Why your robot is just not that into you by Jeffrey Michael Schmitz

Jeff,

Thanks for your nice words on mine. I also found yours quite brilliant, as well as the most entertaining read of the contest so far. Quite brightened up my day, and an excellent original and perceptive take on the issues.

I see it's been trolled with a least one 1 score, I think mines's just has it's 5th!! A well earned 10 from me should recover it a bit.

Very nicely done

Peter

Jeff,

At my age, I doubt if you know what an old and stiff back is, but I value your personal narrative mixed with scientific wisdom and knowledge. It grabs the reader, one of the goals of this contest. Another is clearly written, which it is. I know the difficulties and rewards of adjunct teaching. I did it part time in computer science decades ago and in English and Economics, so I can appreciate what you're doing. We do exist in the creative wrong answers arising from discoveries in all endeavors but the dogged pursuit of knowledge may eventually help us unravel the truths.Mine is your 4th rating for an essay well above average. And thanks for your kind words about my essay.

Jim Hoover

Jeffrey,

Hope you haven't rated me yet. I've been under a bombing attack. I'm trying to wrap up as the deadline approaches: https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3396

Jim Hoover.

Hi Jeff - Thanks for a lovely essay - lyrical and funny. I was also moved - a rare response to an FQXi essay. This was a powerful statement - "Random, the meta-function that is always outside of any ordered system, will work in a pinch." I personally believe that is NOT the best choice (something I discuss in detail in my 2016 FQXi detail - The How and The Why of Emergence and Intention (https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2840 ) There is considerable evidence that a selection process (outside the system) is at work and we make of it what we choose.

Best - George Gantz

FYI: Here's a touching verse form the Rubaiyat - the very last one.

CI. And when like her, oh Saki, you shall pass

Among the Guests Star-scatter'd on the Grass,

And in your joyous errand reach the spot

Where I made One--turn down an empty Glass!

Jeff, your essay is both delightful and playfully meaningless.

I have one issue: You wrote "true random number could not be produced by a mathematical function"

Add the last 2 digits of the current Dow, Nasdac, and S&P, divide by the day of the month, and then by pi, multiply by the miliseconds elapsed in the current day, add the number of days since 1/1/2000, drop any numbers before the decimal point, drop the decimal point and any leading zeroes, and you have a true random number - because randomness is just the product of a confluence of more-or-less independent factors. Randomness isn't un-precipitated - there is no reason to think that anything that is un-precipitated can even happen.

But! My own experience tells me my behavior is partly random (partly precipitated), but fundamentally cipitated, i.e., spontaneous, creative, and inspired by value. Put those together and you have the capability of intelligence! And anyone who disagrees with this is simply deficient in cipitation. That's just unfortunate. And unremarkable.

Thank you for writing so cipitatingly. You are more than you may think!

Jim