[Fis] Information in Poetry

[Karl Javorszky]

*Information in Poetry*



*Expanding the boundaries of what is permissible*

Pedro’s trumpet call of awakening has brought us into a fringe area of
science. Many of the learned friends have allowed and supported employing
artistic means to express ideas that have not yet been explicated and
defined in a degree of exactitude and clarity usually required from
contributions to a scientific discussion. Let us compare the work we
presently do to the scandalous performance of *Sacre du printemps. *That
composition has awakened the audience to archaic, primitive, insultingly
personal musical experiences. We are actually composing ourselves a
revolutionary music here, in our capacity as a *composite subject *(social
psychology compares the evolvement of subcultural norms within a group to
the creation of a single brain, which happens to be distributed in the
crania of several people).



*Break with established traditions*

The revolution is referred to (or announced?), quite discreetly, by
Krassimir, as he writes:

… we may say that the "intelligent systems" may be studied in accordance
with theirs genesis – natural or artificial. The growth of natural
information technologies permits to find new theoretical decisions and
corresponded realizations influenced by the investigations of natural
information phenomena and especially of the models of the information
processes in the brain.

The key words are: *the models of the information processes in the brain*. Why
is learning from Nature such a remarkable turning point?

Some two decades ago, Pedro has elaborated on the encouraging historic
example of creative exchanges of ideas in Córdoba in the 10th century. We
discussed also the fateful split of the liberal arts into the groups of
unique and of diverse ideas about what is appropriate, just and right.
({[geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, music], [grammar, logic, rhetoric]})

The invitation coming from a hard-core quadrivial professional to adherents
of biology and the humanities, “ok, we have come to our wit’s end. Now show
me, whether you maybe have any good ideas” undoes roughly thousand years of
established epistemology. To accept input from the trivials as legitimate,
constitutive contributions, foreshadows great internal rearrangements among
the quadrivials. Let us reiterate the hope expressed in the early years of
this chatgroup, that we can inseminate each other’s mental landscapes.
Archaic cultural conventions clash with archetypical truths which can no
longer be denied: this is the mixture of which scandals erupt.



*The L-word*

We will agree that the brain is a system that evolution has produced in
order to optimise actions and reactions in response to its internal and
eternal surroundings’ periodic changes. The brain as a system maintains a
quasi-stable equilibrium and conducts its pursuit of happiness. Its
self-sustaining efforts can be seen as a part of its seeking happiness, as
a precondition for everything else *(survivre, c’est tout)*.

Krassimir’s vision of a man-made thinking unit addresses the limits of
artificial intelligence, as a homunculus created exclusively by quadrivials
will even in the 21st century remain nothing else but a finite automaton
without its own, innate wishes, urges or needs. Here, the ideas of the
trivial arts come in handy. We do have a name for that basic, archaic,
axiomatic principle which Giordano has shown not to be God in his *Cause,
Principle and Unity*.

We refer to that design principle one has to ask when starting to build a
homunculus 2.0 (our Boy). Where do we set the arbitrary middle value which
Boy shall maintain and how do we gradate his actions relating to outflow,
maintenance and increase of that measure in which we establish the
reference value? If we want to make a thermostat, we have to fixate the
target value range and foresee actions if the sensors show that the actual
value is below or above the target limits. There, the common dimension is
temperature and is measured in Kelvin.

It would be bigotry to call that, what the brain maintains and tries to
optimise anything else than *Lust**. *The lust as a concept has an
existence on the membrane between the inside and the outside. If we
experience it, it is subjective. If we discuss the utility of reinforcers
(do we give him more money? More fame? More time?), we deal with an
objective dimension which is routinely scaled, being additive within the
context of the experiment. Compare the measure lust to the measure
“nourishment”. We can agree that Girl shall thrive to maintain *q ± r *units
of nourishment in her system, and that the scalar values *q ± r *do not
cover the whole story: there are manifold sub-measurements which impose
their own bylaws, etc.

The design change from the tautological Boy to a trivial homunculus Girl is
that the former has no own desires and lacks any inbuilt *joie de vivre. *We
have to enter, introduce into the quadrivial world the central idea of lust.

In a deictic definition, the idea of lust can be demonstrated by some
schematised patterns of behaviour that people with anankastic symptom show.

Case C: 38 y manager, has to clean the flat he shares with his wife, to an
unreasonable degree. Every evening, however tired, he has to spend 3 to 4
hours going through every spot and make it clinically clean. He weeps for
frustration, but he has to do it with the greatest perfection, otherwise he
will not find sleep.

Anankastic optimisation patterns show the subject to be in a situation
comparable to one’s situation who has fallen victim to payday lenders or
loan sharks. He needs every bit of certainty he can get, right now, to pay
for immediate needs. Done in such fashion, the lust arising from the fact
that the predecessor and the successor connect (that there is an inner
congruence and predictability to the world) becomes an expensive input. One
who needs extremely high density, punctual doses of the neuro-signals that
expectations and observations are in congruence, has his overall economy on
self-congruence not balanced very well. Indeed, exploring alternative
avenues to see wishes fulfilled, and letting wither away habitudes that
destruct self-references can stabilise the lust economy within the
individual.



*The kick behind the lust*

We have presented lust to be a bonus Nature awards to her subjects if they
(the subjects) follow her (Nature’s) orders. In whichever way one tries to
formulate the idea, it remains deeply anthropomorphic. It pays to behave is
the same as be true to thyself: we know that there is a reward for being
such as expected (or not, in dependence of who does the expecting and who
the fulfilling). We wish to attach an evaluation function to the prediction
function and issue boni if the actual value nears or hits the target value,
but where do we get the material to reward with (*“Pour la Predictabilité”*)
and before all, the decision web which regulates the details of awarding *how
much* for having achieved *such a goal* from *such a starting* position has
to be written, if we attribute externally, or be found in Nature, if we
attribute internally.



*Passions of Nature*

Maybe there is a middle way between animalistic anthropomorphism and rigid
rationalism as we design our updated version of the homunculus, Girl.
Nature, as we see her, does provide by herself a source for lust, as she is
observed to maintain and achieve her own goals of optimal agreements of her
actual values to her – presumed epistemologically, but observed factually –
wished-for target values (gravitation, radiation, entropy, etc.) or wishes.
She awards herself a bonus for doing – letting happening – processes such
as they should, actual values becoming target values. Nature does have a
tendency towards stability, like healthy individuals do, and she reverts to
compromises if she needs to maintain an overall balance, just like healthy
individuals readjust to changes. The central concepts of inertia and of
identity are linked by their similarity with respect to predictability. But
where is the kick? In what way can the production of lust itself be made a
source of lust?

Respects are due to great thinkers, who foresaw that the day will come
that *Lustprinzip
*shall be a legitimate topic in educated circles: W Reich, S Neill, R
Dutschke, N Chomsky, M Python et al.



*Managing alternatives*

Periodic changes affecting an assembly shall produce recurring states. Some
of these are predictable. Based on some facts in a time precedent, one can
generate expectations regarding a time provident. The implications of being
prepared for a future A implicate also a degree of preparedness for futures
B, C, D also. Assuming that future B has come to pass, the preparations for
A, C, D have become void, caduque. This is the point we concentrate on,
because herein lie the goodies that can be awarded as boni for having
chosen well.

There is an economic term for such funds that are not needed any more,
because some expected losses have not materialised; the dissolving of
accruals frees up cash again that had been put in reserve for a case that,
after all, did not realise.

Periodic changes generate cycles. Cycles connect elements by bonds. Those
cyclic bonds, that would have come into effect if future A had come to pass
have now become a part of the background, having no relevance. Resurrected
from their dormant state are such that are valid now that future B is
actually the case. There is a continuous zero-sum-game going on between the
foreground and the background. Of this, Nature does not learn, our
homunculus Girl, like living organisms generally, does.

We have seen that background and foreground are defined within a context.
In the context of natural numbers: if the foreground is diversity and the
background is similarity, we create linear rankings. If the foreground is
similarity and the background is diversity, we create groups. In any case,
the number of sentences about groups and ranks within an assembly is
related to the number such groups and ranks within the assembly that we
call “objects”. Objects are solidified complexes of statements about groups
and ranks in a context. The context are periodic changes that affect the
assembly.

Switching large classes of statements from foreground into background (or
back) alters the overall balance of the assembly. Assuming we find that
quasi-stable balance for the inner Lusthaushalt of Girl which she shall
maintain, the system Girl could produce lust, *joie de vivre, *by being
prepared for alternatives and being relieved and happy that the other
alternatives did not come into existence although they as well could have.
This is perpetual fountain of youth and pleasure, because a. predictable
alternatives will always exist, b. being prepared for alternatives
/accruing in foreground/ is a corollary, c. there shall always remain
alternatives that were not fulfilled, d accruals will always be there to be
dissolved. This is not anthropomorphic thinking, rather the description of
an ongoing accounting procedure of lust optimisation and adaptation.
Learning can be conceptualised in such a fashion. Krassimir’s quadrivial
and the poets’ trivial system can merge, observing the lust principle, like
a boy and a girl do.
------------ pr�xima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20210522/da0bce63/attachment-0001.html>