The new approach for true machine cognition is a dynamic and generative geometric system with mathematical precision. It doesn’t guess; it just works. Every time.
Whatever you do, you invariably realize that you are something that just works. Every time. That is one of the things that gives you the perception of “uniqueness” or “specialty” (along with the fact that you cannot be defined by what you work “on”). Its that you always work. Always and whenever.
But that perception is something a posteriori relative to that “thing” that works. Get the point? You can only get it… because you work.
Differences between my approach to AI and the traditional symbolic approach:
My approach produces reasonings with an arbitrary number of assumptions and end goals
Lisp and Prolog have to be coded by you to work as you intend, but my approach organizes the information and the rules by itself
Lisp and Prolog use a linear navigation in the solution space (“backtracking”) while my approach is non linear
My approach is a geometric system
In fact, my approach is so non linear that it works in multithreading already natively. That is, the reasoning is constructed in parallel at the same time and consolidated in real time.
That is why it is scalable to much complex problems, unlike Prolog or Lisp, and that is something you need to get to human level intelligence and beyond.
As for the comparison between my approach and statistical approaches such as LLMs, the engineers’ favourite toy, well… I started using geometry for AI when everybody else was masturbating with LLMs. Today every new paper claims to improve LLMs with geometric approaches.
When discussing the way the pyramids were built we cannot afford to ignore one variable: TIME. Because what seems to be the hardest task becomes feasible with simple approaches in a sufficiently long timeframe.
The great pyramid (GP) took about 26 years to build with its 2.3 million blocks. We could consider the average time per block (4.12 days) to expect that at most it took about 8 days to place the hardest blocks. But that only has meaning under the assumption that the timeframe does not depend on the location of the block inside the GP.
A much more meaningful result is to average per course (block layer, or step, which total 206) because the added difficulty of moving bocks higher is somewhat cancelled by the fact that higher layers take fewer blocks to complete. This gives about EIGHT YEARS per layer as average, hence at most it could have taken SIXTEEN YEARS to complete a layer. 16 years is more than enough to move a 9 ton block up to the summit of the GP — with very simple mechanics.
Now you can divide the height of the pyramid by the timeframe to completion and you get the most simple formulation of the Egyptian pyramid building technique:
They only had to solve the mechanical problem of moving a several ton block up by X cm each time, making sure it cannot slip back down, and probably only do it once per day
About the question of Identity, you are invited to read Mathew 10,34-36.
Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.
Matthew 10:34-36 NIV
Here Jesus speaks about an extraordinary thing He deliberated to do, a fundamental change deep within people, that is the demarking of individual identity. The separation between self and others, which is not the same as disfunctional opposition, but instead the construction of our own identity as a fundamental pre-requisite to any form of stable gathering of people.
But that is not all. God described himself to Moses as “I am that I am” (Exodus 3:14), which is an absolute identitarian statement.
Just like a painter loves his work when he sees his best qualities reflected therein, so the Creator of all things loves His work, and that is why we are given such important information.
Do not look at this as a burden to grasp but as an edifying tool for your human being. Having an Identity is a right granted to you by the Creator, something He wishes for you and something He considers of paramount importance.
1. credits to Microsoft for doing serious work on what otherwise is just a mediocre concept of computer intelligence called LLMs.
2. credits to Microsoft for stating today what to me is obvious since back when “AI” was still called big data: «There is absolutely no guarantee that a LLM’s output accurately reflects the source data you’re interested in». Which is reason enough to call a lunatic to anyone using these systems.
3. the reason why it is obvious that LLMs are not reliable, the same as any other statistical approach (including another engineer’s favourite masturbation called “baesian reasoning”), is simple: these systems translate raw real data into a finite, comparatively small set of parameters, therefore they lose information which cannot ever be reconstructed to the original.
4. however this admission comes at least a decade and billions of dollars AFTER these actors have been promoting the fake statistical emulation of intelligence called LLMs; they should be demanded to do better based on the resources they have.
5. As a society we cannot afford to waste such vast resources to deliver billion dollars garbage during 10 years and afterwards start pretending that it is better to clean the garbage instead of doing better scientific research from scratch.
6. so those engineers that have been cheering the next big thing in “AI” should all be labelled as delusional at best and psychotic at worst; totally unfit to perform any duty in exact sciences
7. TWO YEARS AGO I demonstrated how you can analyse large quantities of text in a scientific way, in a deterministic fashion, not probabilistic. This was the basis model for the first proper, scientific reasoning system and it shows how my approach is ahead of the best engineering since years ago.
Now go back to playing with your decade old toys. You are already outdated and each passing day you are thrown further back into the dustbin of History. And I am making sure that you will stay that way.
Another logical argument in favour of the resonance on a universal crystalline structure can be provided as follows. This adds to the prior analysis available here.
Let A and B be two events in different moments in time. If A implies B, that is if we have B whenever we have A, then B asserts the verification of A. Therefore, A cannot have happened after B given that B happened. Therefore, we say that A causes B. But if A and B happen in different moments in time, which is an assumption for the causality relation, then when B happens A already happened. Therefore, when B happens there is nothing happening that can cause B, which is a contradiction [1]. Therefore, if B happened then some information regarding A was propagated in a fractional time between A and B happening. And this propagation has to happen in a medium or dimension that is foreign to time, otherwise the causality A => B would be restrict to time leading to the contradiction [1].
This is the same concept as that of the resonance that I have already explored before, that is, A causes B as much as B causes A, and the medium in which the causality takes effect, a medium foreign to time, can only be a subset of the crystalline structure of the Universe, since it is time invariant. Equivalently, causality and retroactivity are two aspects of the same mechanism, which we refer to by the concept of “resonance” on a necessarily time-invariant medium. As stated elsewhere, this explains why events in the Universe follow a given path while not leaving the evidences of all the trial of possibilities that should be the case had a (time-dependent) causality (but not a resonance) taken place.
For example, biological systems developed light capturing devices (the eyes) because there is visible light, but equivalently visible light exists because something is affected by it. Both are evidences of the same mechanism, action or property. And there is no evidence that biological systems had developed sensing to the entire range of light spectrum which had been selectively “pruned” by natural selection to just a specific range of frequencies. Therefore, the “choice” of the method for sensing light was the same “choice” for the existence of light. Here we say “choice” to mean a time-invariant mechanism, or the concept of a “resonance” on a time-invariant medium.
This explains why species evolved in a specific way while we could never find all the intermediate fossil forms and wide-raging branches that evolution should have produced if Darwin’s assumptions were true. The same for the number of arms or legs, for the symmetry of biological systems, for the arrangement of electrons in atoms and so on.
Everything that exists or happens is therefore a manifestation of the same crystalline, immutable universal geometry. And the interesting thing about it is that it should be possible to infer the properties of such a structure by its manifestations.
This is, again, consistent with non-dual postulates such as
What you seek is seeking you
You already are what you will become
Moreover, the parallel universes theory of physics is an application of these principles, since the possibilities for the state of a system spread throughout the parallel dimensions, the collection of those becoming the universal geometric structure.
In early morning, around 3 to 7 am, there is no car or people traffic outside and we can only hear them chirping as if its country side.
I am hidden behind a curtain so they don’t see me and get scared flying away.
This is why I disapprove of the fireworks in the street (e.g. during New Year, as explained here). It must terrorise these little ones in their tree branches.
If you are not amongst the western elites, there is just one thing you need to understand about the mythology of the “AI takeover” and the “Alien takeover”: they are both parables of the takeover of the western elites by something bigger than them.
An avalanche that will superseed all those incompetents, something compared to which they will look like the Neanderthal before being extinct.
Compliments of the Author 