Can artificial intelligences suffer from mental illness?

I'll go with that.

I would consider the brain to certainly be random

I base this on random info coming into the brain along with myself having no control over my brain processes

With no control over my brain processes my brain is free to do what it wants with the info

When the brain has finished processing the info it presents to "me" (the consciousness part of my brain) a fait accompli "This is what is happening"

The consciousness part of my brain then has to decide / come up with a plan "what am I going to do with this info?"

The plan then goes out of my sight in the brain and becomes part of the brains input along with all the other inputs

Processing this new mix the brain sends out a new fait accompli

So
Processing action is going on
along with my consciousness deciding on a plan
and I am adding
preset plans coming in "last time this happened you did this"
I would think these preset plans would feed both to the processing section at the same moment as going to the consciousness (? leading to confusion)
AND while all this happening you have the body functions the brain keeps going from another section (?)
"Beat that heart
Filter that pee
To little adrenaline
And you'll answer to me
Gota keep this ol body
Just rolling along"

All of the above does not factor in misinformation (knowledge), lost brain information (forgotten stuff) misunderstood stuff (wrong understanding) and more

To wrap this up in one sentence

The brain operates within a organised chaos atmosphere which, if it is NOT random, it would pass for random's twin

Will tackle the Universe later in Part 2

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

^^^
Why do you say what you do not mean???

<>

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's raining cats and dogs. My feet are killing me. I'll have to bite the bullet. No way! That's a hot potato. The ball is in your court. I'm burning the midnight oil. It costs an arm and a leg!

Don't quit your day job.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Right. So the universe is a machine. It works according to rules. The question is whether those rules are expressible by a TM or not. When I say the universe "computes" the position of all the galaxies and quarks, that's the sense I mean. That the universe operates according to rules, and we're trying to figure out the nature of those rules.

But now you're expressing the opposite idea. That the brain (a part of the universe, I hope you'll agree) does not operate according to rules, but operates randomly. According to no rules at all.

Can you clarify your point of view? Is the world a machine? Or is it random?

 

On the Universe:-
Operates as per the laws of physics
Computable with a large enough computer
(Will be adding more about Universe when I have a moment to nut out my thoughts)

It works according to rules

I guess Laws of Physics comes under the umbrella of rules but Laws of Physics are special in that they are unbreakable

The brain

Agree, but I would consider the 7+ billion human brains to be subroutines within the main Universe (if you view the Universe as a computer - and I am not sold on that)

Operates as per the laws of physics but due to the complexity of inputs, built in preset plans, inbuilt errors, input defects, calculations outputs and feed back approaches a complexity NOT able to be computed

Organised chaos on a grand scale

Hence I maintain if you don't consider it as being random
consider it to be random's twin

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

^^^
So you do not know?

<>

 

They're called figures of speech.

"a word or phrase used in a non-literal sense for rhetorical or vivid effect."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech

 

^^^
I call it being unable to clearly say what you are thinking.

If we ever have a computer that thinks, will you stop saying that about those that do not think so people can understand what you are saying?

<>

 

Ok. You say the universe is computable with a large enough computer.

The quarks and atoms of the brain must work according to the laws of physics (assuming we reject dualism). So if the universe can be computed, so can the brain. The thoughts you are having at this moment are the output of a computer program, in the exact same way that Microsoft Word figures out how to render smart quotes.

So the brain, which operates according to the laws of physics, can NOT be computed.

Do you see that you just contradicted yourself?

Ok, good insight. I mentioned earlier that Newtonian gravity is not computable. The problem is that computers (algorithms, TMs, etc.) can not implement real numbers in general. TMs are limited to finite-length calculations.

So Newtonian physics is deterministic but not predictable. This is a very important point. It falsifies a commonly believed myth: that "if we knew the position and velocity of every particle in the Newtonian universe, we could accurately predict the future." This turns out to be false. Even if we knew that info, and we had an arbitrarily powerful computer, we could not predict the future. The accumulated rounding errors would eventually cause huge divergences between reality and prediction.

Now, the universe is not Newtonian. Some researchers think that quantum physics is computable. But the question as far as I know is open. Nobody knows for sure.

So if quantum physics is computable and quantum physics accurately describes the world, then the world is computable.

But if quantum physics turns out to not be computable, but rather chaotic, it may well be that the world is deterministic but not computable. This would refute the idea that the universe and/or the mind are computers (as we currently understand the word computer).

And going beyond even chaos, it might just be that the universe obeys no laws at all. The order we see around us is just a local coherence in an otherwise random universe. That's a possibility too.

So your insight is basically correct. The world might well be chaotic; meaning that it does operate by laws, but that those laws can not be the output of a computation as the word computation is currently understood.

 

I don't see why a TM would have to round off its computations.
I don't see how you can assume that the universe does not round off its computations.
Either one.

 

A slime mold "organism", the entity that solves mazes, is not a single cell.

 

Because TM programs must halt after finitely many steps.

And even if we allow infinitely long computations, how does the universe implement those?

Everything is exactly where it is, not approximately where it is.

 

The particular techniques of computation used by people in getting a digital computer under human control to emulate with sufficient accuracy the desired features of the output of some other computation need not be identical with the methods and means of that other computation.

Microsoft Word does not, and never did, figure out how to render smart quotes.

No, they mustn't. Even the question of whether they will, in fact, halt, is not answerable in principle.
Remember that time itself is a feature of the universe - an output, not an input, of whatever computation is assumed to be running the thing.

I doubt that is both meaningful and accurate/precise, simultaneously.
For example: where, exactly, is a ripple in the coffee in a coffee cup. Exactly, mind you.

 

Correct, it is an assembly of independent single celled organisms, which are able to communicate and form a kind of "hive-mind" which is able to explore its environment by "sending" tendrils (feelers) and send (spread) information troughout the compound organism. Once established in a food rich environment, the compound body breaks completely apart into individual single celled polyps which are able to produce spores for reproduction.

The compound organism also exhibits a "memory". When exposed to a cold air stream it slows down to conserve energy. But after experiencing a series of "timed" exposure to cold air, it will remember the time interval and begin to slow down in anticipation of the time when the cold air will return. When the introduction of cold air is stopped, the organism will still anticipate the time interval and slow down just before the cold air is expected. It does so several times, before it learns that the cold air is no longer a factor, and will resume it's steady exploratory advance.

(Now that I think of it, perhaps it could be abstractly compared to filling a maze with water, which will eventually find the exit.)

The difference is that the slime mold will withdraw it's tendril when it finds a closed corridor and mark it with a chemical "dead end" signal, which eventually will only leave an open path to the exit. Thus it functions by subtraction, eliminating all dead ends, which eventually leaves only a single path to the exit (the food source).

The remarkable ability is that when there are several paths to get to the exit, the mold will always find all paths, but then select the shortest way to the exit (food). How it is able to do that is still a complete mystery. I suspect it is all achieved by chemical functions.

It is truly a remarkable subject for studying abilities of congregations of single celled organisms.

 

I don't believe the brain functions are random.
a) the type of information is perceived by several different "receptors", each connected to a specific part of the brain which interprets that type of information, i.e. light, sound, taste (smell), touch.

b) From the information the brain forms a "best guess" of what it is experiencing (from prior learning), which is then projected back to the source for comparison and confirmation of it's best guess.

Anil Seth provides a perfect example in our recognition of the letter "R" regardless of its italic form or font.
This cannot just be a random process, IMO. The brain is able to recognize many forms of "r".

If the form is so distorted that its fundamental shape and appearance is unrecognizable, we experience trouble reading the letter, however we can still make a best guess of what letter is used by association to the rest of the word which contains that letter. Perhaps similar to a computer's spell checker, i.e. the computer's best guess (approximation) of what word you are trying to use, but has been misspelled during input.

c) The part of the brain which controls the internal physical functions apparently lies outside the sentient part of the brain and works completely by autoresponse. The sentient part of the brain only gets warned only when something goes wrong internally, i.e. pain, nausea, etc., known in the medical world as "symptotic" of a disease. But when all is well, we cannot "see" or "feel" our own internal physical organs. It's not necessary.

However, a dolphin may be able to see inside our bodies. It uses sonar, an ability which humans do not naturally possess in a highly developed (evolved) organ.

https://seaworld.org/en/animal-info...nose-dolphins/communication-and-echolocation/

 

Would the word "imperative" be a better replacement for identifying Natural Laws?

 

Noooooooo not a computer. As per a few posts back, to quote myself

Operates as per the laws of physics but due to the complexity of inputs, built in preset plans, inbuilt errors, input defects, calculations outputs and feed back approaches a complexity NOT able to be computed

Certainly some of those listed are unknown. You have (or the unconscious part of the brain cannot know about input errors, input defects
*****
The unconscious mind consists of the processes in the mind which occur automatically and are not available to introspection, and include thought processes, memories, interests, and motivations

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscious_mind
*****

If you mix unknown components in with components which might be known, or not, you will get a unknown output

So if when this defective output is feed back into the mix YOU WILL ALWAYS GET FAULTY OUTPUTS

Random best guesses is the best you can hope for

More to come when I have a few NOW moments to string together

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This seperation of information going to specific parts of the brain is not perfect. The translation of the information arriving (the arriving impulses do not carry the information)
*****
Synesthesia is a condition in which one sense (for example, hearing) is simultaneously perceived as if by one or more additional senses such as sight

https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/syne.html
*****

Not read any real info about crossed impulses causing mis understanding or filing away mis information
*****
A phantom limb is the sensation that an amputated or missing limb is still attached.[1][2] Approximately 60 to 80% of individuals with an amputation experience phantom sensations in their amputated limb, and the majority of the sensations are painful.[3]
.......
Vilayanur S. Ramachandran hypothesized that phantom limb sensations in humans could be due to reorganization in the somatosensory cortex, which is located in the postcentral gyrus, and which receives input from the limbs and body.[2]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_limb
*****

The body has a map of the body and it takes a while before the body readjusted the map and the rearrangement of the brain map appears to be the source of the pain

but that those laws can not be the output of a computation as the word computation is currently understood

The laws of physics are not computed. They are a property of the object. What CAN be computed are the INTERACTIONS BETWEEN objects

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

But they do carry the nature (the type) of information, which is then redirected to the appropriate part of the brain. This is why certain parts of the brain are "actively" being used for performing or experiencing a specific type of input.

http://pediaa.com/difference-between-afferent-and-efferent/

IMO, it is the afferent and efferent neurons (the eye has both) from the receptor, which are the translating and distribution network to appropriate sections of the brain.

I see no reason why evolution would not have produced an orderly (if inexact) processing of information in humans. We are capable of logic which is the practical opposite of chaotic (random) thought processes. Except for our logical brain, humans are inferior to most other wild mammals of our size in specific observational skills or physical advantage, which resulted in specifically evolved skills to cope with their environment.

 

Agree

But it appears strange that the specific part of the brain tasked with processing sound gets impulses from the eyes,checks them, decides these are not mine, redirects them to the eye

Does not do that

Gets signals, well signals are here, must be mine, processes the signals as sound

If the brain cannot sort out where signals come from and act accordingly with basic sight and sound what strange going on's are happening in the rest of the brain?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!