On the Self Organisation of Information Systems, The Nature of symbolic systems and the rise of Imagination land|Chapter 1|The Death of the Gods and the Revolt Against Reason

On the self orginisation of matter

The most fundamental question that religion can ask is God or are the Gods subject to chaos. Chaos
being the non redcurrence of phenomena. Things are happening, but the same thing does not keep
happening. And for you to have planets and stars you need a consistent structure of reality to scale
reality over. Said another way, is God a function of the universe or is he the universe.
For the Greeks the answer was simple before there was anything there was chaos. From that chaos
rose Darkness and night who then gave birth to the day and light. Concurrent to all of this, chaos
brought forth tarturus (earths molten core) and Gaia (earth’s upper crust). Gaia then gave birth to
the sky (Ooranus) and the sea (Pontus).
But these are not the Gods as as you know them. In there infancy they are still lacking capitalization
and complexity. It is not until the earth and the sky came together to produce time (Chronos) did gaia
become Gaia to the Greeks. Now I am not physicst, but Stephen wolfram is, his definition of time as
the iteration of the changes in the computation of space squares nicely with the Greeks .As you need
changes in space to get time and if everything is chaotic and reality has no structure how can
anything happen for you to then have something to register its iteration.
Now it is worth noting that the distinction between Gaia and gaia is to do with the establishment of
an ecosystm. We have a very monocentric view of plants and ignore the interrelation between parts.
Researchers in south America showed that [name of plant] does not actually derive it’s energy from
photosynthesis, but derives its energy from the mycelial web which connects plants in an ecosystem.
One cannot distinguish the soil of a potted plant from the plant itself. As it is the mycological network
which helps coordinate the flow of information from plant to plant.
This example is best illustrated with a picture of some plants I took along my rambles of west Africa.
Whose non volcanic, primordial soil makes expansive forestry difficult. One can notice the clustering
of foliage as the probability of a tree increases with the presence of another tree. If there was no
shared information communication at the local level, one would expect to see trees equidistant from
each other. There would be no clustering.
This is precisely the difference between the complex and the merely complicated .This gap between
the two is the principal scientific inquiry of the 21 st century. We can, thanks to ordinary least squares
(OLS) tell where Gaia is going to be. But the application of OLS to determine the behaviour of that eco
system is quite irresponsible.
Now most people do not think of plants as computers. However, plants must calculate how to best
deploy themselves in order to maximise some function of rain, sun, wind and lack of disease. Seeing
as Wolfram defined time as the changes in the computation of space it is this shared information
communication amongst vegetation which signals the birth of time (Chronos) Gaia and Oornaus
(along with 11 other children). The titans as they were later known to history did not come as fully
formed creatures. It took Hyperion some time to maintain a consistent computation across time.
Chronos then conspired with Gaia to castrate the sky. After which Chronos birthed his own set of
children, the most important of which is Zeus.
Like father like son, Zeus along with his brothers and sisters ends up usurping his father. Before
setting up his own dnasty on mount Olympus. However he remains plagued by his father, for
however powerful he is. He cannot escape time.

On the self organisatin of information systems

informatin systems as the mapping of chaos.

The Strange Order of Things

However it is worth understanding that humans do use reinforcement learning. But machine learning algorithms (save for long short term memory LSTM) do not take advantage of the way nature creates intelligence. You are an information system on top of a nervous system. It is worth understanding the evolution of life is also the evolution of intelligence as such. In the sense that at some point, life was not able to see, smell, hear or have access to any senses. Therefore it is worth understanding that the first information system was not the neo-cortex but the nervous system. Feelings were evolved in order to give us a representation of the outside world. I see a tiger, I am then scared, so I then run. 

The role of feelings in information processing save for the recent work of neuro-scientist Antonio Damasio is completely absent in modern literature. However, it does have a corollary surprisingly in the economics literature. Specifically, the work of the Austrian economist Ludwig Von Mises whose theory of human action is predicated on the notion that humans act because they want to satiate felt unease. This unease is generated by the nervous system and it is up to the information processing system to try to determine it.

The Economics of Mises

I felt hungry, so I tried eating some ice cream. That didn’t quite work because I felt sick. I then went to chipotle for some steak guac, and now I feel a lot better. Maybe that Ferari will fill the void in my life. You then get the Ferrari but are just as morabund as ever. But at least, you learnt. So this process of consciously trying to satiate unease is how society scales through time. This is the point of Demasio’s strange order of things. However, Mises wrote Human Action in 1949.

Austrian present bias predates behavioural economics

Time, from an econophysics perspective is the dimension that space iterates over. or the dimension over which capital scales. time is the change in space in other words so what makes the time to change.

It is the new field of ergodicity economics, which provide the most robust modelling of the satiation of felt nice through time. behavioural economics tries to take this into account with the concept of loss aversion, where if one were to look at the empirical data, people hate losing a monetary value more than preferring winning that same amount. However, what Ergo series shows us is that humans are ruined averse, not loss averse.

On the computational nature of capital and the pure time theory of interest

If someone has a 1% chance of going broke at a casino that he attends every day, his odds of Ruin are 100%, not 1% Because you’re the same person who visits at each point in time. From an artificial intelligence perspective, the model of self is ill defined. neoclassical economics posits that we model ourselves by modelling parallel cells at each point in time, not the same person at different points in time.

Economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources. This can be expanded economics the study of the allocation of scarce means inputs towards desired and output. This allocation is done at a price. You economics, the study of the allocation of scarce means, at a price towards desired ends. Ideally one does not allocate once economics the study of the allocation of scarce mean inputs allocate at a price towards desired and through time.

Time and increasing the de emphasise topic in economics with the theories of the trade cycle replaced by macro economics classes on time. classes on time preference relegated to behavioural economics, specifically the science of addiction, where empirical studies show that humans discount time hyperbolically Not exponentially has this posited by neoclassical economics. Humans like all animals exhibit to present bias we value tomorrow more than after tomorrow.

In this session I felt unease takes place through time it is a computation with regards to how long one can say ch felt on these four and it’s a matter of intelligence to be able to model on these for that long.Despite the empirical evidence against it financial models do not take this into account.

This issue is even more prevalent when you taking into account the inherent conflict between our world and the computing world that we created.

Our attention (the individual unit of measurement of both worlds) are mutually exclusive. I am probably not the first one to tell you that you can’t focus on two things at the same time.

Attention and feelings: 

A definition of attention is the information our minds focus on.

This made all the worse when takng into account Ludwig Von Mises’ view of methodological dualism, in addition to general value theory on the part of Austrian Economics (the better version of economics).

Mises emphasize a difference between the physical and cognitive realm [more on this].

In order to make better sense of this we need to consult the metabolism first view of evolutionary theory which emphasis the role of feeling . Specifically the point of the cognitive realm is to map a version of the physical universe into the cognitive realm using feelings as a dimension of information. Feelings in general have something which has largely been ignored by neo-classical economics and neuroscience. The reason for this is some combination of faulty reasoning by Decartes. In addition to the current level of quantification bias which has run most rampant in the social sciences . But I would join Antonio Damasio in saying that without the advent of emotions we would not have developed intelligent minds.

Feelings give us a way to represent the outside world within our brain. Originally when something felt good it was because it was good. The cognitive dimension was tied to the physical dimension. The difference between what is perceived as valuable in the cognitive realm and what is actually valuable was non existent in hunter gatherer times because one evolved based on the other.  Feelings allowed us to represent mentally the state of life within the organism and the state of life outside the organism in the cognitive realm. This is something which helps with evolution.

Now the same responses which were evolutionarily beneficial are the same ones being exploited. We evolved feelings to survive reality. But now our reality is based on feelings. 

This all changed when homosapien transitioned from animal to whatever we are now after we moved above the level of subsistence (division of labor/similar to the roman argument). Homo-sapien was an animal he evolved to survive based on reality (x) but he also (fortunately or unfortunately) has an opinion about x, think of it as f(x) or think of it as feelings. This is an issue as nature optimises how you feel for survivability. But since the agricultural revolution we started to optimise for our own created reality.  

[Which before was good for that environment but bad for this one]

[what is the role of homeostasis here]

Nature did not maximise for you to be happy. Actually in a weird way the more unhappy the better. Because nature needs a way for you to move across time. After all, if you were happy all the time you wouldn’t feel like doing much. As a function of that there is a natural asymmetry between the parts of your brain for wanting than enjoying. Which is why anticipation is often sweeter than the experience itself.

[how is feeling another dimension on information]

Because humans evolved emotions to best survive nature, human action is determined by the process of alleviating f(x) or how we feel. If all human action can be viewed as a byproduct of emotion, then you could make the claim that some of the above points are redundant. Because is all human action is fuelled by emotion then why is technological growth any different. However, there seems to be a consistent need for human to satisfy wants (homeostasis?) consistently across time. The so called leisure effect. This allows humans to think of the future at the expense of the present. This is what people refer to as civilisation building. Because people want to feel the same way across time they want to experience the same things, we started to look to the future. It is the act of looking to the future that causes technology to improve [in addition to war?].

Technology is the process of alleviating f(x). And through through the process of alleviating f(x) homosapien made the transition from animal to whatever we are now, after he traded the unpredictability of nature for more sedentary lifestyle (more to this pint).

 Since that point, humanity stopped optimising fo reality. But started optimising for our created reality.


This is an issue because nature maximizes for survivability (x). And nature did not maximise you to be happy, actually in a weird way, the more unhappy, the better. Because nature needs a way to move across time, a result of that there is a natural asymmetry between the parts of your brain designed for wanting then enjoying.

Before living things occupied their exact physical dimension in space (bacteria) through touch, then occupied more space with their other senses (animals), and then their existential dimension in space (humans). The level of that existentialism depends on the minds ability to conceptualise information.

Compression

In the language of computer science, your nervous system responds in a binary. Did this human action satiate my felt unease? If yes, repeat, if not then avoid. The nervous system acts as a compressor of information in order to map onto the high-dimensional nature of reality. Computers lack an interface for reality. 

I used the term compression in passing, a term that originated in the computer science literature but belongs squarely in the discipline of evolutionary biology. The goal of compression is to try to reduce a set of data points by understanding the general behavior of the system. For example, if I have the coordinates of all the planets in the orbit of the sun, I could then compress this information by producing the equation which predicts the motion of the object.

How many thoughts I can have per calorie essentially. As it is important to remember, that the energy a gorilla uses to lift a car is equivalent to the energy you use to watch that Netflix show.

Human beings navigate this high dimensional nature, not by mapping their reality to a set of 1s and 0s but with words and images. It is less computationally expensive to tell a human being “the sky is blue” than it is to run a machine learning algorithm that determines the sky is blue. Specifically, I only need 8 bytes of information (the amount of information needed to store the ASCII keyboard) to tell a human almost everything I need to know about his universe.

However, to a computer, the sentence “the sky is blue” means nothing other than the 1s and 0s that it needs to retrieve to generate that sentence on the screen. Needless to say, it takes several hundred orders of magnitude to run a machine-learning algorithm to understand there is such a thing as a sky and that it is blue.

To bring this back to compression, humans think the way they do because it is the least energy-consuming way to move through a physical universe as the human brain needs less energy than a supercomputer to navigate the same domain.

Skin in the game

The probabilist Nassim Taleb shows us in Skin in the Game that most of what humans call intelligence stems from their ability to interface accurately with reality. People with skin in the game do better without skin in the game not because of incentives, but because of their feedback to reality. Feedback, is then compressed by your nervous into a binary. which is then up to the information system to process.

This is in stark contrast to neoclassical economics, which is completely devoid of any notion of computation. The closest thing to it comes from the notion of creative destruction from the oft mischaracterized as Austrian but squarely Walrasian Joseph Schumpeter. In which he acknowledges that it is the entrepreneur which takes the economy from one state of equilibrium to the other. 

It is the self-referencing nature of human action which is what modern AI is currently lacking as the typical definition of a computer which is an electromechanical device which takes an input and produces an output. 

If we are to invent a true man made intelligence. It would not need to take an input to produce an output. It would just reference itself. Because it has felt unease that has to be met, it will then act independent of an input to try to satiate it.

Imagination Land

Jung-The subconcious mind

The subconscious, is the map of reality itself or in information theoretical terms. the combination of code and hardware which allows human beings to perceive reality. Imagination, previously calibrated to local patterns of nature. With native American culture, having developed its oral tradition with specific landscapes in mind. Human memories, more robust to visual information than rope memorisation. The famous memory palace, comes from associating information to a visual location space. When one alters a Native American landscape, one literally destroying history.

Biological motivation for the fantasical

The biological motivation for the fantastical, is the case against reality. It is evolutionary, less expensive to imagine something, than to perceive it. Imagination, is used to fill in the gap in our perception. Humans see the part of the electromagnetic spectrum condusive to their survival. Other animals, see a part condusive to their. No animal sees everything.

It is also worth considering the implications of a memetic theory of intelligence. With the evolution of human intelligence following a gradual path. There is an argument that humans evolved their intelligences as a function of sexual competition. Regardless of the nature of the competition. Humans evolved the intelligence as a function of natural selection. 

Said another way, the development of human inteligence was a positive adaptation to evolutionary pressures. In the language of evolutionary calculus. Humans, trade strength for brains. In terms of Artificial intelligence, the goal is compression. To produce the most amount of information processing, with the least amount of associated energy. A trade that has turned out quite successfully (as of this writing). Hunter gathering humans went from a local species to a global one.

The more people over an area. the more time humans are able to attent to each other. The more time they compete with each other. The more human intelligence is prioritising competition versus force. The more energy will be associated with the development of intelligence. The greater the level of intelligence of a given population.

Jungian archetypes

These perceptions, are then codified in abstract form. which are then represented as archetypes. later, shared. These archetypes, are usually represented in the form of the gods.these archetypes approximating, ergodic habit formation. the habits that we use to survive across time. the most popular propagate. the success of these representations, some function, of how many people share it, to the extent they do so.The most important recurring information is the distribution of personality. With different cultures, emphasising different personalities.

Girrard-Memetic Desire

From an information theoretic perspectives, humans are trying to solve an impossible problem. The information topography of reality being denser than what humans can understand. How do humans survive?

Some of the information, which was conducive to survival is compressed within the nervous system. A nervous system augemented by an information system. To help resolve this the information this information in asymmetry. Humans look to others to determine their goals. Specifically, humans should first choose a model. They then adopt the values of the model. Before then, competing with the idol for the objects of interest. The triangle nature of desire, can be frustrated by scarcity. As each subsequent generation expects to attain the object of desire. hese idols need not be flesh and blood. Girrard, himself came up with the theory while reading a novel. Any Jungian archetype therefore bears a viable model for behaviour.

On the nature of symbolic systems

A symbolic system is a set of rules which dictate the behaviour of variable images. Variable images being the codification of relevant phenomena. The extarnalisation of imagination, given the biological motivation for the fantastical.

On symbolizable information:

Increasing the complexity of which the brain can interface with reality?

Information that can be codified with symbols such that it can interface with the other information systems (the human brain).

And can be shared among people to homogenize social coordination 

And 

Transpire a specific form of knowledge 

And 

Allows humans 

More to this in terms of the difference between storing vs creating

What about AI 

outside of baseline levels. 

Baseline reconfiguration of bits which are already self organised by nature with tools which are derived from matter which is self organised by nature.

In an economic setting (?) your ability to minimise costs is deponent on having less people be able to transform configuration of nits from nature to configurations of bits intersubjectivity by. Humans with the most effect use of resources. 

On the symbolic maping of objects

Language as a symbolic system

Alphabetical symbols

The maping of variable images onto sound.

Mathematics as a symbolic system

After a certain level of complexity, symbolic systems are necessary to organise society.

A Number System

Numbers, fundamentally, are for counting things. Different types of numbers can count different things. We use complex numbers in fluid dynamics. Because no matter how small the linear scaling of a natural number is. There are places on the number line that it can bever get to.

The most fundamental type of numbers are known as the natural numbers. Fundamentally derived from the Hindu-Arabic Number system. Where pictorial patterns are used to label each succession of I. A symbol meant to represent a numeric quantity. As prior to this a three was III. If i wanted to count to ten i would need ten I (IIIIIIIIII). Each number system, with its corresponding base. Decimal is of base ten, binary base two. Otherwise we would need a new symbol for each succesive digit of ones till forever. The idea of a number base, allows you to extend the codification numbers within the same set of symbols.

The Hindu arabic number system also introduces the notion of a decimal point. Introducing the notion of scale and precision into mathematics. the concept of a number expanded to include zero.

The evolution of the symbolic system of mathematics

The Archaic nature of mathematics

The variable image revolution

The Matrix

Jean Baudrillard’s, Simulacra and simulation. The intellectual inspiration for the Matrix franchise. The Matrix, a unique point of philosophy in its own respect. Departs from the book in many ways. The first Matrix film, reflecting the versatility of filmmaking as an information medium. With Hong Kong style kung fu. The other films, a poor imitation of the first.

Baudrillard postulates, that people get theie information not through actual reality. But our shared imagination, externalised through increasingly sophisticated information technologies. With increasingly salient variabe images. The book starts off with a map of reality. A map so accurate, that it’s confused for the real one. Anybody that’s followed the Google Maps down a bad the road, knows the equivalents of this. It is this confusion between this externalised imagination and fundamental reality is the Matrix.

Humans think in terms of representative internal visual images, are externalised. These externalisation, can take many forms from the cave paintings, alphanumeric symbols French posters.

The Evolution of variable image technologies

Our ability to produce these variable images has increased through time in addition to the complexity of these variable images. Eventually, we will learn how to automate the process of vaiabble image creation through the printing press. Be able to send these symbols without having to walk with the Telegraph

As the first images of hieroglyphs would later evolved phonetic symbols, numbers systems will become more complex with the establishment of civilization. In addition, people are also learned how to manipulate variable images through mass schooling.

The inflection point in variable image technology being the postmodern era with the introduction of the television, the latest result at the time of the variable image revolution. The television can be thought as a one way variable image machine. The shift from satellite to cable representing a fundamental shift in the cost structure of the content wars. The means of transporting these valuable images shifted from broadcasting via electromagnetic waves via satellite. To sending the very same information via fibre optic cables.

The personal computer, two way variable image machine. As instead of just being able to receive the variable images. One can also create them. Two way variable image was seen was mass commercialised with 1984 is Apple Macintosh. Giving people the greatest externalising imagination machine in human history overtaking pen and paper. As the Macintosh allows users the use of visualise representation associated with computer objects.

Freud-Depth Psychology

Prior to the field of Artificial Intelligence the field dedicated to the study of intelligence as such as the field of psychology specifically depth psychology.

Karl Popper, for its theories are unfalsifiable. We use all of Freud’s terms in passing like they were always there.

are unfalsifiable in as much as their uncomputable said another day. We know Freud is correct not if his theories can be used in the construction of a man who is intelligence.

Since Freud and Jung the field of psychology has absolutely degenerated into something unfalsifiable literally. I’m looking at you clinical psychologist.s who pretend to be more rigorous and scientific. because they conduct randomised controlled trials RCT. have memorise the formula for hypothesis testing. and can run a regression. Because the guy who programmed SPSS does most of the work for them. watching a clinical psychologist run a regression is like watching a child drive a tractor. They have absolutely no clue what they’re doing.

For most of the experiments clinical psychology but before we talk about replication most of the experiments clinical psychology do not make any sense take ego the patient for instance.

ego depletion

what was considered one of the stalwarts of clinical psychology. was later found out to be on replicable. Before we get there. There’s faulty logic associated with the theory to begin with. ego depletion postulates that people’s willpower is a finite resource that gets depleted the more you use it, not the case. And the way to counteract ego depletion is by consuming calories energy. How is that a description different than an analysis of every muscle of the body? Not even clinical psychology conducted experiments would make sense or conduct experiments which should could be replicated.

depth psychology, on the other hand has much deeper.

ideological Foundation which can be given interpreted in the language of artificial intelligence. the concept of free association. whereby a psychologist as they can talk about whatever they want. An act of self expression does then the job of the psychotherapist to extrapolate recurring themes. As people mentioned, the things they find important to someone keeps repeating the same thing. It’s because it’s important.

The psychotherapist becomes a depth psychologist once they start extrapolating recurrent themes between clients, and these recurring themes are falsifiable insofar as they are computable. Now that we prove through the scientific we must proceed to you.

As the principal difference between the Vienese Freud and the Swiss Jung school of psychoanalysis. has to do with the importance of sexual selection in Freudian psychology. sexual selection,considered the most important drive. So much so that his daughter Anna Freud, that aversion, so lame, much like Obi Wan Kenobi. The reason it has the reason is that humans compete with each other for sexual partners that which is good.

The nature of the scientific method

The formalisation of the process of sharing a reality is a scientific method than the scientific method bracket. Inductive in nature, the science of deduction even misunderstood by the supposedly reductionist himself Sherlock Holmes bracket.

The scientific method being one of the most overrated concepts in the history of our civilization in the history of science, however, the history of new concept being adopted because all people so today, exact some of ice brackets

People in order to communicate need to agree on a shared reality shared the artists who shared imagination because when you see a different reality, you’re crazy. The more people who occupies pain the more important that dysfunction is.

People in order to communicate need to agree on a shared reality shared the artists who shared imagination because when you see a different reality, you’re crazy. The more people who occupies pain the more important that dysfunction is.