Vladimir,
Your essay will receive a high rating before the contest closes. Agreement isn't necessary at all. I appreciate reading your opinion. My response is that it cannot be established that there is separation of the intelligence of physics' tools from the nature that gave rise to it. The potential in full had to already be provided for. This may sound creator like. It matters not whether it sounds that way or not. I follow where empirical evidence leads. the empirical evidence is that we are formed from parts of the Universe according to the properties of the Universe. There is nothing new added into the mix. If that was the case, then we would have evidence for the existence of miracles.
Computers will never be intelligent. They will always mimic intelligence. When I ask a computer to add 2+3 and it responds that the answer is 5, all that has happened is that electrons have changed places either moved to inputs to transistors or moved away from inputs to transistors. The computer is forced to display a meaningless figure and it is done. Only the observer can attach meaning to that figure of 5. Even for a computer that currently adds numbers, as it does when plotting the integral of a function, and does so far, far faster than a human ever will, it is doing something that we don't do. We do not add. We either remember the sum of 2+3=5 or we must resort to counting. Another important missing function of intelligence, for computers, is the use of emotion.
If it wan't for emotion, we wouldn't know the difference between a sensible thought and an insensible thought. Every conscious thought is a conclusion that was reached subconsciously after our subconscious mind searched for the best meaning to fit with patterns that our subconscious mind decided probably exist in the wildly mixed storm of photons that bombard us from innumerable sources. That mix is arriving as innumerable tiny increments of information about particles located throughout the Universe changing their velocities. They are arriving at the speed of light in formations that are never repeated.
From that storm we very quickly discern possible patterns and find meanings to fit with them. Just one of the things our subconscious mind does is it draws a picture of what it has concluded we should be seeing. That conclusion is presented to our conscious mind. Its conclusion is sometimes wrong. That is why optical illusions work. Even when we know that the conclusion is wrong, our subconscious mind continues to draw its own erroneous conclusion and we continue to see the wrong picture.
Too much said right? :) Please look forward to a high rating for your essay.
James Putnam