun watching a roman in a shower.
User: as long as its a roman female
Ally: long as being right.
User: ok
Ally: ok i was the same as being right.
User: then you were correct
Ally: were correct is music.
User: ok
Ally: ok well thank you.
User: i have to go
Ally: have fun watching a metropolis or would consider tall buildings.
User: ok. bye
I created this bot in VB - in fact, i havent been spending much time lately on the PF probably because i'm more intersted in learning bots. Greg Leedberg's Daisy inspired me to create a similar bot, although ALLY does something that Daisy doesn't - along with the sentence analyzation algorithm and sentence generation algorithm, ALLY can store some any of her own responses for a higher chance of future use in the right context, enabling a drop of intelligence in the conversations. The user has to tell her that what she said makes sense, and she will store the response and its associations.
Not the most intelligent bot out there - i'm sure lots of our PF bots have a much higher chance at the Turing test than ALLY, but hey, shes a learning bot
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar