Kurzweil revisited

[Pliny]

Kurzweil

In this essay Kurzweil states that "consciousness" or "intelligence" could eventually permeate matter and energy and mould it to it's will.

Could this be our history and not a future ideation?

Edited April 14, 2010 by Pliny

[Bonam]

Kurzweil

In this essay Kurzweil states that "consciousness" or "intelligence" could eventually permeate matter and energy and mould it to it's will.

Could this be our history and not a future ideation?

Glad I got someone else reading Kurzweil ;p

That being said, I think that particular point of his essay is perhaps one of the less compelling. It rests on certain assumptions, specifically, that the advance of future science will let us in some way circumvent or avoid the consequences of the laws of thermodynamics. While perhaps possible, it is far from certain. In any case, these predictions relate to things as they will be in the relatively far future, at the earliest say in the 22nd century. His near term predictions are, in my opinion, both more credible and more relevant for us to consider today. For example, the idea of the technological singularity, the explosion of artificial intelligence, and the achievement of the immortality of the human mind, which he projects for around the 2040s.

As to your question, I find it doubtful. Our technology has obviously not yet progressed to that level. Unless you are actually making an allusion to religion. Or unless you are referring to the simple fact that the human brain is "matter permeated with intelligence", which it of course is.

Edited April 14, 2010 by Bonam

[Pliny]

Glad I got someone else reading Kurzweil ;p

That being said, I think that particular point of his essay is perhaps one of the less compelling. It rests on certain assumptions, specifically, that the advance of future science will let us in some way circumvent or avoid the consequences of the laws of thermodynamics. While perhaps possible, it is far from certain. In any case, these predictions relate to things as they will be in the relatively far future, at the earliest say in the 22nd century. His near term predictions are, in my opinion, both more credible and more relevant for us to consider today. For example, the idea of the technological singularity, the explosion of artificial intelligence, and the achievement of the immortality of the human mind, which he projects for around the 2040s.

As to your question, I find it doubtful. Our technology has obviously not yet progressed to that level. Unless you are actually making an allusion to religion. Or unless you are referring to the simple fact that the human brain is "matter permeated with intelligence", which it of course is.

Well. I don't know how Kurzweil arrived at this conclusion. But it could be, and I think it obvious that, "consciousness" is something separate from the physical and does permeate matter, as you say - the brain is "matter permeated with intelligence".

In other words, are you not saying Kurzweil's hypothesis is already realized?

[Bonam]

Well. I don't know how Kurzweil arrived at this conclusion. But it could be, and I think it obvious that, "consciousness" is something separate from the physical and does permeate matter, as you say - the brain is "matter permeated with intelligence".

In other words, are you not saying Kurzweil's hypothesis is already realized?

Kurzweil's hypothesis is to do with matter being permeated with intelligence to a much greater density than is presently the case in human brains. Consciousness, in Kurzweil's view, is precisely "physical" and not separate from it, hence why he thinks that intelligence and consciousness can be created simply by duplicating the physical characteristics of the human brain which exhibits these properties.

[Pliny]

Kurzweil's hypothesis is to do with matter being permeated with intelligence to a much greater density than is presently the case in human brains. Consciousness, in Kurzweil's view, is precisely "physical" and not separate from it, hence why he thinks that intelligence and consciousness can be created simply by duplicating the physical characteristics of the human brain which exhibits these properties.

Not from what I read.

As intelligence saturates the matter and energy available to it, it turns dumb matter into smart matter. Although smart matter still nominally follows the laws of physics, it is so exquisitely intelligent that it can harness the most subtle aspects of the laws to manipulate matter and energy to its will. So it would at least appear that intelligence is more powerful than physics.

He says,"intelligence saturates the matter and energy" If intelligence saturates the matter and energy and intelligence itself is matter or energy it would imply it could be saturated as well.

He also states there is no objective measure of "intelligence" or "consciousness" but goes into it perhaps being some quantum factor, once again the inmplication being that they are some form of matter or energy.

You may be correct in your interpretation of what he is saying and I suspect you are.

But then to me it doesn't make sense. It would read mattter and enrgy permeates matter and energy to manipulate it to it's will.

And the statement, "intelligence is more powerful than physics," further separates them from each other.

In my view, having no objective ability to detect a particle of consciousness or intelligence that it is an X factor and unknown and in that it could be something not of the physical, being neither matter or energy. We could postulate it to be something entirely separate and different since it is not objectively measurable but only subjectively experienced.

[Bonam]

He says,"intelligence saturates the matter and energy" If intelligence saturates the matter and energy and intelligence itself is matter or energy it would imply it could be saturated as well.

He also states there is no objective measure of "intelligence" or "consciousness" but goes into it perhaps being some quantum factor, once again the inmplication being that they are some form of matter or energy.

You may be correct in your interpretation of what he is saying and I suspect you are.

But then to me it doesn't make sense. It would read mattter and enrgy permeates matter and energy to manipulate it to it's will.

I think you are simply over thinking his words to a certain extent. Kurzweil is a scientist, not a philosopher. When Kurzweil talks about "intelligence permeating matter", what he means is basically taking matter and building a computer out of it. Matter that is used for computation in this way is what he dubs "smart matter". He describes it in this way to emphasize the extraordinary computational density that he posits will be achievable in the future. For example, when a few grams of material have the same computational power as all the human brains currently making up the human civilization, that matter is extraordinarily "smart".

And the statement, "intelligence is more powerful than physics," further separates them from each other.

This statement is not meant as a metaphysical statement in the context of his essay. If you read that section specifically, what he is talking about is cosmology. Specifically what he is referring to if you read the full elaboration of his idea in his book "The Singularity is Near" is what astrophysicists sometimes call the "entropy death" of the universe. According to our present knowledge of the universe, it will continue to expand indefinitely. Galaxies and galactic clusters will be separated by ever larger cosmic distances, until they disappear out of each other's light cones (that is, they become causally disconnected). Meanwhile, any processes that continue to go on can only increase the entropy of the universe. As entropy is increased, less useful energy remains to be extracted from the system. This is a fundamental law of thermodynamics and implies that as the universe ages, an energetic civilization cannot continue to exist because no more useful energy could be extracted from the universe. The ultimate fate of the universe is, according to our current best cosmological knowledge, a vast and barren expanse which can support no energetic processes of any sort.

This is a serious issue for some futurist thinkers and a fertile subject for some science fiction authors. Though most people would laugh at thinking about problems that will not affect us for quadrillions of years to come, it is worrisome to some people because it is the one fundamental impediment to the eternal continuation of human civilization to which there is no theoretically obvious solution.

For example, the Sun's death in 5 billion years is not a problem since if we still exist 5 billion years from now then presumably we would easily have the needed technology to either stop it from doing so, to relocate elsewhere, or to make the existence of the Sun simply irrelevant to our civilization. Also, by then, most human civilization would not be orbiting the Sun anyway. But the entropy death of the universe has no easy way out such as this, at least not in the common view.

Kurzweil's somewhat radical view (among the scientific community) is that this ultimate end can be avoided. Specifically, he argues that we will be able to understand the laws of physics so deeply as to be able to essentially bend them to our will. In the same way that understanding, for example, electromagnetic theory, has allowed us to harness electricity and magnetism and to use these to great effect, he believes we may one day be able to harness other fundamental phenomena to circumvent the ultimate fate of the universe as we now understand it. Alternately, he proposes that it may be possible for us to create and/or travel to other universes, thus making the eventual entropy death of this one irrelevant. This is what he means by the statement "intelligence is more powerful than cosmology".

Like I said, in my opinion, this particular part of his essay is perhaps the easiest target for skepticism. Almost everything else he talks about is clearly possible within the context of exponentially accelerating technological progress, whereas this particular section rests on rather speculative ideas (i.e. faster than light travel, or circumventing the laws of thermodynamics, or creating and traveling to new universes).

In my view, having no objective ability to detect a particle of consciousness or intelligence that it is an X factor and unknown and in that it could be something not of the physical, being neither matter or energy.

Obviously intelligence or consciousness does not come in particles. Intelligence arises from a specific arrangement of physical matter. We know this to be the case since the human brain supports intelligent processes and consists of nothing more than a physical arrangement of matter. The only argument against this stance comes from the religious point of view (that intelligence comes from your "soul" not from your brain), which of course most people considering this subject reject implicitly.

We could postulate it to be something entirely separate and different since it is not objectively measurable but only subjectively experienced.

That is consciousness which he states can only be subjectively experienced, not intelligence. Intelligence can be objectively measured. For example, the intelligence of a computer can be easily gauged by its computational speed (computations per second). The intelligence of a human can also be measured and quantified. When a machine achieves the intelligence of a human, that too can be measured, specifically, using the Turing test, or a modified version thereof. Intelligence that greatly exceeds human intelligence would be obviously self-evident.

Edited April 15, 2010 by Bonam

[Pliny]

Gosh I thought Kurzweil was interesting now I find he isn't so interesting.

Like I said, in my opinion, this particular part of his essay is perhaps the easiest target for skepticism. Almost everything else he talks about is clearly possible within the context of exponentially accelerating technological progress, whereas this particular section rests on rather speculative ideas (i.e. faster than light travel, or circumventing the laws of thermodynamics, or creating and traveling to new universes).

I agree with the hypothesis of exponentially accelerating technological progress as long as science doesn't cater to idiots.

Obviously intelligence or consciousness does not come in particles. Intelligence arises from a specific arrangement of physical matter. We know this to be the case since the human brain supports intelligent processes and consists of nothing more than a physical arrangement of matter. The only argument against this stance comes from the religious point of view (that intelligence comes from your "soul" not from your brain), which of course most people considering this subject reject implicitly.

Yeah, computers are intelligent too. It's the physical arrangement of their CPU. However, I think consciousness is missing.

That is consciousness which he states can only be subjectively experienced, not intelligence. Intelligence can be objectively measured. For example, the intelligence of a computer can be easily gauged by its computational speed (computations per second). The intelligence of a human can also be measured and quantified. When a machine achieves the intelligence of a human, that too can be measured, specifically, using the Turing test, or a modified version thereof. Intelligence that greatly exceeds human intelligence would be obviously self-evident.

Alright. Subjectively, you experience consciousness. You can only assume everyone else does.