X-Message-Number: 11689
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 16:46:20 -0400
From: Brook Norton <>
Subject: Emulations and awareness

Mike Perry in msg 11684 gives a good explanation as to how a strong AI
proponent would include the passage of time as yet another characteristic


that can be emulated.  It seems he concludes that a book with complete
space and time isomorphism could contain an aware being but that the being
would only be aware in its own frame of reference.  I think thats a good
way to look at it but still have reservations as discussed below.  

Bob Ettinger often makes the point that information isomorphism may not be
enough.  "Real world" time and space binding may also be necessary for
awareness.  I agree that this might be the case.  But I want to point out


that an emulation based on the physics at the atomic and perhaps the
subatomic level would give rise to emulated neurons and entire emulate
brains.  The emulated atoms would even give rise to emulated "standing
waves" and "self-circuits".  The emulation, when computed through
successive time steps, would have an isomorphic state for every state 
that a fully aware person in the real world has.  

Even so, I can't make the logic jump that says an isomorphic state is the


same as a real state.  To say that an emulated self-circuit has awareness


seems too strong.  I would say an emulated self-circuit has EMULATED
awareness.  Real and emulated awareness, for all their similarity, are, I


believe, very different things.  My comment to Mike Perry would be...
considering the example of a book emulation of a person.... The isomophism
is only aware in ITS FRAME OF REFERENCE.  But I see no evidence that its
frame of reference is operational.  I think the book guy would be aware if
the books frame of reference were to be entered into somehow or made
operational in some way, but as far as I can tell, the books frame of
reference is just a certain method of bookkeeping and so the book guy is
not truely aware.  

Brook Norton  

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=11689