Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: cpu68 on 13/03/2023 11:12:02
-
New theory of evolution (search for the text in google)
Applied by me conception derives from social theory,
similarly was in the case of C. R. Darwin which used
conception of T.R. Malthus when he was elaborating
conspectus of his theory in 1842. Earlier, in 2008 I
worked out a framework of theory of social evolution,
basing on logistic conception which was described by
P.F.Verhulst in 1838.
1. Biological evolution
The term evolution introduced to biology Charles de Bonnet, Swiss naturalist from XVIII c. A biological evolution we call process of transformations of organisms within many generations, both with reference to transformations of their construction as and functions. It leads from more simple forms to more complex and developed. Eleven billions years took evolution to reach biological phase, but only three to reach first primitive organisms, and only several hundred millions to reach high developed and later intelligent animals. It is rather sure that it is not only perspective delusion arising because of passing of time - like optical delusion when we see close objects more precisely than far. I think that this development can be described the best by so called Logistic development.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/e4/6c/HJwXvKoc_o.gif)
diagram 1. Logistic development
In 1972 J.S.Gould and N.Eldredge proposed new conception of evolution - arising of specieses called Punctuationalism. In this theory speciation, takes place very quickly in not large populations. Can last hundreds of years, what in scales of the geologic time counted in millions and hundreds of millions of years, has a punctual character. Sigmoid development describes exactly this conception, though hitherto was not at all considered its use in this intent.
In mathematics logistic development coupled is with Normal distribution model. Turns out that also this model, which founds some applications in different disciplines, has important meaning for biology. Simple plants and gymnosperms include above 150 thousands specieses, angiosperms above 250 t. specieses, fungi 1,5 mln, insects about 1 mln, primitive animals tens thousands, fishes 24,5 t., reptiles 13 t., birds 9350, mammals 4630. Moreover the same conception describes evolution on higher levels, Mega - whole biological evolution and Giga - three phases of gigaevolution - see diag 2. Gradual changes on these levels can - in a greater temporal scale - show differentiation. In reference to biological megaevolution logistic theory clearly illustrates and can explain so called "Cambrian explosion" (590-545 millions of years). It shows that development after achievement of certain critical level suddenly accelerates - see end of text - mechanism of evolutional processes. Logistic development also describes biological macroevolution understand as megaevolution so whole biological evolution.
2. Gigaevolution
(https://images2.imgbox.com/89/6a/iaYZ0X4n_o.gif)
(https://images2.imgbox.com/c4/d9/vBbs5l4x_o.gif)
diagram 2,3. Gigaevolution
Quick biological phase was preceded by relatively stable astrophysicochemical phase. Attainment of relatively stable civilizational - psychosociocultural phase it takes hundreds years. On diagram 3 we can see Gigaevolution with more details. Cosmological megaevolution was leading from primordial explosion - nb. logistic development is its perfect model to arising of matter. Physical from fundamental particles and interactions to atoms and chemical elements. Chemical from inorganic to organic compounds. Biological from simple cells to intelligent hominids. Civilizational megaevolution is leading from simple backward culture to complex cosmical culture. It consists of three main subprocesses connected with three types of civilization, dependently from their cosmic range:
(https://images2.imgbox.com/9e/f7/TQUpOAjG_o.gif)
diagram 4. Sociomegaevolution. The third phase from diagram 3 in more details.
- Type I, planetary, is connected with transition inside simple backward culture, about 10000 BC
- Type II, civilization which is entering in interplanetary space, is connected with transition from simple backward culture to complex scientific culture, present and future time
- Type III, which is entering in interstellar space, far future, this phase will also be a phase of biological transition from a relatively small braincase to a much larger one, which will be controlled by genetic engineering.
Processes of gigaevolution and biological megaevolution possess common turning point, it was appearance of fish-amphibia similar to genus Ichthyostega (370 millions of years). According to mechanism of evolutional processes (see p.3) a limiting factor designating this turning point and developmental limits was environment - properties of environment. It designates framework both for mega as well as giga evolution.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/aa/23/6YZ4fFkH_o.gif)
diagram 5. Ichthyostega.Turning point of whole evolution.
Conception of microevolution of Gould-Eldredge can get confirmation from the point of view of my theory of biomegaevolution, considering that evidences confirming its rightness seem to be more convincing than evidences in interest of Punctuationalism. Hitherto conception of Gould-Eldredge was treated harshly. There is not its in basic manuals from a scope of biology.
Logistic development can explain also a difference between a qualitative change and quantitative change. It shows that each kind of so called qualitative change, like for example liquefaction of gas, is just some form of quantitative change. Marxists are using conception of change where quantitative changes transform to qualitative change. But this idea is containing fundamental mistake that there is a difference between qualitative and quantitative change. One from subprocesses of sociomegaevolution we can see below. Primordial phase of development of civilization was backward, at present we are during transfer into scientific phase.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/77/ae/r9XgcrHy_o.gif)
diagram 6. Social evolution. You can also put a backward culture at the bottom of the curve and a technical culture at the top of the curve.
3.
Mechanism of described mega and giga evolutional processes is based on three rules:
(1) First predicates that no development cannot last endlessly.
(2) Second that unopposed development has autogenous tendency to self accelerating in compliance with simple rule of duplication or multiplication quantity of evolutional improvements - a model of this process can be sequence of numbers ...0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8.... Simple organisms possess small quantity of adaptive and constructional solutions, multiplication their quantity does not bring through longer time greater results. Only after achievement of certain level of complication their multiplication effects with impetuous development. Similarily as duplication of small values does not bring through longer time greater effects, only after achievement of certain level appears impetuous increase.
(3) Third predicates that when self accelerating evolution meets limiting factors then begins more and more quickly slowdown, in compliance with simple rule of partition - which a model can be sequence of numbers ...8, 4, 2, 1, 0.5, 0.25.... Complex organisms possess huge quantity of adaptive and constructional solutions, and after achievement of certain level of complication further impetuous increasing of number of complications becomes impossible. They meet limiting factors, which more and more diminish quantity of evolutional improvements. Similarily as first partition of great values brings visible results, later partition of small values does not bring greater effects.
Gregory Podgorniak, Poland, year 2008
It can be assume that extinction events are connected clearly with logistic development. Each such event can mean a jump on higher level of evolution. For example last Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event of reptilia tied in with transition on higher level of evolutional development and with a capture of environment by mammalia.
What I would like to emphasize is each so called qualitative change, for example the transition of water into ice, or steam into water, is actually a cumulative quantitative change; that is, a quantitative change taking place quickly over a short period of time. So there are no qualitative changes, only quantitative ones.
(year 2008)
Were it not for the fall of the meteorite 66 million years ago, intelligent reptiles would control the Earth now or in the future. I would add that since intelligent beings of the homo sapiens type have appeared on our planet, it can be expected that also other beings of this type will appear on other planets. In addition, these intelligent reptiles would also probably resemble homo sapiens. The hominidin type may not be uncommon in the cosmos, but there are probably other forms, often very strange ones. Forms resembling homo sapiens occupy perhaps about 70 percent of the forms in cosmos. Such forms may arise from crab-like, reptile-like, and other forms.
(year 2020)
The validity of the theory of logistic development is supported by the social theory, where the same concept of development is successfully applied (see my text Sociological theory https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=86048.0 ).
(year 2022)
In the future, we will probably move to extracorporeal reproduction in artificial conditions. For this purpose, one can imagine incubators with artificially grown biological tissue of the uterus, in which the development of the fetus could take place (on a similar principle, one can imagine the artificial cultivation of meat food). Such extracorporeal reproduction may be necessary due to the enlarged braincases of future superhuman species. With a significantly enlarged braincase, natural birth from the mother's womb may be too difficult or even impossible. Of course, it will be possible to use genetic engineering to control the expansion of the braincase. I will also add that the enlargement of the braincase should not be an unlimited or too far-reaching process, the braincase will be significantly larger compared to the current human species, but it will not be a superbrain, with a head the size of a meter or more. Such a limitation results from the possibility of movement of a given superhuman form, from the ability to keep the head on the neck or move the head, etc. Because for the normal development and life of a given intelligent form, whether a superhuman or some cosmic form, sensory stimuli are needed.
Once a species reaches its maximally enlarged head, one can imagine moving on to extracorporeal brain development and creating meter- or multi-meter-long brains in special devices that would be fed and kept alive by this maximally developed species. This would therefore be a hybrid species (two species cooperating with each other). Perhaps there will be only a few such huge brains.
(year 2024)
about the author, My name is Gregory Podgorniak (brn. 01.1977, Szczecinek, West Pomerania, Poland). I am working on field of natural as well as social sciences. During philosophical studies at Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan (1996-1999) I was actively act in student scientific organisation, got a scientific scholarship, and one from my articles titled Circulus vitiosus and fourfold petitio principii in the system of Descartes was published in Humanistic Drafts of Publishing House of Humaniora Foundation in Poznan, no. 6, 1998. Unfortunately certain fate events made impossible to me continuing studies to master's and later doctor's degree. Thence I was forced to be content only with a title of bachelor.
Thanks to deep and penetrating researchings I was able to establish indisputably some number of my past incarnations reaching of ancient period, these data are certain, these incarnations are: Auguste Comte (1798-1857) French philosopher and sociologist, Edme Mariotte (1620-1684) French physicist and meteorologist, Aenesidemus (1 st century BC) Greek sceptical philosopher, Arcesilaus (315-241 BC) Greek sceptical philosopher, Gorgias (485-380 BC) Greek sophist.
see these my threads on this forum:
Return of Hitler, World war lll, nuclear warfare -
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=87090.0
How to raise your IQ, how to achieve higher IQ, how to get higher IQ ? - https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=86231.0
Structure of electrons, quarks and gluons; preon, preons -
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=86090.0
New horizons in Science book in PDF format -
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=87402.0
-
Thanks to deep and penetrating researchings I was able to establish indisputably some number of my past incarnations reaching of ancient period
The current theory of evolution doesn't rely on made up magical thinking, so the current theory certainly seems better than your take.
-
New theory of evolution
Not a theory.
Probably not new.
-
It can be assume that extinction events are connected clearly with logistic development. Each such event can mean a jump on higher level of evolution. For example last Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event of reptilia tied in with transition on higher level of evolutional development and with a capture of environment by mammalia.
-
It can be assume that extinction events are connected clearly with logistic development.
What do you mean?Each such event can mean a jump on higher level of evolution.
What's a higher level of evolution supposed to mean?
For example last Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction event of reptilia tied in with transition on higher level of evolutional development and with a capture of environment by mammalia.
Nope.
-
Here's how you are supposed to use S-curve to predict the future.
https://singularityhub.com/2016/04/05/how-to-think-exponentially-and-better-predict-the-future/
Kurzweil lists five computing paradigms in the 20th century: electromechanical, relay, vacuum tubes, discrete transistors, and integrated circuits. When one technology exhausted its potential, the next took over making more progress than its predecessors.
(https://singularityhub.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/individual-s-curve-progress-time-chart.jpg)
When the old S-curve starts to saturate, the newer S-curve overtakes.
-
What I would like to emphasize is each so called qualitative change, for example the transition of water into ice, or steam into water, is actually a cumulative quantitative change; that is, a quantitative change taking place quickly over a short period of time.
-
What I would like to emphasize is each so called qualitative change, for example the transition of water into ice, or steam into water, is actually a cumulative quantitative change; that is, a quantitative change taking place quickly over a short period of time.
Word salad.
-
Were it not for the fall of the meteorite 66 million years ago, intelligent reptiles would control the Earth now or in the future. I would add that since intelligent beings of the homo sapiens type have appeared on our planet, it can be expected that also other beings of this type will appear on other planets. In addition, these intelligent reptiles would also probably resemble homo sapiens.
-
I would add that since intelligent beings of the homo sapiens type have appeared on our planet, it can be expected that also other beings of this type will appear on other planets.
Non seq.
-
Were it not for the fall of the meteorite 66 million years ago, intelligent reptiles would control the Earth now or in the future
That of course is wild speculation, based on the mistaken belief that evolution 'wants' to produce intelligent beings. Dinosaurs were around for 165 million years (230 million years if we include the avian dinosaurs) without evolving towards an advanced intelligence. Mammals have been on earth for 175 million years and it is only in the last 2 to 3 million years have they shown any advanced intelligence. It seems that animals with advanced intelligence is more of a fluke than a norm.
-
The validity of the theory of logistic development is supported by the social theory, where the same concept of development is successfully applied (see my text Sociological theory https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=86048.0 (https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=86048.0)).
-
The validity of the theory of logistic development is supported by the social theory, where the same concept of development is successfully applied (see my text Sociological theory
You can't use a wild speculation that you made up to support another wild speculation that you made up. You need real evidence.
-
Verhulst developed the logistic function based on research on modeling population growth, it was not used by him to describe evolution as it is in my theory
-
What I would like to emphasize is that the presented theory is derived from social theory. First there was the social theory and then I used an analogous solution in the theory of biological evolution and gigaevolution.
-
Your diagram on gigaevolution above shows as if memetic evolution happens slower than genetic evolution,
and eventually stops. Memetic evolution should run faster, simply because memes can replicate much faster than genes.
-
...the presented theory is derived from social theory. First there was the social theory...
Is there any evidence that the "social theory" is correct?
-
Memetic evolution should run faster
So called memes, if they exist at all, have no meaning.
-
Memetic evolution should run faster
So called memes, if they exist at all, have no meaning.
They do.
noun
A unit of cultural information, such as a cultural practice or idea, that is transmitted verbally or by repeated action from one mind to another.
Any unit of culturalinformation, such as a practice or idea, that is transmittedverbally or by repeatedaction from one mind to another.
A self-propagating unit of cultural evolution having a resemblance to the gene (the unit of genetics).
A meme is an idea, behavior, or style that spreads by means of imitation from person to person within a culture and often carries symbolic meaning representing a particular phenomenon or theme.
It can be generalized to cover information transferred among AI models.
-
They do.
ok, give an example of an evolving meme
-
They do.
ok, give an example of an evolving meme
Christianity.
-
My theory of evolution confirms Gould-Eldredge's concept of microevolution.
-
My theory of evolution confirms Gould-Eldredge's concept of microevolution.
It's still not a theory.
-
Thanks to deep and penetrating researchings I was able to establish indisputably some number of my past incarnations reaching of ancient period, these data are certain, these incarnations are: Auguste Comte (1798-1857) French philosopher and sociologist, Edme Mariotte (1620-1684) French physicist and meteorologist, Bodhidharma (5th or 6th century) buddhist patriarch, Aenesidemus (1 st century BC) Greek sceptical philosopher, Arcesilaus (315-241 BC) Greek sceptical philosopher, Gorgias (485-380 BC) Greek sophist.
ROFL
U r a Funny chap!
But I'm afraid U ain't tryin to be one.
Anyhow, Extraordinary claims, Extraordinary evidence.
Bodhidharma aka Daruma had 2 Specific Pets.
Surely you Remember what those Creatures were & what He named them.
Right?
-
Processes of gigaevolution and biological megaevolution possess common turning point, it was appearance of fish-amphibia similar to genus Ichthyostega (370 millions of years, see image below).
(https://images2.imgbox.com/aa/23/6YZ4fFkH_o.gif)
diagram. Turning point of evolution - Ichthyostega
-
What's the difference between gigaevolution and biological megaevolution possess ?
-
What's the difference between gigaevolution and biological megaevolution possess ?
Gigaevolution encompasses cosmological, astronomical, physical, chemical, biological and cultural processes on the largest scale. Biological megaevolution encompasses biological processes on the largest scales.
-
Gigaevolution encompasses cosmological, astronomical, physical, chemical, biological and cultural processes on the largest scale. Biological megaevolution encompasses biological processes on the largest scales
So these made up terms are the same thing as far as biological evolution is concerned. Why have two terms for the same thing, what ever that 'thing' is supposed to be.
-
Gigaevolution encompasses cosmological, astronomical, physical, chemical, biological and cultural processes on the largest scale. Biological megaevolution encompasses biological processes on the largest scales
So these made up terms are the same thing as far as biological evolution is concerned. Why have two terms for the same thing, what ever that 'thing' is supposed to be.
He said that gigaevolution is not limited to biological process. In other words, it's the superset of biological process.
-
He said that gigaevolution is not limited to biological process. In other words, it's the superset of biological process.
Of course, you are right Yusuf.
-
Hitherto conception of Gould-Eldredge was treated harshly. There is not its in basic manuals from a scope of biology.
-
There is not its in basic manuals from a scope of biology.
Well said!
-
There are no qualitative changes, only quantitative ones.
-
The logistic model can be applied to various levels of evolution, including the evolution of a species of intelligent forms.
-
The problem is that the current theory of evolution is gradualistic and its graph may be an ascending straight line. I proposed a logistic model where a sigmoid curve is applicable at all levels of evolution.
-
Welcome back @ cpu.
i was under the impression that You got Banned from TNS or sumthin.
(Hope you are doing Well?)
To be Honest...
I do Wish you get Banned.
I'd rather like to see you create Threads someplace Else, & then have them moved to a Trash Can section or something.
Instead of seeing you repeatedly being treated like trash in here.
ps - hope you are aware of the " Ignore & Block User " option available on the forum.
(u can ask Moderators for help too, They are mostly Helpful)
U tc now.
: )
-
In the future, we will probably move to extracorporeal reproduction in artificial conditions. For this purpose, one can imagine incubators with artificially grown biological tissue of the uterus, in which the development of the fetus could take place (on a similar principle, one can imagine the artificial cultivation of meat food). Such extracorporeal reproduction may be necessary due to the enlarged braincases of future superhuman species. With a significantly enlarged braincase, natural birth from the mother's womb may be too difficult or even impossible. Of course, it will be possible to use genetic engineering to control the expansion of the braincase. I will also add that the enlargement of the braincase should not be an unlimited or too far-reaching process, the braincase will be significantly larger compared to the current human species, but it will not be a superbrain, with a head the size of a meter or more. Such a limitation results from the possibility of movement of a given superhuman form, from the ability to keep the head on the neck or move the head, etc. Because for the normal development and life of a given intelligent form, whether a superhuman or some cosmic form, sensory stimuli are needed.
-
In the future, we will probably move to extracorporeal reproduction in artificial conditions. For this purpose, one can imagine incubators with artificially grown biological tissue of the uterus, in which the development of the fetus could take place (on a similar principle, one can imagine the artificial cultivation of meat food). Such extracorporeal reproduction may be necessary due to the enlarged braincases of future superhuman species. With a significantly enlarged braincase, natural birth from the mother's womb may be too difficult or even impossible. Of course, it will be possible to use genetic engineering to control the expansion of the braincase. I will also add that the enlargement of the braincase should not be an unlimited or too far-reaching process, the braincase will be significantly larger compared to the current human species, but it will not be a superbrain, with a head the size of a meter or more. The theory of evolution can be debated for a long time. Biology is a difficult subject and ambiguous; I argued with the teacher for a long time on this topic. Then I searched for topics in biology, used https://papersowl.com/blog/biology-research-paper-topics (https://papersowl.com/blog/biology-research-paper-topics) for this. I chose this topic for myself. In fact, I don't believe in any theory. A refutation can be found in each. Such a limitation results from the possibility of movement of a given superhuman form, from the ability to keep the head on the neck or move the head, etc. Because for the normal development and life of a given intelligent form, whether a superhuman or some cosmic form, sensory stimuli are needed.
There are many questions not directed at you, but in general:
How will the use of such technologies be regulated?
What rights will fruits grown in artificial conditions have?
-
IMO, supersized brain won't be needed. It won't help its hosts to compete against someone who has direct brain computer interface to Artificial Super Intelligence.
-
Brain computer interface is about as unlikely as flying pigs. A lot of people assume that the human brain is a computer- this is not the case and our knowledge of how the brain works is still primitive.
-
How will the use of such technologies be regulated?
What rights will fruits grown in artificial conditions have?
Different jurisdiction will have different regulations. They will compete against one another to produce optimal results, which are also affected by local conditions.
Rights are social construct. Someone who lives in solitude has no use of them. Afaik, there's no known benefit from giving rights to fruits.
-
Brain computer interface is about as unlikely as flying pigs. A lot of people assume that the human brain is a computer- this is not the case and our knowledge of how the brain works is still primitive.
How did you calculate that probability?
What do you think brain is for?
Why can't our knowledge improved in the future?
-
I don't need to calculate the probability of such an extremely remote possibility. You should try learning some neurology and the extremely complicated biochemistry involved before comparing the brain to a computer. Your brain is not "for" anything, your brain is you. I never said advancement was not possible but the idea of interfacing the brain with a computer is beyond science fiction(it is possible to control motor functions with directly connected electrodes but this will become an increasingly hazardous procedure as the bacteria/antibiotic war is progressively being lost).
-
Brain computer interface is about as unlikely as flying pigs.
I first saw this pig fly in 1992, as a student project at the Technical University of Graz. No implant, but some very subtle decoding of EEG signals.
We have been using cochlear implants to encode audio inputs to the brain for even longer.
As long as you keep AI out of the picture, direct electronic interface communication between the brain and the outside world can be very valuable.
-
Yes of course, Alan, but the brain does not have a bidirectional port for thoughts, as Hamdani seems to think, for computer interface. Things like cochlear implants and deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's are modalities to overcome disability, not to improve on the basic normal brain function.
-
I don't need to calculate the probability of such an extremely remote possibility. You should try learning some neurology and the extremely complicated biochemistry involved before comparing the brain to a computer. Your brain is not "for" anything, your brain is you. I never said advancement was not possible but the idea of interfacing the brain with a computer is beyond science fiction(it is possible to control motor functions with directly connected electrodes but this will become an increasingly hazardous procedure as the bacteria/antibiotic war is progressively being lost).
https://www.wingsforlife.com/uk/latest/recent-advancements-in-brain-computer-interfaces-en
Behind the scenes
Due to the invasiveness of the procedure, studies testing BCIs in humans are understandably lengthy. This is to ensure the safety of the patients and to verify that the devices remain operative over extended periods. While Neuralink announced a five-year lasting follow-up, the BrainGate trial is set to reach completion by 2038, meaning in 14 years' time.
Sometimes reality feels stranger than fiction, especially for those who don't follow most recent updates on science and technology.
-
A single truly bidirectional port, or lack of, is of no consequence. We have a few effectively bidirectional sensor/effectors, and the human hand is a particularly good example that can input pressure and temperature and output force. But most data arrives in the form of hearing and vision and is output as speech, so the intermediate wiring is of no more importance than whether your telephone works on bidirectional package switching on two wires, or four separate wires.
Apropos Hamdani's concern over the length of human implant trials, there is a serious ethical question to be considered beyond the questions of chemical compatibility:
The first effective cochlear implants were 4-channel devices, which were supplanted by 16 and 24-channel units. So far, no problem - everyone expects technology to improve over time. But CIs work best if implanted in very young kids diagnosed with profound deafness whilst the brain is still very plastic, and reworking to accommodate a new unit involves serious surgical risk and a lot of brain reprogramming. So we have made our patient's life and safety dependent on a device that requires maintenance for at least 70 years. Problem is that the commercial life of any electronic product is about 5 years, and the lifetime of a small medical device company rarely exceeds 20 years. So who is going to hold the stock of spare parts for a tiny number of obsolete machines manufactured 50 years ago by a now-defunct company?
-
The first effective cochlear implants were 4-channel devices, which were supplanted by 16 and 24-channel units. So far, no problem - everyone expects technology to improve over time. But CIs work best if implanted in very young kids diagnosed with profound deafness whilst the brain is still very plastic, and reworking to accommodate a new unit involves serious surgical risk and a lot of brain reprogramming. So we have made our patient's life and safety dependent on a device that requires maintenance for at least 70 years. Problem is that the commercial life of any electronic product is about 5 years, and the lifetime of a small medical device company rarely exceeds 20 years. So who is going to hold the stock of spare parts for a tiny number of obsolete machines manufactured 50 years ago by a now-defunct company?
Perhaps it will be the time to consider upgrade or migrate to newer systems. That's why safe dismantling method should be considered in the design before installing a system as part of its life cycle.
-
https://www.youtube.com/live/rvBWNTevhcM?feature=shared
The Atomic Human - understanding ourselves in the age of AI (repeat) | The Royal Society
This event is part of the Royal Society's Summer Science Exhibition 2024.
What if machines could think like humans? Can AI truly understand us? Ever wondered how AI will shape our future?
Discover some of the answers with Neil Lawrence, one of the world?s foremost experts in AI and machine learning. In this insightful talk, Neil Lawrence will reveal how AI serves as a powerful assistant to human intelligence, not a replacement. He will discuss the limits of AI in replicating human thought and its profound impact on society and information management.
Additionally, the talk will explore our society?s fascination and fears about AI, examining its influence on human identity. Lawrence will give an overview of the current state of AI, the challenges we face, and the importance of transparency and data quality. This session will offer valuable insights into the real-world applications of AI and its future.
Neil Lawrence is the inaugural DeepMind Professor of Machine Learning at the University of Cambridge where he is also the academic lead of AI-Cam, the University?s flagship mission on AI. He has been working on machine learning models for over 25 years. He returned to academia in 2019 after three years as Director of Machine Learning at Amazon. He is also a Senior AI Fellow at the Alan Turing Institute, visiting Professor at the University of Sheffield and author of the forthcoming book The Atomic Human - understanding ourselves in the age of AI.
-
I don't need to calculate the probability of such an extremely remote possibility. You should try learning some neurology and the extremely complicated biochemistry involved before comparing the brain to a computer. Your brain is not "for" anything, your brain is you. I never said advancement was not possible but the idea of interfacing the brain with a computer is beyond science fiction(it is possible to control motor functions with directly connected electrodes but this will become an increasingly hazardous procedure as the bacteria/antibiotic war is progressively being lost).
https://www.wingsforlife.com/uk/latest/recent-advancements-in-brain-computer-interfaces-en
Behind the scenes
Due to the invasiveness of the procedure, studies testing BCIs in humans are understandably lengthy. This is to ensure the safety of the patients and to verify that the devices remain operative over extended periods. While Neuralink announced a five-year lasting follow-up, the BrainGate trial is set to reach completion by 2038, meaning in 14 years' time.
Sometimes reality feels stranger than fiction, especially for those who don't follow most recent updates on science and technology.
NEW: Elon Musk MASSIVE Neuralink Update!
https://x.com/neuralink/status/1811095113281720722
They go into quite detail in the interview/discussion/presentation here.
-
Perhaps it will be the time to consider upgrade or migrate to newer systems. That's why safe dismantling method should be considered in the design before installing a system as part of its life cycle.
That doesn't answer any of the ethical questions.
The most effective time for a cochlear implant is as soon as you have a confident diagnosis of profound deafness, and a patient able to tolerate the surgery - generally before the age of 5. So do you wait for the next generation of devices, knowing that the result may be less satisfactory than proceeding with what you have?
Problem with "safe dismantling" is that the human body is very dynamic. Fishing anything out of the head after it has been in place for even a couple of months involves delving into the unknown (no two people heal from surgery in exactly the same way) with risk of serious damage being the only certainty.
In almost every case, other than infection or total failure of the implant, the balance of risk and benefit is to stick with what you have and accept that the next patient will probably end up with more acute hearing and clearer speech. But the maintenance problem remains: the commercial life of most medical devices is about 5 years, and spare parts for any device with a production run of less than a million are almost impossible to obtain after 10 years. But humans work pretty well for over 80 years.
-
Perhaps it will be the time to consider upgrade or migrate to newer systems. That's why safe dismantling method should be considered in the design before installing a system as part of its life cycle.
That doesn't answer any of the ethical questions.
The most effective time for a cochlear implant is as soon as you have a confident diagnosis of profound deafness, and a patient able to tolerate the surgery - generally before the age of 5. So do you wait for the next generation of devices, knowing that the result may be less satisfactory than proceeding with what you have?
Problem with "safe dismantling" is that the human body is very dynamic. Fishing anything out of the head after it has been in place for even a couple of months involves delving into the unknown (no two people heal from surgery in exactly the same way) with risk of serious damage being the only certainty.
In almost every case, other than infection or total failure of the implant, the balance of risk and benefit is to stick with what you have and accept that the next patient will probably end up with more acute hearing and clearer speech. But the maintenance problem remains: the commercial life of most medical devices is about 5 years, and spare parts for any device with a production run of less than a million are almost impossible to obtain after 10 years. But humans work pretty well for over 80 years.
Which ethical questions?
It depends on the agreement before the medical procedure was executed, considering the price and risks according to the best knowledge of that time, assuming that both parties are being honest and open in the discussion preceding the agreement.
-
In the future, we will probably move to extracorporeal reproduction in artificial conditions.
-
I expect that descendants of humans will be able to improve their own bodies through science and technology. Assuming that no global catastrophic event will occur before then, which leads to their extinction.
-
Once a species reaches its maximally enlarged head, one can imagine moving on to extracorporeal brain development and creating meter- or multi-meter-long brains in special devices that would be fed and kept alive by this maximally developed species. This would therefore be a hybrid species (two species cooperating with each other).
-
Perhaps there will be only a few such huge brains.
-
Perhaps there will be only a few such huge brains.
What would they be useful for?
-
What would they be useful for?
To solve the most diverse problems, theoretical and practical. To build theories, develop new technologies, etc.
-
What would they be useful for?
To solve the most diverse problems, theoretical and practical. To build theories, develop new technologies, etc.
Any biological neural network including brain is constrained by its physical size. Artificial neural networks have no such constraint. Thus they can be much more effective and efficient in doing what brains are supposed to do.
-
Mutation Bias: Were We Wrong About Evolution?
Are mutations truly random? Yes?but not in the way you might think. In this video, we break down what scientists mean by "random" when talking about mutations and why it?s a bit more nuanced than you might expect.
While cells don?t decide which mutations they want next and then actively cause them, mutations don?t occur with equal probability across the genome. Factors like DNA?s physical structure, repair mechanisms, and (this is currently debated) even past selection pressures can influence mutation patterns.
Recent research suggests natural selection might shape these mutation biases, shaping genome structure to prioritize protection of vital genes?much like how your skeleton evolved to protect vital organs. But how much do these biases influence evolution?
CORRECTIONS
We got a technical correction on the deamination diagram from viewer, @johnathancorgan3994:
Nicely done. Very minor nit: the cytosine structure is missing a hydrogen, and the uracil has an extra bond between the carbon and nitrogen
-
Logistic theory clearly illustrates and can explain so called "Cambrian explosion" (590-545 millions of years).
-
- Type I, planetary, is connected with transition inside simple backward culture, about 10000 BC
- Type II, civilization which is entering in interplanetary space, is connected with transition from simple backward culture to complex scientific culture, present and future time
- Type III, which is entering in interstellar space, far future, this phase will also be a phase of biological transition from a relatively small braincase to a much larger one, which will be controlled by genetic engineering.
-
Of course, such an enlarged braincase will not have huge dimensions.
-
One of the practical problems, with the genetic centric theory of evolution is, although the the DNA is useful to explain the changes in protein, the DNA has little impact, on critical stages, such as the folding and packing protein, and positioning these, so they can be useful and evolutionary.
The mRNA, hot of the DNA press, all by itself is very limited. This does not define life. It still needs to process further to make protein. While as these protein comes off the ribosomes, they are not already folded or able to do anything, nor does the DNA direct them where to go. There are still many things to be don, beyond the DNA, yet DNA gets all the credit. This model glosses over these shaping and placement steps, needed to become alive and useful.
Conceptually, the graph steps, shown in the first post, appears to show these organization steps. To bump up to a new level. there is a lot of sorting to do and placement of new protein, and the rejection of useless or obsolete protein from the DNA, since the theory assumes random. The DNA is not perfect and needs help. The cell or animal needs to sort that out, to evolve. This takes time.
The DNA appears to have and also needs a partner. The DNA brings home the bacon, but something else cooks it and place on plates as tasty meals; DNA's partner. If we knew more about this partner, what the DNA does, may not seem so random. The partner may wish to make a cake and asks the bacon provider, it also needs eggs and milk.
The most logical co-partner is water. Water was there even before replicators or DNA. It was there even during abiogenesis. That would make DNA, water's partner, since DNA will only work in water; it is monogamous to water. It will not work in any other solvent.
Enzymes for example, have their hydrophobic moieties packed into the core of the enzyme. These cause the most surface tension with water, and are buried by the water to lower surface tension. Most other solvents, proposed for life, are good degreasers and would pack the protein inside out. Even ammonia is a good degreaser and would not allow the DNA double helix to form but would keep it dissolved as separate helixes. Water tries to bury the hydrophobia aspect of the DNA, as a double helix, to lower its own surface tension. RNA is more like a single helix since its sugars and one of its bases is less hydrophobic compared to DNA. Water packs; dresses, her partner.
When you think of it DNA, RNA and all Protein evolved in water. They were naturally selected by water, at the nano-scale, which is why they only work in water. It is like the Arctic selected the polar bear, due to his dense thermal coat. This will not work well in another (chemical/solvent) environment like the tropics.
The water selected DNA to be its partner and DNA only has eyes for water; does not work with other solvents. It stays monogamous to water.
Interestingly, water has not changed since before even abiogenesis began; steam. Water is the same today and even the foreseeable future. It is like an eternal bookend partner. It has seen it all; evolution. This adds a steady anchor and the vector for evolution. The DNA on the other hand, is fickle and is always changing with time. The unchangeable and the changeable became partners.
Water chemical properties are based on hydrogen bonding. In a sense, water also taught the DNA hydrogen bonding. Or that it was natural selected since thy had this in common. DNA also has a double helix of water within major and minor groves of the DNA. Water keeps an eye on DNA, since DNA is fickle and needs to tow the line.
[img]https://water.lsbu.ac.uk/water/images/nuclei.gif/img]
-
One of the practical problems, with the genetic centric theory of evolution is, although the the DNA is useful to explain the changes in protein, the DNA has little impact, on critical stages, such as the folding and packing protein, and positioning these, so they can be useful and evolutionary.
...
Water chemical properties are based on hydrogen bonding. In a sense, water also taught the DNA hydrogen bonding. Or that it was natural selected since thy had this in common. DNA also has a double helix of water within major and minor groves of the DNA. Water keeps an eye on DNA, since DNA is fickle and needs to tow the line.
Very interesting arguments Wellwisher.
-
One of the practical problems, with the genetic centric theory of evolution is, although the the DNA is useful to explain the changes in protein, the DNA has little impact, on critical stages, such as the folding and packing protein, and positioning these, so they can be useful and evolutionary.
...
Water chemical properties are based on hydrogen bonding. In a sense, water also taught the DNA hydrogen bonding. Or that it was natural selected since thy had this in common. DNA also has a double helix of water within major and minor groves of the DNA. Water keeps an eye on DNA, since DNA is fickle and needs to tow the line.
Very interesting arguments Wellwisher.
Water is the shape maker of life. For example, the bi-layered lipid membranes of all cells do not randomly form. This specific bi-layer shape, is the shape that minimizes surface tension in water. The organic moieties get buried inside the sandwich, and polar moieties face the water.
This shaping of life materials, by water, can be understood as being similar, to the water and oil effect. If we mix water and oil; add energy, we can form an emulsion, which appears all random like a solution. But this is not stable. If we wait and let it settle, the water and oil will separate, driven by the lowering of surface tension. This shape shifting lowers the system energy, that we added via agitation. In abiogenesis, the high tide might mix random organics to form an emulsion with water. As the tide goes out, pools of this emulsion settle, and will lower surface tension; water and organic phase separation. A sorting process begins to occur.
In this model, the organics of life; DNA,RNA, Protein, fats, etc., are analogous to "oil" and when they appear in water, a variation of the water and oil effect form; some degree of surface tension. The water helps to pack the same shapes, each time, since these specific shapes create minimal surface energy potential.
When enzymes are packed, the most hydrophobic moieties, create the most surface tension in water; most oily. These groups always pack first, thereby lowering the surface tension, fastest. The water, in essence, sets packing energy priority, to get to the sweet spots, as efficiently as possible. This results in repeatable bio-material shapes
Even the organic DNA is treated like "oil" in water. The lowering of the surface tension in water encourages the double helix to help bury the organic bases and sugars, as well as adding pressure to the double helix; squeeze, thereby making the DNA even more precise, since it now takes deliberate enzymatic work to expose base pairs; need to fight the water, deliberately.
The rational for why water is the universal shape maker of life, is the fluid and reversible nature of life's molecules, is based on secondary bonding. The primary or covalent bonds of DNA keep the extremely large/long DNA molecules whole. It is the secondary bonding; hydrogen bonds, between base pairs, that is the essence of life. These weaker secondary bonds, can form and break, without harming the main bonds. These secondary bonds can be used again and again for the same genetic expression, with no harm to the DNA backbone. This duality is critical to fluid genetic reliability; secondary bonds, and long term stability; primary bonds.
Water is the king of secondary bonds, when it comes to life. Water also has primary bonds between oxygen and hydrogen; O-H. Water also forms strong secondary bonds with other water molecules, via hydrogen bonds. The organics of life; oil, is more often Van der Waals types secondary bonds, which are weaker than hydrogen bonds. While each little water molecule, by comparison, can form up to four stronger hydrogen bonds. This collectively adds up to water having the dominant secondary bonding power. Water wants to self bond; optimized, and this will put the squeeze on the oil; shapes them.
The accumulative effect of the water's secondary bonding, with water the main component of life, is that the liquid water matrix is the "big dog" of secondary bonding within life. All the; "oil", is modified, by water, to allow water to optimize; lowest surface tension. This is why enzymes are packed with their worse surface tension in water groups buried. This optimizes water; the big dog. There are 100 times as many water molecules in the cell, as all the rest "oil" combined. Multiple this by four hydrogen bonds each water molecule. This matrix has a very powerful self goal. Water is like a large army of ants that keep the cellular house organized, in a way to optimize the colony; lowers the global surface tension to create a favorable water energy balance.
Evolution, started with replicators. As a visual, as the replicators made new RNA materials, water immediately began house keeping, to maximize itself; secondary bonding big dog. Even if the replicators, were not very useful or precise, yet, their output is still got organized. The goal of the water was and still is, optimize itself.
Flash forward in time; Say water packs all the intermediate stage replicator created protein, into minimal energy shapes. The "best" enzymes become more stand-alone, with a surface that is very agreeable to water. The less than perfect, still have residual surface tension. These will get combined and balled up with other junk protein. Now we have also at some "good enzymes"; solo enzymes, to do additional work. Water takes away the random, since the water has sweet spots, that are energetically favorable; reproducible.
If we go back to abiogenesis, before the replicators, and we have a bunch of random proteins made by other non life process; clay. The water and oil effect, is already in effect, The water will pack these. Since it is so early in the story of life, most of these protein may have residual surface tension with water. Water will combine them, to hide these residual energized areas. This is why we have organelles, these organelles, as a team, minimize the surface tension in water.
One older, but advanced example, that is still in effect, is the packing of the DNA with packing protein to form chromosomes. These packing protein are compose of histone protein, with long carbon chains. These are very "oily". Water will combine these protein, into groups, to lower surface tension, but that does not totally lower surface tension. Water looked for another way to combine, which becomes the DNA.
The combined DNA and packing protein minimize the water's surface tension. The DNA covers the packing protein, to help shield the water. This is very stable. It needs unpacking enzymes to reverse this packing, making genetic expression even more directed, since these will not self unpack, due to the water resisting.
But even the unpacking enzymes are directed by water, since when they attach to the packed DNA, this composite helps water. However, the enzymatic potential water added earlier; original enzyme shaping, sets the enzyme up, for success later; catalytic reversal. However, this exposes the packaging protein and adds surface tension. Water might send now send it to recycle; new equilibrium to lower global surface tension.
The key points to remember is the fluid nature of life is based on reversible secondary bonds. Water is the king of secondary bonds, with four hydrogen bonds per tiny water molecule, and there 100 times as many water molecules as all the "oil" molecules combined.
Through the water and oil effect, water, as the big dog of secondary bonding, shapes the organics; oil, to optimize both the local and global water colony. This action, over time, caused water to naturally select RNA and then DNA, since they were optimizes to the aqueous environment; optimize the water. This is why DNA will not work in any other solvent. Both water and oil (DNA and his offspring) need each other, with the team more than the sum of its parts.
-
Wellwisher, you rightly emphasize the importance of water for life processes, water is the basis of life.
-
I use the same logistic concept in sociological theory.
-
It is not known how long we will have to wait for this third phase.
-
But after thousands of years this phase will come.
-
Logistic model is an interesting model for model of evolution.