Hi

How far it will be successful to model AI on computers or say on digital processor ?
I have always felt that the way brain work and how computer are made to work entirely different. So isnt it unworthy talking AI in Systems Where algorithms are written to respond rather than evolved from action.

What the first thing a life learns? is it to breath, to dream, cry, ?
what is it. Or is something stored in our genes (DNAs), the knowledge from ancestors ?

Dont you feel we need entirely a different model of computation or processors to achieve AI ?

Regards

I completely agree and I'll tell you why I think so very soon. I'm writing up a small article as we speak to sum up my theory.

Non-Conformed Electron Consciousness

The basic principles of self-aware AI and why computer based artificial intelligence wont work.

NOTE: This article is very short and too the point. A more detailed paper needs to be written, but what I needed to do was to get the idea out in the open.

Every sentient and self-aware entity on this planet thinks, for lack of a better description, with electricity. Thought and its physical manifestations (movement) all exist in an electrical form. Electrical pulses flow through our brain and our body allowing us to think various things and perform various functions.
The ever increasing human urge to mimic these process' through robotics and artificial intelligence is more prominent now than ever. There have been recent talks of using our extremely powerful modern computers and advanced scanning technology to create a near to perfect simulation of the brain. There is a very high possibility that this will work to create an intelligent, sentient being. However, it will still only be a simulation, albeit a realistic one. To achieve self-awareness in machines something different has to be done. A complete reversal of current methods. This why I have written this article.

First I feel it is appropriate to explain what I consider the difference between sentience and self-awareness is. Sentience is the ability to feel, perceive and think, where as self-awareness is the knowing of ones existence and individuality and possibly possessing creative ability. The penultimate is a highly debated topic and even for those who go with its conventional meaning still struggle to believe that a machine could ever achieve such a state of consciousness.

The base of my argument is this. Self-aware artificial intelligence is not possible in any system where the electrons present inside conform to the system itself. To achieve self-awareness the system itself must conform to the flow of electrons.

In every AI system we have developed to date the electrons inside of it flow through a controlled environment. Even in a simulation of the brain where we simulate the random flow of electrons, those “random” movements are still only pseudo-random and even if they were true random they are still generated by a system in which the actual physical electrons are conforming to the system.
It can be argued that in real life the electrons in our and other creatures brains follow the paths of the neurons - however lets not forget that neurons themselves rewire in accordance to the flow of electrons. Thats how we learn.

Products of the human brain, wether it be personality or art or even self-awareness, are all random in nature. In our current view of physics, a world based on mathematical rules, it is impossible for something truly random to exist without tapping sub-atomic particles.

If we look to the sub-atomic levels of the universe we start to find randomness. Is it not interesting that randomly behaving particles such as electrons are the ones that make up our thoughts. If this is true then can we not consider the electron to be the particle of thought? In other words, electrons are thought, and our physical brains are merely an extension to that thought in order to be able to remember things and to allow electrons to exist independent from the world and also to allow electrons to interact with the world.

The following rules need to be acknowleged.
1.The electrons must be free flowing within a neural net.
2.The system must conform to that flow.
3.All outputs must have a corresponding input. But not all inputs need a corresponding output. (e.g.. You can hear yourself talk.)
4.The system must not be digital in nature. In other words the system cannot be a simulation. It must exist as a “mechanical” device, like the human brain.

To tap thought - to create artificial brains that have the same knack for art, poetry, music and science - to create something self-aware - we have to create a system in which the system itself changes in accordance to what the electrons do.

An essay by,
Shaun Slabbert
(KingCobra)
06/12/06

Source: http://ndai.awardspace.com/