Colin Hales

An agent X that lacks a 1st person perspective would not notice its own death. Life and death are indistinguishable for X.

Novelty would also be cast entirely in terms of what is already known. In our 1PP, 1PP-less X would appear to handle novelty inexplicably & vulnerably.

That's why 1PP evolved.

The 75 years of "head for AGI, bandwagon boom, bubble bust into useful narrow-AI" must end.

When real AGI turns up it will be very different. Embodied/robotic only. Start _small_. It will quickly become autonomous. Coached not programmed.

Ignored for 75 years. Maybe it can finally start! 🤞🤞🤞🤞

This is more than just a commercial bubble. Bursting it also bursts a science bubble... The computer cargo cult science paradigm, that has dogged "AI" for 75 years, finally gets a chance to end.

Inorganic artificial kidneys retain the essential physics of filtration.

Etc

Artificial versions of natural X retains the essential physics of X.

Organoids retain the essential physics of brains.

Computers throw all the essential brain physics away.

The implications are obvious.

... And here's the computed LFP waveform of a 2D slice through the 3D electric field produced by the axon hillock action pot'l of a pyramidal cell. It's kind of a lighthouse beam in 3D.

It's rotating dipoles all the way down to single cells.

50000 of these in a mm^3, recurrent, & voila! Waves.

It could easily be the local EM field environment that happens to guide transport and orientation of charges or charge moieties _sometimes_ in alternate directions.

EM fields are also quantum mechanics.
😊

And wouldn't it be helpful to have 1000 robot firefighter robots that could handle natural novelty like us?

And a thousand other niche robots that can tackle thorny issues with the same alacrity.

None of which will ever happen without real AGI processing.

Been watching the "AI" mess for too long.

No zoom link?

I registered. Why was no zoom link sent?

What happened to the zoom link? I was hoping to attend. I received no advice of the link ...

Please sign me up to present based on Hales & Ericson 2023.

I don't remember a nano standing out. Bio or inorganic. I remember thinking his stance was more a reflection of his own internal darkness, which I imagined was in equilibrium with his inability to play the traditional academic game. The people in and around EXI gave rise to crypto currency. Complex.

I met Eli during the heady days of the extropian email forum in the early 2000s. I was around when he had the "build it and everyone dies" psychological break that confined him to making a living through the AGI risk shell game.

I'm more of a "we'll all die if we don't build _real_ AGI" guy.

= Reasoning about things that apparently exist according to the evidence science demands pass through a scientist's mind (on pain of rejection for lack of evidence), and thereby masking the things that actually exist, and that create a mind that makes things "apparent", invisible?

Frontiers | Electromagnetism’s Bridge Across the Explanatory Gap: How a Neuroscience/Physics Collaboration Delivers Explanation Into All Theories of Consciousness A productive, informative three decades of correlates of phenomenal consciousness (P-Consciousness) have delivered valuable knowledge while simultaneously lo...

In 2023 we did a thorough analysis of the origins of causality in excitable cell tissue: it's EM field superposing vectorially in space from the immediate interior of atoms to whole-tissue level. The standard model of particle physics proves it.

Source: Frontiers share.google/kz0jy2WXoxIH...

Sound transmission is formally an EM field phenomenon, bosonic, part of the electromagnetic quadrant of the standard model of particle physics.

Music as "brain-to-brain" ephaptic coupling? ... Is not as far from scientific sanity as one might initially think! 😊

Imagine a specially engineered rock that has the physics of a subjective visual scene imposed within it via a video camera. To "be" the rock is to 1PP experience that visual scene. But no behaviour/agency.

Now imagine a 1PP-less robot zombie with behaviours.

Is "Agency" the word adding anything?

You have missed the scientific sense of natural vs "artificial nature", as contrasted with "made by humans".

See the depiction of normal science. The 70+ year lack of genuine REPLICANT science is the real problem. The missing artificial brain "tissue" is not a computer and is not an abstract model.

Saturday morning thought...

My prediction is that the real "Bitter Lesson" (www.cs.utexas.edu/~eunsol/cour...) will occur when the 75-year confusing, of "computations of abstract models of properties of nature" (computers), with the actual natural computation of brain signalling physics, ends.

Non-stop for >70 years, in a perfect string of fails, an AGI is proposed, is wheeled out, scrutinized after early signs ... And then off down the slope of the valley of disappointment it goes.

When will the science stop and examine its fundamental presuppositions? It looks like a cargo cult.

Having fun in the @braininspired.bsky.social complexity email forum. They are going through the Santa Fe compendium of complexity science historic papers (Vol 1) while wearing a Neuro-AI hat.

Journal club zoom videos for each paper. I did Turing 1950.

url.au.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/tjRTCk8vpK...

The EM in brains is quasistatic, non-radiative near-field. It's produced by cell membrane ion channel currents. Quite different to the tech in the article. But at least the EM field is getting attention!

I wish I was a reviewer on that paper!

Alas, too small! Physicists generally have the greatest problems "seeing" subjectivity. Which is paradoxical given that scientists' work is rejected if they can't get scientific evidence to pass through the 1PP of a scientific observer (on its way into the literature). Tough nut to crack!

The traditional process of losing a need for deep contact with philosophy, something new sciences all do, is in its end game after 35 years. Replacing it is a spectrum: physics thru to neuro to cognitive and up, all of which speak to "mind" at some level. Physics is the last to properly step up.

The science of consciousness transitioned into the physical sciences in 1990 with the work of Crick & Koch. So it's 35!

Half way through they speak of sentience as a foundation for consciousness. This is the direct opposite of it!

For 35 years we've had a neurobiological science of consciousness (subjectivity, 1st person) that doesn't involve any mention of sentience.

Frustrated. 35 years.

#1: Consciousness, AGI, and the Hole at the Heart of Science - Dr. Colin Hales imperfect, but improving's podcast debut!

My continuing campaign to peek out from behind a decade or two of lab obscurity ... Another podcast interview of yours truly in relation to "the hole in science" called "consciousness", and how we're going with it.

Enjoy!

url.au.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/kuPsCD1jmr...

#1: Consciousness, AGI, and the Hole at the Heart of Science - Dr. Colin Hales imperfect, but improving's podcast debut!

My continuing campaign to peek out from behind a decade or two of lab obscurity ... Another podcast interview of yours truly in relation to "the hole in science" called "consciousness", and how we're going with it.

Enjoy!

url.au.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/kuPsCD1jmr...

Interesting factoids:

1) Astrocytes have a significantly higher resting potential than neurons. The electric fields across their membranes are huge.
2) back of envelope on the surface area of all neurons and Astrocytes: 10000sq m. = 100x100m...

And we get to "be" that massive ~1F capacitor.

Based on typical averages, an estimate of the active cell surface area that creates all signalling in the brain (action potential & direct EM field coupling) for a normal adult human brain (astrocytes + neurons) ..... it comes out at roughly 10,000 sq. m. 100m X 100m. It's a 1 Farad-ish capacitor.