Lorraine Ford
Re information versus symbols of information:

When it comes to the physics of the world, the 3 necessary aspects of real-world information are categories (like mass, position, momentum, energy), relationships between the categories, and numbers that apply to the categories. These three aspects are seemingly necessary because a number cannot imply a relationship, and vice versa; a relationship cannot imply a category and vice versa; and a category cannot imply a number, and vice versa. In the real physical world, these three necessary aspects of real-world information are not held separately. And without these three necessary real-world aspects (category, relationship and number), any purportedly existing “information” is not actually information.

When it comes to how people represent the real world, people must use written, spoken or binary digit symbols to represent information, and the three necessary aspects of information must be separately symbolised. Obviously, computers/ AIs are not processing the real-world information (i.e. the categories, relationships and numbers) that the world is constructed out of. But computers/ AIs are not just processing mere symbols of real-world information: computers/ AIs are processing mere separate symbols of the separated-out aspects of real-world information.

In the real physical world, the 3 necessary aspects of information are not held separately. But the so-called “information” processed by computers/ AIs is not at all like real-world information; in fact, the purportedly existing “information” processed by computers/ AIs is not actually information at all.

      Lorraine Ford
      The abovementioned three necessary aspects of information in the real world are: categories; context/ mathematical relationships between the categories; and numbers that apply to the categories. But, these three aspects of information are passive, so how do you make a real-world moving system out of real-world passive information?

      In order to make a moving system, there is a fourth necessary aspect of passive information: logical connection/ knowledge, represented by the symbols AND, OR, IS TRUE. These four separate aspects of passive information are necessary because none of the four aspects implies any other aspect. So, the logical connection/ knowledge aspect of passive information might be represented as something like:
      “category1 = number1 AND category2 = number2 IS TRUE”.

      But to make a moving system, a fifth necessary aspect of a system is required in order to move the numbers, because no other aspect of the system is actually moving the numbers. It might be thought that the mathematical relationships are moving the numbers, but as explained in my essay, despite the delta symbols, these mathematical relationships between categories don’t come into effect unless and until one or more numbers are moved.

      Number movement in a system is represented by the symbols: IF, THEN. Once again, these five separate aspects of a moving system are necessary because none of the five aspects implies any other aspect. So, number movement in a system might be represented as something like:
      “IF category1 = number1 AND category2 = number2 IS TRUE, THEN category2 = number3”,
      where the “IF” part represents the passive information situation, and the “THEN” part represents the number movement/ change.

      But the idea that a single number change event at the beginning of the universe could power all subsequent number change in the universe can’t be supported. More realistically, when one or more numbers are changed, there might be a ripple in the pond effect where other numbers change due to the mathematical relationships between categories, but the ripple will die down, and the system will grind to a halt, needing further number input in order to keep the system moving.

      So it seems clear that, when a whole SYSTEM is analysed, as opposed to just focussing on mathematical relationships between categories (i.e. laws of nature), a whole system requires a source of number change. I.e. new numbers need to be continually input in order for the system to keep moving. This is a different way of thinking about “quantum randomness”, which is essentially the input of new numbers to the system.

          a month later

          Lorraine Ford
          Physicists have built up a complicated picture of how they think the world works, out of nothing but measurements (which consist of numbers, that apply to categories of information like momentum, mass, energy, charge etc.) and experimentally verified mathematical relationships that seem to exist between these categories of information.

          With their delta symbols, the equations that represent these mathematical relationships say that IF some numbers that apply to some of the categories change, THEN other numbers that apply to other categories in a particular relationship will instantly change so that the correct ratios specified by the mathematical relationships are always maintained and never violated. In other words, despite the complicated picture of the world that physics has developed, physics can’t tell you why the numbers would ever change in first place, OR why the numbers would continue to change. Physics just assumes number change, without being able to give a proper detailed account of how and why the numbers change.

          This is physics’ Achilles heel: as I say in my essay, physics can’t explain why the numbers are changing, i.e. why the world is moving and changing.

              This is physics’ Achilles heel: as I say in my essay, physics can’t explain why the numbers are changing, i.e. why the world is moving and changing.

              heading towards a destination is giving a support sensation for counting ,
              this action is the first major accomplishment for any human: to stand and to walk ,
              unfortunately, (what we are given2) (with1), we are stuck ! 1 2
              🟢
              || \ _ 💐
              | \
              |_ |_ ,,,,,,,,;,,,;,,,,,;,,,,;,,,,,;,;,,,,,;,
              1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

              it may be that seeing the world(universe) with numbers ,
              physicists accomplish rocky soil stabilization in slope engineering for mountain roads,
              each number is like a metal rod needle that keep the soil fixed , there is an idea of what happens(what is) in between the fields of parallel rods , the actual content is only an hypothesis and cylindric tube of the material have to be /removed/ bored , to replace it with numbers spikes

              the (numberlines) spikes are not sharp at the end, instead are like thread cones wider and wider and heavy the more distance they travel/ extend.
              pointing towards the edges of the (knowledge )universe

              🦩 ,,;,,,,,;,;,,;,,,,,;,,,;,,,,,;,;🥀

              Lorraine Ford
              How could science be different? Well, just like mathematicians tell themselves a fairy story that their equations and numbers represent a self-sufficient world which could exist without human beings moving and manipulating the equations and numbers, physicists tell themselves a fairy story that their equations and numbers could represent a self-sufficient, moving world. Physics could start by not telling themselves fairy stories.

              Clearly, the world is not the purely mathematical world that physicists imagined and hoped and believed it to be, because number movement can’t be explained by any sort of equations or functions. Just like mathematicians are wilfully blind to their own presence which animates the mathematics, physicists are wilfully blind to their assumption that the numbers just move, and that no explanation is required.

              All that physicists can say is that IF some numbers change, THEN other numbers will instantly change, so that there is no violation of the ratios/ mathematical relationships that physicists have experimentally found to exist. But physicists can’t explain the “IF” bit: why any number would ever change in the first place, and why the numbers would continue to change.

                letters and words are in the same category like the comment with numbers only here is a lot more complicated

                so imagine a device that can take and print pictures that zoom in or out magnify or minimize and those can replace parts of the text fast in a special typewriter , than after that there can be made extra links connecting the surface with various colors.

                firstly the human language does not need such complicated story telling
                secondly the human language does not need such complicated story telling

                human language has evolved in an environment with certain grammar based on voice and brain constraints
                to solve certain problems

                the environment is such that the actual language is more or less sufficient,
                maybe the fantasies match the complexity of the environment and culture
                why sci fi has not been written in the 15 century ?

                fantasies , play a role in generating and using artificial models , activate.use the imagination
                that is the first step in science for science new hypothesis generation

                what is the pathway towards better imagination ,
                computer programs externalize / multiply the imagination , the control is those who program them
                that fixes certain imagination structures, by having programable hardware that uses letters is a huge impairmant

                some care only about the result , some wants imagination options i'm in the second category

                the units off measure used in physics are connected with the entire discussion
                more fantasy might mean more complicated/ advanced science

                All that physicists can say is that IF some numbers change, THEN other numbers will instantly change, so that there is no violation of the ratios/ mathematical relationships that physicists have experimentally found to exist. But physicists can’t explain the “IF” bit: why any number would ever change in the first place, and why the numbers would continue to change.

                drop a rock in a water pond lots of changes happens without any number

                Life is like one bad adventure. however the graphics is unmatched
                what would be a physics engine based on physical hardware like mixing two solutions that do all the" number calculations"
                .
                so i look in to doing hyper graphics maybe related with language/ (inventing new interaction), what it would be the best for me given my actual experience and goals ?

                will make a few days , maybe a week pause of verifying what is written here on this forum, i assume that among readers are people that can understand and help.

                at the admission at a math bachelor in 2017 ive tried to solve/explain all the problems without any letters, only with sequence of drawings. if the admission hat one or two extra hours i would have completed all the tasks.

                the problem i had was how i should explain with no letters that i'm solving with drawings, typically for example in a geometry problem there are names with letters for the sides of a figure so i used a type of naming with no letters , the problem that an admission like that assume (reading ability)( speech comprehension so the first step was to show how i understand the request than to actually show lots of transofrmations for drawings , than solving the equations with no algebra , because the request was in a way evident after the reading and the drawing showed all the answers to first part of the test , i had to make pathways of evident geometrical transformations that are typically called a proof , the result of that exam was under the necessarily minimum for passing the test .

                confirming what is the expected result is a communication bias caused by react quickly language / behavior/ habits , there is no intent in developing a communication in itself, only the message matter.

                💬 abcdEfghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz abcdefghijklmnopqRstuvwxyz 🗨️

                💬 👂️ 🗨️
                example1

                • i'm going to say something with voice, tongue teeth, and face , look at the other person if he is listening , use the ear to listen to my own voice and to the response about 5 second with ten words after that i will wait about 2,3 second for a reply,
                  example2
                • we have a video streaming platform where people can make videos sound and images and other can writte comments
                  example 3
                • we are a respectable institution we evaluate prospective students at the highest standards using written tests
                  example 4
                • we are a research lab with advanced terminology and technology

                here i'm changing the subject
                a problem is that once you understand this interfaces there could be an intent to fake ,
                so in a one to one conversation a fake smile is detectable because m the wire circuitry is for smile is closer to emotional
                center and a fake one could make a detour ,

                the genuine association of the code(language) with the internal (emotional) states
                , looked from outside how this appear and unveil and what roles plays the self awareness

                is the message really meant or not (human problems)

                in the visual abstract realm anything can be a meaning (for a species of extraterrestrials with high levels of imagination)
                especially simple codes can be ambiguous (some simple codes might not because they spell emergency)
                what enviroment would force et to have visual communication

                if people in the 14 century had maps and made exchange to navigate territory, with the horse/ elephant or by sea or river

                maybe the octopus ET live on a liquid planet like lava lamp soup that has always changing territory , with dangerous regions to be avoided while traveling, and the communications must include always changing maps to avoid and adapt

                the fixed placement of resources for humans also fixes the communication of maps .
                a human is not simply just a human is also the territory he comes from/ lives/ feed, and buildings like an invisible leash/ root . the same static attitude (imovable ) may be applicable to language of mathematics

                doing math means to know how to use brain resources (because those are necessarily) , is an expensive activity
                to develop special attention skills , rare and precious, not redundant and flexible.

                Underlying everything in the world, physicists have found categories of information (like mass, momentum, position or energy), mathematical relationships between these categories, and numbers that apply to the categories. These three aspects of real-world information are seemingly the basic substance which, when logically aggregated, constitute the various varieties of fundamental matter: no “more substantial” substance has ever been found; no “more material” matter has ever been found. So, rather than these three aspects of information being a “property” of material substance, material substance is seemingly a logical aggregate of information.

                But, as I ask in my essay: why are these numbers moving and changing? The categories don’t change; the relationships don’t change: only the numbers move and change. But the numbers don’t seem to be the type of self-sufficient entities which could change themselves, and the categories and relationships also don’t seem to be the type of self-sufficient entities which could change the numbers. So, I conclude that there is another aspect to the world, which can only be represented as logical connectives (like IF, AND, OR, THEN, and IS TRUE), which are responsible for the above-described logical aggregation of information, and responsible for number movement/ jumps.

                Vladimir Rogozhin

                Unfortunately, you do not give a definition of MATTER. And this is very important!

                Vladimir, this is my answer to your 17th May challenge:

                When fundamental-level matter is measured, or calculations about fundamental-level matter are made from other measurements, resulting in categories of information (like mass in MeV/c2, or charge) with their associated numbers, what is the material substance whose properties are being measured? My answer is that there is no material substance other than information which is logically connected (e.g. by logical ANDs) to other such information.

                But what is information itself? The three necessary aspects of real-world information are: categories (like mass or charge); context (like mathematical relationships between the categories); and numbers that apply to the categories. Numbers, without category or context, are not information. Yes/no answers, without questions and other associated context, are not information.

                    Lorraine Ford
                    P.S.
                    Which, I might add, is EXACTLY why computers/ AIs are not processing real-world information, real-world information which has 3 inherent, inseparable aspects: category, context/ relationship, and number. Computers/ AIs are merely processing man-made symbols of information, where there are physically separate symbols for category, context/ relationship, and number.

                        Lorraine Ford
                        Has matter always had the capacity to, at least sometimes, behave logically, i.e. behaviour which can be represented by logical connectives (like IF, AND, OR, THEN, and IS TRUE)? This is as opposed to categories of information (like mass, momentum, position or charge), which seem to exist in relationships that are represented by mathematical operators.

                        But what is matter? Seemingly the most primitive matter is already assumed by physicists to be a hybrid type of thing in which these categories, with their associated numbers, are connected by logical ANDs (as opposed to these categories and numbers being seen as “properties” of matter).

                        Unacknowledged logical ANDs have seemingly always been a part of the picture that physicists have of primitive matter.

                            Lorraine Ford
                            So, in the absence of any other fundamental “material substance” being found by physicists, I’m concluding that the fundamental “material substance” of the most primitive particles would be information of the following type of form:

                            (mass = number1) AND (velocity = number2) AND (charge = number3) AND (spin = number4) IS TRUE,

                            where the logical connectives “AND” and “IS TRUE” are the things that can build a materially substantial “particle” of information.

                                Georgina Woodward

                                1. What “load of numbers” are you talking about? Did you not notice that, as well as word symbols representing real-world numbers, I also used word symbols for real-world categories (“mass”, “charge”), symbols for “=”, symbols for brackets, and symbols for AND and IS TRUE? The numbers are only a part of the picture I was trying to portray.

                                2. I think you yourself are perhaps “muddling” symbols of the world with the actual world. Physicists and others have always used word and other symbols for real-world categories (like mass and charge), real-world relationships (“laws of nature”), and real-world numbers that apply to the categories, in order to represent theoretical, experimental and measured aspects of the real world. Are you suggesting that symbols with known meanings should NOT be used to represent aspects of the real world? I’m saying that in order to concisely represent known aspects of real-world primitive particles, one needs to use the above-mentioned AND and IS TRUE symbols, which have known meanings to people.

                                3. “…isn’t material … material existence”: In the absence of any actual evidence of any material substance, I’m concluding that the most primitive material substance can be represented in the above-mentioned way which includes the known aspects of the most primitive matter. Have you got a better way of representing primitive material substance, apart from the words “material existence”, words which pretty much say absolutely nothing about the known aspects of primitive material substance?

                                4. Define what you mean by "information".

                                  Georgina Woodward
                                  I’m saying that the most fundamental matter, the material substance of a fundamental particle, is actually just information which can be represented in the following type of way:

                                  (mass = number1) AND (velocity = number2) AND (charge = number3) AND (spin = number4) IS TRUE,

                                  where the numbers can be zero, and where the logical connectives “AND” and “IS TRUE” are the means whereby a “particle” of information can be built.

                                  People know what the word “number” refers to; people know what the words “mass”, “velocity”, “charge” and “spin” refer to; people know what an equals sign is; and people know what the words “AND” and “IS TRUE” are supposed to mean.

                                  So, can you provide a better, alternative way of describing fundamental matter?

                                      Lorraine Ford
                                      The difference between information (like the above purportedly existing “particle” of information) and categories (a group term for things like mass, charge, and position) is that:

                                      • Information is always represented in logical connection with other information, using logical connectives like IF, AND, OR, THEN and IS TRUE.
                                      • Categories are always represented in mathematical relationship with other categories, using mathematical operators and equals signs.

                                      The physics equations that represent the experimentally determined relationships between categories (“laws of nature”) essentially say that IF some numbers that apply to some of the categories change, THEN other numbers that apply to other categories will instantly change, so that the relationships between the categories are never violated. Then all further number movement stops, because these relationships between categories can’t explain why the numbers would ever change in the first place, or why the numbers would continue to change. In other words, the relationships between categories can’t explain why the world is continually moving and changing.

                                      To explain why the world is continually moving and changing, one needs to represent the world in terms of information, using statements containing logical connectives like IF, AND, OR, THEN and IS TRUE to represent the necessary number jumps. But, relationships between categories are essentially rules, whereas logical connections between information are not rules. So, unlike relationships between categories, which can be experimentally verified, it would seemingly be difficult to experimentally verify any specific purportedly existing logical connections between information.

                                          Lorraine Ford
                                          But (who knew?!!*) that man-made symbols of the real world are not the same as the real world!! I suggested a way of representing a fundamental particle in the above posts, but the written symbols:

                                          (mass = number1) AND (velocity = number2) AND (charge = number3) AND (spin = number4) IS TRUE,

                                          or the same symbols read aloud, are not a particle. Who knew?!!

                                          And the same symbols represented in a computer or an AI computer, are not a particle. Who knew? Who knew that symbols of the real world are not the same as the real world? I try to explain this in my essay, and in subsequent posts, but it seems to be a very, very, very difficult concept for many people to understand.

                                          *who knew?:
                                          Expressing ironic lack of surprise, upon learning something.

                                              Lorraine Ford
                                              The thing about basic matter (and also consciousness) seems to be it’s quality of “AND” and “IS TRUE”, where many things (like mass, charge and spin) are simultaneously true in the one time and place (so to speak, because time and place are also part of the things that are true). This is easily seen in one’s own consciousness, where many things are simultaneously true in the one time and place (e.g.: (the grass is green) AND (the sun is shining) IS TRUE). This seems to show that logical connectives (represented by the following symbols: IF, AND, OR, THEN and IS TRUE), are just as important and basic a part of the real world as the aspects of the world that are represented by mathematical operators and equals signs.

                                              However, it bears repeating for those poor souls spooked by human creations (i.e. AIs), that symbols representing the above logical connectives (which are symbolised by man-made arrangements of circuits, transistors and voltages) are not the actual logical connectives that seem to exist as a fundamental part of the real world.

                                                  Lorraine Ford
                                                  OMG. These people on the FQxI forums website with their crazy alarmist fearful views about AIs developing minds of their own, and either going rogue, or going to save humanity! And yet, just like the climate change deniers have no idea how the climate works, the AI alarmists and utopians also have no idea of the nitty gritty of how computers/ AIs are made to work, and they just believe what everyone else (who also don’t know the nitty gritty of how computers/ AIs are made to work) tells them. It’s truly laughable how a bunch of woefully ignorant people, physicists included, have managed to freak themselves out.

                                                  In my above posts, and in my essay, and I think also in my posts to other essay authors, I have tried to explain the nitty gritty, the well-known details, of how computers/AIs are actually made to work, and I’m not sure that I can be bothered repeating myself over and over and over again.

                                                  More disturbingly for a supposedly science-based website, is the complete lack of interest in the WELL-KNOWN DETAILS OF HOW COMPUTERS/ AIs ARE MADE TO WORK. It is an absolute disgrace that a type of religious belief has overtaken these people. I expect they will soon all be banging tambourines and shouting “hallelujah”!

                                                  More seriously, having badly misjudged the nature of AI, the AI alarmists and utopians are inevitably wasting their own time, and everyone else’s time, barking up the wrong tree.

                                                      Lorraine Ford
                                                      Even the developers don't know the nitty gritty of how the large language models learn for themselves. They can ask what the models have done but humans think in a different way. The speed and amount of processing by AIs can be beyond the ability of relatively much slower human checking ,

                                                          Georgina Woodward
                                                          Unlike all the genuinely learned immunology professors during COVID who could give you a detailed account of how viruses and pandemics work, NOT ONE of the AI alarmists or AI utopians, not one of the “AI researchers” or executives, not one of the videos, not one of the people supposedly “in the know”, could give you a detailed account of how bunches of wires, transistors and voltages, run by computer programs, are supposed to transform into civilisation threatening entities with minds of their own. This is because, unlike the genuinely learned immunology professors, the know-nothing AI alarmists/ utopians are believers in miracles.

                                                          ALL the technical knowledge of how computers/ AIs are made to work is out there. How is it that the fearful know-nothings with their inability to explain anything, and their reliance on dubious interpretations of superficial appearances, and fear-based know-nothing videos, can hold sway on a supposedly science-based website?