[Fis] Emotional Sentience

[Karl Javorszky]

Dichotomy, Liaisons, Homunculus 2024 04 22



   1. *Dichotomy*

The dichotomy sequential – commutative is partly in our brain only. Let me
demonstrate the idea of dissolving of contrasts on an example.

Dichotomy of sexes *f/m *first as a social convention, then as a biologic
marker. Our generation has experienced a massive social weakening of the
opposites of what is a sex and what is a marriage. The dichotomy *f/m *is
as good as dead in legal life, in Europe.

Evolutionarily later organisms use gametes and chromosomes for
reproduction. These are dichotomized variants that cooperate, of the same
message. Yet, there are variants that can reproduce (e.g.Komodo varans)
asexually, self-cooperative.

We look at that predecessor of humans that has not quite yet finished
transforming its reproduction into a technique using two different sexes.
Its genetic material is not yet dichotomized into *xx *and* xy *strands. At
that stage, the genetic material includes all those properties which will
differentiate into the female and the male version.

At the stage, where it is not yet clear, whether a dichotomy had evolved,
do the logical primitives come in. Their maneuverings while undergoing
periodic changes produce patterns that make sense if read *successively*
and such that make sense as well if read *across* (like an inventory, or
the substance analysis of a fluid).

There exists a category of symbols that are both commutative and
sequential, independently of the decisions of the human spectator.

As the learned friends have by now each sorted their 12 books and see the
lists of the cycles, which book was in which cycle, there remans only one
small exercise to do. Take as many colors as the reorder of your 12 books
have resulted in, paint the books that belong to the same cycle with the
same color. Then, use a fat marker and mark each member of a cycle with “*q
< > r” *if that book in that cycle was replaced by *q *and replaces *r*.
Then we see a symbol that is commutative (shared by all members of the same
cycle) and that is sequential, because it says at which sequential position
(rank) the element is within the cycle.

The unit we work with is comparable to a Lego stone. Its color is an entry
on the *nominal *scale (differentiating only), the rank within the sequence
of the members of the cycle, is an entry on an *ordinal *scale (allows
sequences).

The *proto-symbol* designating commutative and sequential properties of an
object (name-of-cycle *cum *sequential-rank-within-cycle), *has no name
yet.* Fis is welcome to give it a name.

   2. *Liaisons*

*2a: Rhetorical challenges:*

In the Sumerian system, units are uniform and have no distinguishing
properties. The units can number up to infinite.

In contrast to this, the Akkadians have evolved a system that works on a
limited size assembly, where the units are each an individual, and each
individual possesses properties; ranks can be built on the properties of
the individuals. For numeric reasons, we deal here that variant of the
Akkadian family of algorithms, which evolves if there are *16 *possible
variants of *a, b*. We discuss the world in *136 *units each catch/gulp and
look at the patterns of coincidences that are implicit in the artefact of
the elements being different to each other, within the catch/gulp.

The facts of Akkadian algorithms are as fundamental truths as the truths
presented in a multiplication table of the Sumerian type. This means that
the grammar needs to be made more flexible. The concepts of types of units,
relations among units, value of each relation among units and the economy
based on the values of relations among units – all these concepts need to
be admitted into the collection of agreed on truths. Presently, the
Akkadian value of bonds that connect members of a cycle may sound
agrammatical. If the elements are not supposed to have any properties at
all, it is complicated to discuss the web of relations among the elements,
based on the properties of the elements.

*2b: Being a part of*

In the Sumerian tradition, there are no immanent tendencies among the units
to form groups. The units are born not in an assembly but are the one
perfect abstraction of properties of many. Since their birth they are
thought to remain unrelated to any other units.

In Accadia, units appear only as members of a cohort. A cohort are
those *d(d+1)/2
*members that realize all variants of *d *as applied to *a, b; a **≤ b.*

During reorders, elements team up into task groups. In the example with the
12 books, the task was to be reordered from [author, title] into [title,
author]. A different task would be a reorder [pages_no, year_publ] ↔
[year_publ, pages_no]. The same book is once a member of a cycle *w *in
reorder [at-ta], once a member of cycle *q *in reorder [yp -py]. The unit
is a member of several groups, which are here named cycles, in honor of
their genesis.

*2c: Costs and benefits of being a member of a group*

We use a reading of *a+b=c *that is conceptually *2(a+b)*, by
redistributing the value of *c *among the *a, b* in proportion of the
cycles that constitute a reorder. All cycles together have moved *∑a,
*∑*b *during
a reorder. These are cohort constants. (In the etalon collection, *∑a + **∑b
= 816 + 1496 =2312.) *The total of logistics delivered is partitioned into
summands delineated by the cycles. The cycles can be treated as a
separately existing logical category.

The cycles in their turn credit the individual members with a proportion of
the whole of the cycle. These are the lateral liens that bind each member
of one cycle to that one cycle.

The concept of liaisons is closely intertwined with the concept of
information. The lien connecting members of one cycle is not only a
material extent (*∑a, *∑*b), *but also data relating to the spatial
characteristics of the cycle. Cycles that weigh the same can be differently
dense.

*2d: Economy, bargaining and the bazaar*

The logical primitives change places during periodic changes. While being
in transit, there appear many alternatives to change track; here: cycle.
The liaison values (individual vector of liens) of each element are subject
to economic pressures. (Eg element X comes from a dense cycle, can match
with an element which needs more density.)

The idea of bargaining needs a *basic disagreement* to exist, about which
there is controversy. *This idea is alien to Sumerian thinking.* Numeric
facts show that there does exist a small inner discongruence within the
numbering system (A242615).

Once it is conceivable that it makes a difference whether an element
belongs or belongs not to a group, and that this difference has a numeric
value, the liaison values are easy to tabulate.

The following numeric example is *fictive and simplified*, in which there
are 10 elements which we enumerate 1..10. The total amount moved (*∑(a+b)*)
during a reorder of this fictive assembly is *55 (1+2+3+…+10). *

Reorder A generates cycles A1 (1,4,7), A2 (2,3,8,9), A3 (5,6,10);

Reorder B generates cycles B1 (1,5), B2 (2,4), B3 (3,6,10), B4 (7,8,9).

The liaison between and among the elements has two levels:

Level cycles:        Cycles A1 – A3 receive 55/(1+4+7), 55/(2+3+8+9),
55/(5+6+10);

                              Cycles B1 – B4 receive 55/(1+5), 55/(2+4),
55/(3+6+10), 55/(7+8+9).

Cycles summary:



Reorder A

Reorder B

No of cycles

3

4

Carry per cycle

12, 22, 21

6, 6, 19, 24



Level units:

Name and value of unit

Credits for liens A

Credits for liens B

1

12/3

6/2

2

22/4

6/2

3

22/4

19/3

4

12/3

6/2

5

22/3

6/2

6

21/3

19/3

7

12/3

24/3

8

22/4

24/3

9

22/4

24/3

10

21/3

19/3

Nota bene that the whole of material (55) is moved in both reorders’ cycles:

*3*12/3 + 4*22/4 + 3*21/3 = 12+22+21 = 55,*

*2*6/2 + 2*6/2 + 3*19/3 + 3*24/3 = 12+19+24 = 55.*

These are *static values*, which are properties of units in the etalon
collection. The apportionment follows rules that are implications of the
two natural numbers that make up each logical primitive. The data, which
value each lien, are included in the database, while the database is not
processing, in an idle state.

*2e. Enter periodic changes*

The situation changes as we commence reordering the assembly, in our quest
to simulate periodic changes which are axiomatic in Nature and therefore
one of the fundamental design principles of the Akkadian algorithms,
specifically of the liaison algorithms.

Again rhetoric: If we say: ‘I know’ then we refer to a state of the world,
which has the legalese description: “circumstances and facts that the
subject should and could have known”. The human observer, if working
correctly, can and will know nothing else but the facts and their
implications. Whatever else the human thinks, imagines and phantasies,
she/he will not be able to communicate that deducted content to others
understandably, because others can also only know facts and their
implications, and everything else is private. We shall come to deal with
poems, phlogistons and insinuations, in a later phase. Here, it is
important that the category of the observer, narrator, decider, etc. {human
↔ machine} is not a dichotomy but rather a non-differentiable identity. A
human in the Wittgenstein sense of being a communication partner is so much
(in such an extreme extent) rational as to be indistinguishable from a
finite automaton.

Now, why is this long prelude necessary? Because the slogan: *“Knowledge is
power”* is shown to be factually true. It makes a material difference
whether I know or not that X is the case. This happens by means of the
liaison values that connect elements as parts to cycles as wholes, and
parallel to this, cycles as parts to reorders as wholes.

*2f. Liaison values in dynamic processes*

If I know that Reorder A is the case, then I calculate with 3 vacant places
and 3 values of estimated extent in transit. If I know that reorder B is
the case, then I calculate with 4 vacant places and 4 values of estimated
extent in transit. Each cycle has one place vacant and one unit in transit.

If Reorder A is the case, then the assembly consists of 7 places filled, 3
vacant. In transit are on average 12/3 + 22/4 + 21/3 = 16.5. In any moment,
its stationary picture shows 38.5 amount (mass) on 7 places.

If Reorder B is the case, then the assembly consists of 6 places filled, 4
vacant. In transit are on average 6/2 + 6/2 + 19/3 + 24/4 = 18.3. In any
moment, its stationary picture shows 36.6 amount (mass) on 6 places.

The local certainty that X is the case contributes to the global hypothesis
that periodic changes A, B, C are taking place, in falling order of
probability. We have *3 *variants of expected distributions of elements,
World according to {A, B, C}.

The Akkadians have defined information as the extent of deviation between
expected and observed values. The fact (of the knowledge) of Reorder A
being the case creates a web of expected liaison values that are different
to those which would prevail if Reorder B or C would be the case. Naming
the descendants of variants B, C as observed values, we have matrix of
deviations (of spatial and material nature) between expected and observed
values: that is, information. The fact of (a knowledge of) X being the case
has spatial and material implications, by changing the background, with
respect to the number of places vacant and amounts in transit, relative to
which the present state is in deviation. Feed-backs and self-reinforcing
processes appear to be at work, with thresholds, limits, and tipping points.

The Akkadians have assumed a natural and unavoidable process of
self-organization, in which order develops naturally from the properties of
parts of wholes. The hypothesis is that a random arrangement of logical
primitives creates parts of reorders. (Our neurology causes us to perceive
patterns, even if there are no patterns. The active search for patterns
would not be an evolutionary advantage if here were no patterns to detect.
Therefore, there are patterns in Nature, the recognition of which is an
advantage.) The order as a concept comes from the fact of the units being
different. Some of the possible orders are more frequent in random
assemblies of logical primitives. These became the proto-being-the-case.

*2g. Summary of liaisons*

The relations of units to and among their peers was not in the focus of the
Sumerians. There is no tradition of speaking about logical – algorithmic
implications of parts of a whole (e.g. a cohort, a cycle, a reorder) being
involved in a construction of many small wholes that consist of other small
parts, etc, within a whole.

Liaison values work in cooperation with information values. The term
information has been introduced and numerically defined in ijita29-01-p02.pdf
(foibg.com) <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.foibg.com/ijita/vol29/ijita29-01-p02.pdf__;!!D9dNQwwGXtA!XLQLJ3k_Jww9q-PJwvYXhM9I439QV4N_K_OJKTxYKlpVulvjmkPAqYuBQoRl5ROpFkSbP6AYIlufYUa9fUI6VDk0sas$ > p. 85ff.
We use two cycles of the reorder [ab ↔ ba] to serve as unit of deviation
between expected and observed. Information is in this sense analogous to
ideas of opportunity, attraction, force, potential, energy, but includes
also distance, asynchronicity.

The liaison values are no simple scalars, neither. There are *k *dimensions
to the value bundle. (It may be of comfort, that no more than *15*
different dimensions can be used, and only a few of them are actually
relevant in simple tautologies.)

The places and amounts that are vacant and in transit, are outside of the
geometry applicable to the stationary snapshot. These could well be
understood to greet us in the form of fields and forces that are active
outside the concrete body of the object. Due to the Basic Incongruence (see
oeis.org/A242615) there are two versions of describing the same state of
the world: once in the reference of interval scales (using ‘=’ as
background), once in the reference frame of ordinal scales (using ‘≠’ = ‘<
| >’).

*3. Homunculus*

The group consensus in Fis appears to tend towards stating that a living
organism is impossible to build using only binary statements. In a
historical analogy, the learned friends tend to be deciding that a
homunculus cannot be built only of computers, but needs also some
bioreactors with physiological processes in fluid media.

There is hope that our version of homunculus will need no wet things but
can live on electricity alone. The problem with the wet part of biology is
not that it is wet but that what appears to us as wet is relatively too
similar among each other relative to how much it is. The interplay between
sequenced and commutative is best understood by contrasting the DNA with
the organism and feelings with thoughts, physiological mixtures with
electric discharges.

The interplay is not a dichotomy. The knowledge the Akkadians had, have the
Sumerians not carried over for us, namely that the relations within an
assembly of individuals have tautologies, axioms, rules, and implications.
Wittgenstein implies that for each distinct state of the world there is *one
*correct logical sentence to identify it. Using a dual way of counting, we
have *at least two *correct logical sentences to identify one and the same
state of the world. There is no need for wet extensions to the computers,
because two computers can cooperate with each other, of which one can
specialize on sentences in which the words mean assemblies that share a
symbol, and the other on sequences that watch the predecessor – successor
relations. These two are source for a third computer, which integrates the
low-level two and generates hypotheses about what periodic change is
currently taking place. The hypotheses are translated by a fourth computer,
that re-aligns the set of values into a web of target values for the
basis-level two. We have such a web of values *observed – expected *which
is what was called: information. There are lots of decision situations, up
to such that require intelligence, memory, and the ability to learn.

There is no need for fluids for our version of homunculus. It can be
balanced, spontaneous, creative and curious, and if attached with storage
media, learning, all by remaining in the discrete, binary world and
language.

Karl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20240423/a53c2cf8/attachment-0001.html>