GNU   davin.50webs.com/research
Bringing to you notes for the ages

       Main Menu          Research Projects         Photo Album            Curriculum Vitae      The Greatest Artists
    Email Address       Computer Games          Web Design          Java Training Wheels      The Fly (A Story)   
  Political Activism   Scruff the Cat       My Life Story          Smoking Cessation          Other Links      
Debugging Macros     String Class I     Linked List System I Java for C Programmers Naming Convention
    String Class II         How I use m4              Strings III                 Symmetrical I/O             Linked Lists II     
Run-Time Type Info   Virtual Methods      An Array System        Science & Religion            Submodes       
  Nested Packages      Memory Leaks    Garbage Collection      Internet & Poverty      What is Knowledge?
Limits of Evolution   Emacs Additions      Function Plotter           Romantic Love        The Next Big Thing
    Science Fiction     Faster Compilation Theory of Morality         Elisp Scoping               Elisp Advice      
  S.O.G.M. Pattern       Safe Properties         School Bullying          Charisma Control          Life and Death    
     Splitting Java          Multiple Ctors       Religious Beliefs         Conversation 1           Conversation 2    
   J.T.W. Language    Emacs Additions II      Build Counter             Relation Plotter          Lisp++ Language  
  Memory Leaks II   Super Constructors CRUD Implementation Order a Website Form There Is An Afterlife
More Occam's Razor C to Java Translator Theory of Morality II


The limits of evolution

Abstract

This article follows on from an earlier article. In that article, I explained how evolution taken to its limit implies the existence of God. This article explains how this is not so, as the end product of evolution will be in some definite way something that is strictly less than God. First I will examine the arguments of Lucas and Penrose and show why they are not valid. I will use the insight generated from studying their arguments to shore up the end result.

1. A Rebuttal to the Arguments of Lucas and Penrose

This section is a paraphrase of an article written by myself under the supervision of Jack Copeland for the course PHIL607 Formal Logic at the University of Canterbury. In the 1960s the philosopher John Lucas wrote an article "proving" that our conscious minds are more than just finite machines. More recently the philosopher/mathematician Roger Penrose in his book The Emperor's New Mind used a very similar argument to show a very similar result. I will now attempt to explain why the arguments of Lucas and Penrose are invalid.


The arguments of Lucas and Penrose use the standard logical technique of reductio ad absurdum to arrive at their result. The following is a summary of their arguments: Assume that we are (in principle simulatible by) finite machines. Let M be one such finite machine. Then M is consistent (we assume!) and contains basic arithmetic. Then Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem shows that there is a Gödel Statement G(M) that is true but unprovable by M. However by reasoning about its own algorithm, M can prove G(M), which leaves us at a contradiction.


To see why this contradiction occurs, suppose we have an artificial intelligence M2 that is consistent and contains basic arithmetic. Then by Gödel's theorem there exists a statement G(M2) that is true by unprovable by M. If M2 can prove G(M2) by reasoning about itself we arrive at a contradiction M2 knows G(M2) and M2 doesn't know M2. Therefore we can conclude that a machine reason about itself to know its own algorithm.


The argument of Lucas and Penrose is of the form A and B C and not(C), where A is the statement: "We are finite machines", B is the statement: "We can know our own algorithm" and C is the statement: "M can prove G(M)". From the contradiction C and not(C) we can deduce by elementary logic: not(A) or not(B). The conclusion is not the negation of A as Lucas and Penrose would have us believe, but rather the negation of B: a machine cannot know its own algorithm. Giving a machine its own algorithm is like building a better machine, it gives the original machine in a definite way more power than the original machine had.

2. The Limits of Evolution

Consider the totality of life on earth as a single theorem-proving machine M. Assuming that living beings are finite machines that could, in principle, be simulated on a computer then M is also. Assuming that the set of theorems generated by M is consistent and contains basic arithmetic then the Gödel statement G(M) of M is something that is true but unprovable by the system M. One of the properties of God is that he/she is all-knowing (omniscient). Therefore we have a discrepancy between M and God and it is true that in this definite way, M is strictly less than God. In the previous section I explained how a machine cannot know its own algorithm, which shores us up against the possibility that M can "Gödelise" itself, that is to come to learn G(M) by reasoning about itself.



Back to Research Projects
This page has the following hit count:
| Main Menu | Research Projects | Photo Album | Curriculum Vitae | The Greatest Artists |
| Email Address | Computer Games | Web Design | Java Training Wheels | The Fly (A Story) |
| Political Activism | Scruff the Cat | My Life Story | Smoking Cessation | Other Links |
| Debugging Macros | String Class I | Linked List System I | Java for C Programmers | Naming Convention |
| String Class II | How I use m4 | Strings III | Symmetrical I/O | Linked Lists II |
| Run-Time Type Info | Virtual Methods | An Array System | Science & Religion | Submodes |
| Nested Packages | Memory Leaks | Garbage Collection | Internet & Poverty | What is Knowledge? |
| Limits of Evolution | Emacs Additions | Function Plotter | Romantic Love | The Next Big Thing |
| Science Fiction | Faster Compilation | Theory of Morality | Elisp Scoping | Elisp Advice |
| S.O.G.M. Pattern | Safe Properties | School Bullying | Charisma Control | Life and Death |
| Splitting Java | Multiple Ctors | Religious Beliefs | Conversation 1 | Conversation 2 |
| J.T.W. Language | Emacs Additions II | Build Counter | Relation Plotter | Lisp++ Language |
| Memory Leaks II | Super Constructors | CRUD Implementation | Order a Website Form | There Is An Afterlife |
| More Occam's Razor | C to Java Translator | Theory of Morality II
Last modified: Fri Dec 9 21:04:42 NZDT 2016
Best viewed at 800x600 or above resolution.
© Copyright 1999-2016 Davin Pearson.
Please report any broken links to