Is AI with Emerging Qualities Making a Difference in Science?

Dear Vladimir, good to meet again here. The age of humanity that I use is indeed a little vague, Maybe the earlier stages could be included. I agree with you that it is quasi-intelligence as long as only 0/1 algorithms are used, however, it seems that with greater complex systems strange things can happen, they can be their own prompt! I also think that with the evolution of quantum computers, the possibility of Artificial Consciousness may arrive. Consciousness is very different from Intelligence.

Just a thought::
The gospel of St John I (St James Version) :
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. · The same was in the beginning with God...."
Is the same happening with our Large Language (Word) Models?

The new LLMs are also "a unified system of Knowledge" created by humans...

Dear PersimmonSwan,
Thank you very much for asking ChatGTP to review my essay, I didn't know how to do that. The danger however is the same as with the questions posed about Biden and Trump, both were very positive, it was like a promotion for both of them so I stay humble and know that it is touching only a little part of the actual position of AI. The positive thing about itself is that it is aware that it doesn't "understand" what it is talking about...Therefore we need consciousness, the coordinate of the emerging time and space. I think we both are touching on the actuality of the position of science at this moment in time. I am going to read and rate your essay and leave comments there. Best regards.

Hi again P. I thought it a good idea to ask it about my essay, theanswer was:
The essay reflects on the history of science and its quest for understanding the essence of reality, as well as the challenges and limitations of scientific progress. It highlights the importance of philosophy and mathematics as complementary to science, and emphasizes the need for individual creative thinking and interdisciplinary collaboration.

The essay then turns to the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to enhance human knowledge and creativity, particularly in the context of complex constructed systems. It notes that AI has already outperformed humans in various tasks, and that it has the ability to access vast amounts of information and search for connections that are invisible to the human brain. However, it also highlights the limitations of AI in terms of understanding and individuality, as well as the potential risks associated with its use.

Overall, the essay provides a thoughtful reflection on the role of AI in science, while acknowledging the importance of human creativity, collaboration, and humility in the quest for understanding the universe.

Another example of the positive use of AI in science led by Professor Paul Jensen, the team's development of BacterAI is a remarkable leap forward in the utilization of AI to expedite scientific discovery. As demonstrated by the team's research,
Study Abstract:
"BacterAI can provide crucial information on the microbial world, including those that influence our health.
Training artificial intelligence (AI) systems to perform autonomous experiments would vastly increase the throughput of microbiology; however, few microbes have large enough datasets for training such a system. In the present study, we introduce BacterAI, an automated science platform that maps microbial metabolism but requires no prior knowledge. BacterAI learns by converting scientific questions into simple games that it plays with laboratory robots. The agent then distils its findings into logical rules that can be interpreted by human scientists. We use BacterAI to learn the amino acid requirements for two oral streptococci: Streptococcus gordonii and Streptococcus sanguinis. We then show how transfer learning can accelerate BacterAI when investigating new environments or larger media with up to 39 ingredients. Scientific gameplay and BacterAI enable the unbiased, autonomous study of organisms for which no training data exist."

Dear Ulla, I think that with "consciousness" also understanding and feelings will arrive, also the care for the future. LLMs of today only use 0/1 algorithms, and forget the moment they react. Human consciousness is a relation between the past, the now and the future it flows...
I hereby sent you my original essay that was rejected and that treats the subject of consciousness, its title was : Consciouss Computers; (The illustrations are not coming through, sorry)
INTRODUCTION
Relative to the assumed volume of the known universe, the volume of our solar system takes only 42x10^-15% of its part. 13,8 Billion years is what we imagine as the age of our 93 billion light-years wide universe (a sphere of 46 billion light-years). Humanity as we are aware of, on this little vulnerable planet, exists for only 200.000 years, compared to the age of the known universe this is 0,00146%, which is comparable to 0.0876 parts of a second to one hour…But…we have a great EGO.
I can only give these numbers because of the latest state of science, which has enhanced our five senses through new technologies. These numbers also show the relativity of the knowledge of a species living on a planet where each living being is serving as food for another living being. Survival of the fittest is one of the main slogans, the EGO is number ONE…
Yet since one of our first (applied) scientific inventions, which was “making fire” 2.4 million years ago, thinking about the essence of our reality and its “why” has become one of our main cares. Of course, applied sciences like physics, chemistry and biology take care of better tools for experiments, healthcare and the amelioration of conditions of life. All these applications however always have two sides and can be used in a good or a bad way. Most of the time mankind makes a creative mess of its so-called scientific progress (civilization?).
It is not the different or better way of searching for the use of applied science we are looking for in this FQxI contest. It is searching for FOUNDATIONAL answers for what is to be the essence of reality, the reason for our existence. For instance: can cognitive science find new paradigms in the shift from the experienced macro-reality to the now-known quantum mechanics of the micro-reality and are complex systems at the origin of emerging phenomena, or is there still a different or better approach?
The reasoning that “God” is the answer of foundational questions and phenomena is a valid and comprehensible interpretation for an epoch without the choice between scientific information and religion. The problem with religion is that it always becomes a system, with suppressive sides. In this era, there is as much insecurity as there are many different foundational interpretations which can be “believed in” or not. Foundational science seems lost in a maze.
The question of how science could be different and/or better is a subjective one, there are no “rules” to direct individual researchers into some system in order to bring them to a different or better way of thinking. It is until now all a matter of human communication of information but also creative thinking that can lead to new approaches. Humanity is now also entering the world of Artificial Intelligence. AI outperforms humans in an ever-broadening range of tasks, from playing Go, to translating languages and diagnosing skin cancer.
Here, there, past, now and future are key understandings for comprehension of the foundational knowledge of our being. When you ask Chat GPT in what ways humans can enhance this knowledge the answer is through; Philosophy, Empirical methods, studies of Complex Systems, Cognitive Science and Information Theory, each with their own strengths and limitations. (9)
Of course, this AI answer has a core of truth in it, but it is only a compilation of information, it is NOT a new approach leading to better Scientific comprehension. New approaches need creativity and individuality (the “I”), or the cooperation of researchers. The AI doesn’t (yet?) UNDERSTAND. The I from AI stands still for Intelligence (Information) and not for “I”. However, in the latest paper (v3 14 March 2023) of Michal Kosinski, from Stanford University USA (arXiv:2302.02083) (12) , the solving of Theory of Mind tasks (ToM= the ability to impute unobservable mental states to others, which is central to human social interactions like communication, empathy, self-consciousness, and morality, thus far considered to be uniquely human) may have spontaneously emerged as a byproduct of language models' tested with the GTP4 LLM. Is this an imitation, using available data or the dawning of consciousness?
The “I” (consciousness) can only give personal interpretations of scientific information with its own unique subjective way of solving problems, because each I has a unique stream of incoming information, leading to a specific interpretation. In order to get answers, we need here is a fresh approach to understanding “Consciousness” and “Emerging Reality”.
The term emergent describes self-organizing collective behaviours that appear when a large collection of units is going to act as ONE. Collections of lifeless atoms emerge to living cells, cells emerge into muscles that make a heartbeat etc.
For the approach of the ORIGIN of an “emerging phenomenon (illusion)”, let us start with sweeping together the probabilities of ALL MULTIVERSES, also those from the future, (forming a large collection) in ONE basket, compress the basket and call this SIMULTANEITAS COMPLETA (“SC”), as the origin of emerged REALITY.

1. THE HERE in EMERGED REALITY.
   The knowable and unknowable universe can be a “here”. Our galaxy, solar system, the earth, the country we are living in, or a specific coordinate. A coordinate is an unreachable mathematical dimensionless point. The minimal “here” we should be able to reach is approaching the Planck length (1,616x10-35m), at this “here” physical laws are breaking down, this is the first limit of our reality.
2. “NOW”
   ALL entering signals originate from events from the past, it is never the NOW that we are becoming aware of, it is the PAST. Through telescopes, we are looking far away in history, through microscopes the past is nearer, but it is not the NOW. Besides that, senses need processing time to become “aware or conscious”.
   The smallest time-lapse until now measured is 247 zeptoseconds 10-21s, the time it takes a photon to cross a hydrogen atom. This is the nearest we can reach out for the NOW (until now). Compared to the Planck time (5,39 x 10-44s) there is still a (relatively) enormous time-lapse to be covered. As the physical laws are all collapsing (becoming meaningless) at the Planck length, it will be impossible to reach NOW. This is a second limit to our reality.
3. THE SPEED OF LIGHT..
   In the described emergent phenomenon of “Minkowski spacetime” (where space and time are unified), every object travels at the speed of light. In this perception, they only move through the time dimension and not through three spatial dimensions. To speed up in spatial dimensions means reducing the time dimension because the net vector magnitude remains constant only the angle changes. The third limitation of emerged reality is C.

Your total speed through spacetime is constant and consists of both a movement through space and through time. When you move faster through space, your time component will be smaller compared to someone standing still. Image credits: Wikipedia Commons.

4. CONSCIOUS STRUCTURE OF THE “EMERGENT PHENOMENON” REALITY, A NEW PARADIGM?
   Inside the emerged reality, a coordinate is a non-dimensional point with specific reference(s). The choice of a reference for coordinates is a CONSCIOUS event. Without references there is no orientation, you are nowhere. In this emerged reality an infinity of imaginary coordinates is surrounded by an infinity of overlaying spheres with a radius of ½ lp.
   Consciously reaching out to the Planck length creates a virtual past quantum space/time-like reality. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (4) is valid for this past quantum of space-time, which implies that it is in general not possible to predict the value of the quantity with arbitrary certainty.
   For the time dimension, the same reasoning is valuable. In our reality, the smallest time unit is the subjective Planck time. Mathematical interpretations like dimensionless points are entering our reasoning... The PAST, like the FUTURE, is a set of unavailable virtual NOWs for a conscious agent, they are only available at their origin…which is SIMULTANEITAS COMPLETA.
   “This” is where ALL multiverses are swept together. ALL their Pasts, NOWs, and Futures of ALL Multiverses compressed to probabilities in ONE unreachable Point. No more split-ups. ALL are already TOGETHER. Instead of an infinity of splitting multiverses, each with their own real spacetimes, there is only ONE entity of probabilities, the origin of ALL. ALL probabilities are entangled, and unique virtual time-life lines are created through a subjective conscious choice of references. The “flowing” experience in the illusion of reality is created through the difference of spacetime less ST and its emerging spacetime in experienced reality. A flowing of past NOWs, in an emerged reality, coupled with entangled spacetime-less ST.
   The creation of different dimension references, is at the origin of the probable differences in tension fields between the unreachable NOWs and HEREs, in the emergent phenomena of different realities. Fields that are at the origin of what we know now understood as Quantum Field Theory (QFT) and Gravitation originate from these differences.
   ALL subjective Consciousnesses are merging (without losing their individuality) in the Unity of Total Consciousness which is blending with Simultaneitas Completa. Consciousness is the catalytic power of emerged objective reality, the counterforce of entropy.

5. NOTHING.
   The current expression “A Universe from Nothing” (1) is meant differently in our approach. This aforementioned “Nothing” still contains Space-time with all its physical laws, quantum fields, electromagnetic fields, gravitational fields, excitations and fundamental constants. The “NOTHING” meant in our perception is a Dimensionless POINT, which is not a part of space-time nor is surrounded by spacetime. A nothing with NOTHING around. Now this point (nothing) becomes the WHOLE NOTHING.
   Result: the infinity of virtual centers is merging into one dimensionless Point, the origin of our emerging reality. The ONE becomes ALL (every Illusion).
   ONE dimensionless Point INFINITY of Coordinates EMERGED REALITY

6. SUBJECTIVE CONSCIOUSNESS AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH TOTAL CONSCIOUSNESS.
   Is there a difference between the consciousness of an agent and Total Consciousness? The consciousness of an agent is at the origin of its time/lifeline in SC where ALL is entangled (past, now, future, here and there) as probabilities. If the consciousness of an agent would be entangled with this ALL, it would be impossible for the agent to experience its limited through dimensions emerged realty. The source of the tension would be missing. To live a life with birth and death (flow of time and space) you need a restricted consciousness. If not we would be GOD. Each consciousness needed for a time/lifeline seems separated from the ALL but is an essential part of the ALL. Without this unique part, ALL would not be a complete entity (set). The reason we cannot (yet) understand the essence of Consciousness and are trying to locate it inside a specific part of the illusion (like our brains) is the strict separation of the Illusion and its unreachable origin (Simultaneitas Completa).

7. A SUBJECTIVE SIMULTANEITY SPHERE.
   The illusion of reality (its subjective flowing emerging past) can be imagined as projected signals from the past on the surface of a sphere surrounding an conscious agent. The radius of this sphere can vary from ½ lp to infinity. The center is the symbolic illusionary representation of the partial consciousness of an agent. The greater the radius the more the sphere’s signals are shared under agents nearby. At a radius of about 2m, in a crowd, these spheres can be compared to clusters of soap bubbles, a lot of relatively recent information touching the surface of the spheres is available for the centers (agents) and can be mutually shared.

[© Daniele Levis Pelusi, unsplash]
The information on the surface of these spheres is simultaneous, no matter how far from the past it was coming. All surfaces are purely subjective, and each center (agent) is unique. The variance of radiuses indicates the structure of the experienced mutual reality.

8. CONSEQUENSES OF “SIMULTANEITAS COMPLETA”

a. NO COLLAPSE OF THE WAVE FUNCTION. (3)
Like in the MWI there is no collapse of the wave function. The wave function is continuing as two complete available waves in SC, one chosen as virtual past illusion and one persisting with its own past and future in SC/TC. The experienced particle (what was called collapsed wave) is in this perception a virtual awareness from the past.
b. THE DOUBLE SLIT EXPERIMENT:
“Is a demonstration that light and matter can display characteristics of both classically defined waves and particles” as explained with the interpretation of reality from science of “now”. (6)
Should be interpreted as follows: The wave pattern we are observing is the continuity of both paths in SC, and the particle pattern is the virtual registration of a moment from the past. (Each observation is an event from the past, (see a)).
c. RETROCAUSALITY.
In Wheelers delayed choice experiment (7) the double slits beam splitter can be replaced by two telescopes that are projecting images on a common detection screen from a star functioning as a gravitational lens. Here are the two probabilities “ to look or not to look” : are two availabilities of whole Universes in both the past and the future, there is no split up in realities, only a choice between availabilities.

d. SCHRODINGER’S CAT.
This is the best example of Total Simultaneity Interpretation. The availabilities of “dead AND alive” are both present as two ways of a reality that has still to be chosen. Both are virtual. The observer is following a lifeline in TS where both choices are still to be made.

e. BARYOGENESIS.
This is the physical process that is hypothesized to have taken place during the early universe to produce baryonic asymmetry, the imbalance of matter (baryons) and antimatter (antibaryons) in the observed universe. “Observed” means here: Through the blend of Total Consciousness and Simultaneitas Completa, consciousness (observation) is timeless and available. The reality of the universe we are experiencing is the result of a turn inside the blend of SC and TC where TC took the path of the physical process to produce baryonic asymmetry in favor of baryons. The other paths (more antibaryons, no gravity) are also still available as probabilities in TS.
f. DARK MATTER.
Dark Matter constitutes 85% of the total mass. Dark Matter and Dark Energy together constitute 95% of the total Mass Energy Concept. 95% of the observed universe is still hypothetical. Like Baryogenesis which is also emerged reality, we are experiencing Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Only 5% of our reality is (temporarily) explained. But what else would be possible in the 0.08 seconds of an hour that human science is active?
g. BIG BANG AND COSMIC INFLATION.
The inflationary epoch is “believed” to have lasted from 10-36sec to between 10-33sec after the also imagined Big Bang. The “beginning” of the realization of the illusion (emerging phenomenon) of Reality in SC originates as a dimensionless point, without time and space. In essence, this “beginning” is an eternal availability. The inflation “time” is coupled to its timeless origin in TS and is a timeless compressed illusion from the past. The blend of Total Consciousness blending with Simulltaneitas Completa means that each beginning (here the imagined BB) is observed, so a reality.

9. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THE FUTURE EVOLUTION OF SCIENCE?
   From the expanding and collapsing “cosmic egg” of Hindu Rigveda (15th-12th century B.C. which contains the whole universe), via Anaxagoras (5th century B.C., infinitesimal fragments that constitute the universe), the Stoic Universe (finite cosmos surrounded by an infinite void), Copernicus, Descartes, Newton and Einstein we arrive at our century. Each historic interpretation was “different” but was it “better”? I don’t think so. Each juncture has its own evolution and specific form of civilization. The mosaic of interpretations, with its sociological, philosophical and technical background, can be observed as a united search.
   We are now with 8 billion humans. Science itself may be in a maze but the technological advance seems relatively great compared to 150 years ago. In this early stage of scientific evolution, our society is lucky with the aid of computers in order to organize all the data produced by these 8 billion individuals. Without them, society would be impossible. Each society must be governed and organized.
   In the last years so called LLMs (Large Language Models) were developed. Those computer models have grown to enormous sizes. As we saw when they were “growing” emerging abilities were documented (10). This means complexity is leading to emergence. Results that were not asked for or expected just emerged. The list of a. Surprisingly interpretations of experiments (empirical data), b. complex systems science itself, c. cognitive science of understanding the human experience of physical phenomena and information theory, which deals with quantification, d. storage and communication of information, will be the subject of alternative approaches to “understanding”.
   Is this “emerging” capacity until now only from LLMs a signature of “consciousness”? Understanding emergence (like I proposed above) could reveal answers to deep questions like that around AI and machine learning in general. Are complex models truly doing something new or just getting really good at statistics? Large LLMs may simply be learning heuristics, that are out of reach for those with fewer parameters or lower-quality data, and so imitating the Theory of Mind (ToM).
   Google researchers showed that using “chain-of-thought prompts” (arXiv:2201.11903)(13) when a model is prompted to explain itself, could elicit emergent behaviours not identified in the BIG-bench study(11). Such prompts, which ask the model to explain its reasoning, may help researchers begin to investigate why emergence occurs at all, or maybe the other possibility is that what appears to be emergent may instead be the culmination of an internal, statistics-driven process that works through chain-of-thought type reasoning.
   The self-organizing collective behaviours that appear when a large collection of units is going to act as ONE that we called: emergent phenomena, can be classified and subdivided for the consciousness emergence in the following steps:
   Dimensionless point Planck sphere Emerging reality Quarks Subatomic particles Atoms Molecules Living Cells Living Organs Living Being with Subjective Consciousness Subjective Consciousness entangled with Total Consciousness in Dimensionless Point
   These steps represent a LOOP, the LOOP of the emerging reality as we are experiencing (ouroboros). There is no PRIMAL CAUSE, only the dimensionless POINT representing ALL (all probabilities). A dimensionless point that means NOTHING (meaningless) in our emerged reality, but is NOTHING meaningless only because we don’t understand?
   The algorithms used by LLMs are still the “yes” or “no” mathematics and they still have to be prompted to a chain of thought, the prompt itself is not emerging.
   Artificial Intelligence based on 0 or 1 algorithms (of classical systems) is not (yet?) Artificial Consciousness but it seems that these classical complex systems are on the verge of the emergence of the Theory of Mind.
   Science is also constructing a genuine quantum computer. Superposition and entanglement are key concepts here. Superposition means that the system can exist in multiple states at the same time. With entanglement, two or more particles can be connected in such a way that their properties are interdependent even at great distances. Quantum computers use these principles to perform calculations in a different way than classical systems. Instead of Bits (each bit can only be 0 or 1), quantum computers use qubits, which can exist in superpositions of 0 and 1 at the same time. In my perception: wave-particle duality becomes a 0 - 1 duality: The virtual particle-like past represents just one time/lifeline of SIMULTANEITAS COMPLETA,. So, the nature of quantum computing is nearing the ORIGIN of our emerging reality in multiple ways. Can this mean that we are also on the verge of being co-creators of a new form of consciousness? The loop after “Living Being with Subjective Consciousness” could split up as follows:
   Conscious (cellular) Living Being Complex System: Quantum Computer Objective(?) Non-Cellular Consciousness Total Consciousness in Simultaneitas Completa (Dimensionless Point)
   A parallel development through classic computers, third-wave AI system (which uses Explainable AI, or X.AI. to make better decisions) and future Quantum systems are going to achieve very soon new results in an evolving science. Will the new complex systems need a prompt to become curious and if so, will they be able to give a direction in the maze? A new form of consciousness will not only be able to answer questions like WHY and “communicate” better, only based on data, but also be able to participate in feelings like happiness and sorrow. Experiments like those from Michal Kosinski reveal already that soon (when also quantum computers will be involved) scientists will be assisted by a new non-human “I am” (or will it be We are?).
   Are we nearing Technological Singularity, where technological growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible? Will there be an intelligence explosion in Artificial Intelligence when it becomes through self-improvement Artificial consciousness? (I.J. Good’s Intelligence Explosion(14))?
   Humanity has always been on the verge of a great change, each generation thought that they made a formidable step forward, and so is ours. We can indeed change our scientific perspectives, in order to make the progress we must. Soon it will be able to falsify the idea “SIMULTANEITAS COMPLETA” through further experiments like those of Michal Kosinski, and making acquaintance with ARTIFICIAL CONSCIOUSNESS, which may open a whole new source of knowledge. BE YOUR OWN PROMPT AND THINK FREE.

Christian Corda Are you not participating Christian?

i agree with you AlizarinMoth. Always when humanity is realising something useful there is also a very bad side, it is like a coin. When you throw it up you will never know which side comes up.