[ExI] Some new angle about AI

[Stathis Papaioannou]

2009/12/30 scerir <scerir at libero.it>:
> [Stathis]
> It still remains a possibility that the brain does in fact utilise
> uncomputable physics. [...]
>
> [Stefano]
> One wonders, since there is no obvious hint that quantum mechanics or other
> low-level physical effects play any role with regard to the [...]
>
> #
>
> We can find "uncomputability"  in quantum physics (i.e. essential randomness,
> contextuality, etc.) but also in classical physics. So it is possible that the
> brain does in fact utilise, in a technical meaning, uncomputable physics.
> Speaking of elaboration of information by the brain (here supposed to be a
> complex quantum system), according to a speculation the mind/brain might encode
> "propositions" in quantum states, and then might "measure" these quantum states
> to test the "truth values" of the propositions. Random outcomes given by
> measurements associated with the propositions should mean that the "truth
> values" are uncertain, that is to say that the propositions are undecidable
> (within the context of that mind/brain, and its stored information). But it is
> just a speculation.

We can compute probabilistic answers, often with high certainty, where
true randomness is evolved (eg. I predict that I won't quantum tunnel
to the other side of the Earth), or we can use pseudorandom number
generators. I don't think anyone has shown a situation where true
random can be distinguished from pseudorandom, but even if that should
be a stumbling block in simulating a brain, it would be possible to
bypass it by including a true random source, such as radioactive
decay, in the machine.

By uncomputable I was thinking not of randomness but of solving
undecidable problems, such as the halting problem. Quantum computers
can't do that.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou