Modeling Universal Intelligence by Sue Lingo

Hi John...

Thank you for reading my essay with attention as required to make a comparative analysis between your Successful Self-Creation theoretical model, and my Unified Quantization of a Sphere (UQS) geometry model.

I have now read your essay, I do see similarities, and many of the seemingly dissimilar aspects are discipline specific language issues... e.g. I differentiate Phenomena Energy (PHE) from spatially defined Quanta of Energy (QE) to facilitate the UQS minimum/indivisible unit as Space-Time ENERGY, which can then be differentiated from Spaceless-Timeless Cause ENERGY.

REF Graphic Illustration: Cause Energy Pulsed Emergence as Space-Time Energy http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSMarcelMLTD.jpg

To ask, as Peter Jackson does: "You mention self-replication but what existed before the first event?", is not the same as to akd What existed before the first C*s to SSCU "event" ... to which you respond... "Indeterminate C's were interacting chaotically.".

Chaotic interaction implies entity action events... i.e. "stuff" experiencing motion differentials over time.

Differentiating Space-Time ENERGY from Spaceless-Timeless Cause ENERGY requires a logic singularity... i.e. the geometry that encapsulates a minimum/indivisible temporal quanta (QT) pulsed Point Source emission of a spatially defined entity... but in that UQs is a rigorous mathematical/geometry model that satisfies a Space-Time/Spaceless-Timeless logic singularity ... i.e. not a theory... the classic "something from nothing" rejection of the model has been eliminated.

In that the Space-Time kinematic chain, from pulsed source emission of a minimum/indivisible spatially defined entity, to a visible entity. has not been verified, I can agree with Edwin Eugene Klingman'S assessment that we have "no need for new theory"...i.e. I think what we need is conversions of speculative mathematical theories into CAD environment models for critical analysis of fundamental emergence by digital SIM.

I am currently designing UQS Virtual Quantum Lab/Game console screens and coding screen mapped DEF FN, to facilitate utilization of prior UQS geometry derived digital code, as a CAD/SIM environment user interface... i.e. I no longer work with mathematical symbolic equations/linguistics... and as my essay demonstrates, I have installed the UQS integrated PHSICAL/META-PHYSICAL model on my mental desktop and am experimenting with application of the Cosmic Consciousness Connection it facilitates.

In that the Successful Self-Creation model "mathematics and theoretical measurements" correspond to standard model... i.e. perturbatively derived... "variables of universal space, time, mass, speed and direction of the physical universe and its internal functioning", I can not concede that the Successful Self-Creation model goes "beyond" the ""probability"" for a fundamental process that evolves as a networked intelligence, which resolves nascence of a functional Space-Time Energy reality, as demonstrated by the UQS unified field model CAD-SIMs.

In that our exchange demonstrates that "interdisciplinary" conceptual convergence is currently being conveniently and effectively facilitated by FQXi essays and essay comment threads, and typically funding is not available for application development, I think independent Computer Aided Development of the UQS Virtual Quantum Lab/Game, is currently my best course of focused action.

Thanks again John for your thought provoking essay, and thoughtful comments on my essay.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Hi John...

Thank you for reading my essay with attention as required to make a comparative analysis between your Successful Self-Creation theoretical model, and my Unified Quantization of a Sphere (UQS) geometry model.

I have now read your essay, I do see similarities, and many of the seemingly dissimilar aspects are discipline specific language issues... e.g. I differentiate Phenomena Energy (PHE) from spatially defined Quanta of Energy (QE) to facilitate the UQS minimum/indivisible unit as Space-Time ENERGY, which can then be differentiated from Spaceless-Timeless Cause ENERGY.

REF Graphic Illustration: Cause Energy Pulsed Emergence as Space-Time Energy http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSMarcelMLTD.jpg

To ask, as Peter Jackson does: "You mention self-replication but what existed before the first event?", is not the same as to ask What existed before the first C*s to SSCU "event" ... to which you respond... "Indeterminate C's were interacting chaotically.".

Chaotic interaction implies entity action events... i.e. "stuff" experiencing motion differentials over time.

Differentiating Space-Time ENERGY from Spaceless-Timeless Cause ENERGY requires a logic singularity... i.e. the geometry that encapsulates a minimum/indivisible temporal quanta (QT) pulsed Point Source emission of a spatially defined entity... but in that UQs is a rigorous mathematical/geometry model that satisfies a Space-Time/Spaceless-Timeless logic singularity ... i.e. not a theory... the classic "something from nothing" rejection of the model has been eliminated.

In that the Space-Time kinematic chain, from pulsed source emission of a minimum/indivisible spatially defined entity, to a visible entity. has not been verified, I can agree with Edwin Eugene Klingman'S assessment that we have "no need for new theory"...i.e. I think what we need is conversions of speculative mathematical theories into CAD environment models for critical analysis of fundamental emergence by digital SIM.

I am currently designing UQS Virtual Quantum Lab/Game console screens and coding screen mapped DEF FN, to facilitate utilization of prior UQS geometry derived digital code, as a CAD/SIM environment user interface... i.e. I no longer work with mathematical symbolic equations/linguistics... and as my essay demonstrates, I have installed the UQS integrated PHSICAL/META-PHYSICAL model on my mental desktop and am experimenting with application of the Cosmic Consciousness Connection it facilitates.

In that the Successful Self-Creation model "mathematics and theoretical measurements" correspond to standard model... i.e. perturbatively derived... "variables of universal space, time, mass, speed and direction of the physical universe and its internal functioning", I can not concede that the Successful Self-Creation model goes "beyond" the ""probability"" for a fundamental process that evolves as a networked intelligence, which resolves nascence of a functional Space-Time Energy reality, as demonstrated by the UQS unified field model CAD-SIMs.

In that our exchange demonstrates that "interdisciplinary" conceptual convergence is currently being conveniently and effectively facilitated by FQXi essays and essay comment threads, and typically funding is not available for application development, I think independent Computer Aided Development of the UQS Virtual Quantum Lab/Game, is currently my best course of focused action.

Thanks again John for your thought provoking essay, and thoughtful comments on my essay.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Hi David...

A rigorous math model requires all GEOMETRY ELEMENTS... i.e. elements of spatial definition... are derived from a digitally coded CAD environment quantization algorithm that is compatible with the CAD engine.

A rigorous math model requires all GRAPHIC ELEMENTS... e.g. minimum/indivisible spatial unit (QI), minimum/indivisible icon/sprite (QE) that experiences SIM animation... are defined in terms of (x,y,z) coordinates to pass to the CAD engine.

Note: an impossibility if model requires an emergent intelligence, and the quantization of CAD environment is not a unified field...i.e. identical geometry algorithm to generate QI as spatial occupancy addresses

A rigorous math model requires all EMMISION and subsequent DISTRIBUTION PROCESSES... i.e. (x,y,z) transformations of GRAPHIC ELEMENTS from time 0 to SIM duration time... must be digitally coded to output(x,y,z) coordinates for pass to the SIM module of the CAD engine.

I have completed these requirements, and coding the preferably cross platform CAD/SIM app necessary to utilize the Physicist/Logician's rigorous math model, as defined above, can be outsourced to any game developer with 3D OpenGL/vulcan/dirextX experience. or to a CAD/SIM app developer.

A rigorous model of an emergent intelligence... i.e. ability to resolve the next SIM frame without external (perturbative) input... requires an INFERENCE module that reads CAD (x,y,z) data, compares choreography differential between process sequenced frames of the SIM, and digitally codes a logic statement of that differential as a SWITCH Function that can be accessed by the CAD engine as AVAILABLE INTELLEGENCE for subsequent SIM frame resolves.

Coding the CAD/SIM app necessary to utilize the Physicist/Logician's rigorous emergent intelligence model, as defined above, will require Artificial Intelligence expertise.

My choice would be to establish a collaboration between "Animation Master" author Martin Hash, and "Mathmatica" author Stephen Wolfram, but due to limited resources, I have become multi-disciplinary.

May your resources facilitate a more timely production schedule for a "Successful Self Creation" model CAD/SIM.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Hi John David Crowell...

My bad!!!... i.e. my cut and paste error addressing you on my last post.

In regard to your reference to my BIO statement implying that I 'do not believe in "perturbative measurements", please note that my Bio reads: "as a logician I refrain from perturbative analysis of FUNDAMENTAL PROCESSES."

As to the reason I "left the use of symbolic mathematics and language": a digital processor requires an interpreter to process symbolic maths... e.g. calculus... and depending on the interpreter, version#, etc, the response to a query may vary. That being the case, I admit to a bias for digital coded logic in developing applications for analysis of fundamental processes, by digital processors.

As to the reason I "entered CAD/SIM representations based on thought/logic alone": Gödel's thermos do not apply to geometry.

REF: - Topic:"The Misalignment Problem" by Jack James

I agree that any concept of an "Absolute God" as an entity, rather than as the fundamental process for spontaneous harmonious distribution of minimum/indivisible spatially defined Energy (QE) throughout the Universe, "is one of those fallacies", but recognizing the fallacy does not invalidate potential for Spaceless-Timeless Cause Energy to emerge as a Space-Time Energy information network, and to verify the root architecture and processes of that information network, one needs to experiment, develop query mechanisms, and make application of the "wisdom" of said Universal Intelligence

REF: - Topic: "Modeling Universal Intelligence" by Sue Lingo

or as an .html document "Modeling Universal Intelligence" by Sue Lingo

As for "truth??... it must be supported by a composite model that seamlessly, logically, integrates one's PHYSICAL model... i.e. as a QE spatial occupancy model... and one's META-PHYSICAL model...i.e. as a model of spaceless processes... and be defined in terms that facilitate experimental verification of one's observations of one's PHYSICAL and META-PHYSICAL Reality.

Your "assumption was that existence has always existed" is predicated on the word "always", which infers temporal logic that is not supported in a model of Causality as a Spaceless-Timeless logic frame.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Hi Steve...

Thanks for your interest in the Unified Quantization of a Sphere (UQS) model.

Please note that your essay is not currently listed in the FQXi "Undecidability, Uncomputability, and Unpredictability" Essay Contest index?

Visualization of the emergence of the UQS Spatial Singularity as the 3D spherical geometry that encapsulates the Logic Point Singularity boundary between two logic frameworks... i.e. a Causal Spaceless-Timeless logic framework and a Reality Space-Time logic framework... and encodes 24 planar spatial addresses (QI) for occupancy of initial QE emission, will be more effectively facilitated if I dispense with the verbalization, and refer you to the initial 9 second youtube UQS video.

REF: UQS Differentiation (9sec.) www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sbzf6NlU8q4UQS

The second video in the sequence, illustrates in 3 seconds, subsequent UQS infinite Shell Expansion.

REF: UQS Lattice = 2 (3sec.) www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf7QqIcnCbA

The UQS unified planar address geometry, which inherently facilitates pulsed emission and infinite distribution of minimum quanta of spatially defined Energy (QE), is graphically depicted in a single UQS open source on-line illustration.

REF: Cause Energy Pulsed Emergence as Space-Time Energy http://www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQSMarcelMLTD.jpg

In that you mention Nassim's work, I will refer you to a highly illustrated UQS open source on-line paper that discusses the mathematical difficulties in developing a QE emission and distribution model utilizing a Spatial Singularity that does not quantize a unified field geometry.

REF: UQS Directionally Unbiased Point Source QE Emission) www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com/UQST-TVNH.php

Thanks again Steve, for your long term commitment to a spherical, single point source pulsed, emission geometry solution.

Sue Lingo

UQS Author/Logician

www.uqsmatrixmechanix.com

Hello...

In that I am unable to post to Peter Jackson's 2019-20 essay page... but can post to other community pages... this is a test.

Anyone w/ info on this issue... please advise.

Thank you...

sl