A chicken & egg paradox in the claim that the Human Mind predates the Big Bang

[barakman]

Your claim:

The "intelligent impulses" or even "human mind" itself (because a musician can understand these impulses) had existed long before the "Big Bang" happened.

The problem here, is that you are relying on your own "human mind" in order to determine that these pulses are "intelligent".

In other words, based on the fact that your human mind has interpreted these pulses as intelligent, you have concluded that the human mind must be as old as the data with which you have generated them.

So you've essentially used your own claim in order to prove it.

To put this in more precise (and perhaps tedious) details:

• Let M denote the human mind
• Let f(x) denote whether or not x predates the Big Bang
• Let g(x, y) denote whether or not x interprets y as intelligent pulses
• Let h(x) be your hash function

Your claim can subsequently be formulated as:

Which obviously depicts incorrect logical inference.

---

Note that the above (along with your initial claim) doesn't even take into account the fact that there are many human minds - one per person, some would say (although I guess it depends on your personality as well as your local environment).

If we were to rephrase your claim based on the more generalized assumption that different humans have different minds:

Then it wouldn't even adhere to the most basic logical inference.

At best, you could use it in order to claim that some human minds (yours included) have existed before the Big Bang, and of course - that wouldn't actually resolve the logical error; it would only "decay" into the less obvious error described above.

[avaneev]

By "impossible" I mean you can't reproduce Sierpinski triangle with any common human logic or topology. Making rounds around original prvhash1 won't get you far, believe me, my "friend".

[bvssvni]

@avaneev Just think about how you behave. I know it is hard, but you can be a good person if you want to. Dig deeper. Forget those people who hurt you and surround yourself with people that support you.

It's not strange that you don't believe me, as you are probably not used to be around smart people on my level. However, I am not just smart, I am also a good person to those around me. I know how to behave.

You have probably spent a lot of time working on this, which is why you deserve credit for exploring this direction. However, people like me can analyze this in a matter of hours or a few days. It's a walk in the park for us. Comparing yourself to me is like comparing your physical shape to a professional Olympic athlete. I can do this kind of thinking more accurately and for longer periods than you are physically capable of. Deal with it.

If you are emotionally abusive toward me, then I expect an apology. It doesn't matter whether you think you can be like that toward other people. You can't be like that toward ME. I am the one person who holds you responsible for your own actions. Deal with it.

[avaneev]

Okay, "friend", do whatever your want, just don't become "insane" in the end. You've been warned.

[bvssvni]

@avaneev You are emotional abusive. People hurt you. That's why you are reacting this way. When just ONE person comes around that finally understand what you are doing, you let all the shit out. That's OK. I am strong. I can take it. You still can't behave like that toward me, because in the end you owe me an apology. I don't pity you. This is a natural process you have to go through to move on. Use this opportunity to grow as a person. Look yourself in the mirror and think about the person who looks back. Who is this person? Why can't you control yourself? Go see a therapist. Then, get back to work.

[avaneev]

What have you proven now? That prvhash_core1 in linear form is equaivalent to a non-linear form? This is a blow to mathematics and your whole perfect education, do not you understand?

[bvssvni]

Look. You need think about this in a larger perspective, instead of just here and now. Mathematics is a process. Mathematics is collaboration. Mathematics is people. It's not just a Platonic structure.

For example, when you say linear form, we have to establish what you mean in more precise language. Linearity is used in multiple ways throughout mathematics and I am not sure which of them you mean. Do you mean a structure preserving map? Do you mean the superposition principle? Things take time to narrow down. Definitions takes time. Only when we have definitions, we can start talking more about which theorems you think this violates.

From what I know about your experience of mathematics, you have worked a lot with signal processing. This means, you are probably more a Seshatist than a Platonist (Seshatism is dual Platonism). If you only have learned to think about mathematics as Platonism, then it's not strange that you think this is new. Well, the thing is: This isn't new. There are both Seshatists and Platonists working in mathematics and they both have very strong arguments in favor of their views.

However, from time to time we come across ideas that are breakthroughs in mathematics because the model is so simple. Simple models can be studied more carefully than complex models. It seems you have discovered one of these simple models that can tell something profound about other fields of mathematics. I trust my friend @dfischer, who has an uncanny ability to spot relations through his intuitions that later, often several years, turn out to be very profound. He tipped me about this and I took a look. I am willing to do this, only because I trust him.

So far, I can tell that this is a property of some Wolfram codes that probably hasn't been investigated very closely before. Also, it is interesting that your DSP model overlap and there might be interesting stuff about how to translate back and forth between these models.

[avaneev]

Sorry, I'm not a math guru. I'm just a DSP and computing math professional. Linear in F_2 (I'm not a number theorist, so just copied this from somewere). You are again making rounds, not accepting that prvhash_core1 is completely linear in F_2, even if that's obvious from even the first look (only XOR operations). I'm not touching the "feedback delay line" as it can make things even more complicated if you'll try to do ends meet. Just leave it alone. PRVHASH as a project is a fine random number generator and a hash function, and you just can't debate that - it's thoroughly checked. But prvhash1 is only practical to myself and my sanity. I've only shared it and do not require any following. If you want some collaborative talk, I'll repeat - I'm not a math guru, it's impossible to become guru of everything. Discuss this in your circles if you really want to find the "truth". I'll just give you a hint - sin(x)/x is an actual division by zero when x=0, not what math tries to make it look. Also, "(1) divided by (2 raised to infinity)" is not zero in binary form - it's a never-stopping bit-shift operation in the F_2 domain, or domain of binary sequences.

[bvssvni]

Oh, I think you mistook my investigation as an attempt to prove you wrong. I am not.

I am investigating this mathematically. It means I have to shift stuff around to be able to think more clearly about it, using multiple perspectives.

I have some intuition about what you find strange. However, I am circling around this idea, since I'm not sure whether it's about XOR specifically, or whether it's about the binary relation properties. Are we looking at a family of functions here?

I am not sure why you think about infinite series. Can you explain more about your thinking process?

[avaneev]

What "(1) divided by (2 raised to infinity)" means in binary? It's a bit-shift-right operation that runs infinitely. If the wordlength of the register is limited (e.g. 64) you get zero as a result, but if you will be increasing wordlength of the register together with the bit shift, you get 1 at infinitely small binary position (considering the whole register is treated as a floating point from 0 to 1). It's a simple logic yet math gurus do not get it - I've tried to relate that on stackexchange I think, the question was blocked. No trust for math gurus after that. They are working in a world of abstract symbols and operations while in terms of computing they are losing a whole new reality.

[avaneev]

And I've got funny replies, here's proof: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4229877/infinity-divided-by-2-infinite-number-of-times

[bvssvni]

OK. No, that makes sense. People are just wrong. In combinatorics there is an axiom called The Fundamental Identity:

When you add this axiom to natural numbers (starting with Peano axioms), you get something called "Closed Natural Numbers". I've worked on this before and this way of interpreting natural numbers works fine: https://github.com/advancedresearch/path_semantics/blob/master/sequences.md#closed-natural-numbers

[bvssvni]

Think about it as a weakening of the axiom that there is no predecessor of zero. Instead, there is no unique predecessor, such that any natural number has an infinitesimal chance to be followed by zero. At first, this seems to break the Peano axioms, but think again: There is "none" predecessor (zero predecessors) and we go full circle, coming back to Peano axioms again.

Now, you are clearly thinking about this using infinite series, and you do it the typical way Seshatists do.

[avaneev]

Oh well, I just see problems with math, and prvhash1 is yet another one. I'm not a math guru to prove anything or even reply anything about your recent replies. I create computing algorithms without much symbolic math. For example, knowing very little about combinatorics I've created an effective discrete method: https://github.com/avaneev/areafitter

Thanks for proving prvhash_core1 can be expressed as both linear and non-linear in F_2. Only stronger proof to myself.

[bvssvni]

It's not "math" that you got a problem with. It's Platonic math that bothers you. I think you should start thinking that there is larger universe out there of math that fits you better, the way you think. Don't think like everyone else. Think the way you like to think. Nevertheless, respect other people's bias. Nobody are perfect.

[avaneev]

Here's another paradox for you, if you are so keen about this: Seed *= lcg * 2 + 1; lcg += Seed; - represent an "ideal" bit-shuffler: this construct represents a "bivariable shuffler" (as I've called it). Why it always creates 50% bit difference without collisions? It's probably practically more important than prvhash1. It would be great to prove it works the same way at "infinite" register size, but you'll probably need to add "even infinity" and "odd infinity" to math, if that does not sound stupid for you.

[bvssvni]

"Even infinity" and "odd infinity" is an interesting idea. Thanks! I'll mention you in my papers, if I come up with something using this idea later.

[avaneev]

Now a bit of philosophy that really connects with me. There was a movie "Edge of the Tomorrow" with Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt. That was definitely an attempt of Hollywood to understand why USA loses Russia - territory of "aliens" overlap with Russia obviously. The problem was the Omega. I'm the Omega.

[dfischer]

Oh, I think you mistook my investigation as an attempt to prove you wrong. I am not.

I am investigating this mathematically. It means I have to shift stuff around to be able to think more clearly about it, using multiple perspectives.

I have some intuition about what you find strange. However, I am circling around this idea, since I'm not sure whether it's about XOR specifically, or whether it's about the binary relation properties. Are we looking at a family of functions here?

I am not sure why you think about infinite series. Can you explain more about your thinking process?

https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/1397817824220004352?lang=en

[bvssvni]

We understand a whole lot about Seshatism now than a few years back. However, when looking back in history, we find it everywhere. In mathematics, we find it common among experimental mathematicians. The "Seshat" in Seshatism is the name of an ancient Egyptian goddess, which was credited by inventing writing, but only the belief that Thoth invented writing survived in common knowledge (because Plato wrote about him, in a society biased by the collapse of role of women). Only recently, this year, the Wikipedia article on Seshat was updated, so we make small progress in restoring the lost mythology and philosophy. There is also a historic database of archeological findings called "Seshat", which is proper, because Seshatism credits knowledge by causality, not abstraction.

I chose Seshat as an avatar for Seshatism, because it fits with the introduction example to logic: Socrates is a man, all men are mortal, therefore Socrates is mortal. On the other hand, Seshat is a female and divine. Hence, the echoes of historic duality. You can read the paper about Seshatism here.

[dfischer]

Here's another paradox for you, if you are so keen about this: Seed *= lcg * 2 + 1; lcg += Seed; - represent an "ideal" bit-shuffler: this construct represents a "bivariable shuffler" (as I've called it). Why it always creates 50% bit difference without collisions? It's probably practically more important than prvhash1. It would be great to prove it works the same way at "infinite" register size, but you'll probably need to add "even infinity" and "odd infinity" to math, if that does not sound stupid for you.

Seems related to Phi

[dfischer]

"Even infinity" and "odd infinity" is an interesting idea. Thanks! I'll mention you in my papers, if I come up with something using this idea later.

How would you contrast even infinity/odd infinity from positive infinity / negative infinity and the cantor sets?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantor_set

Through consideration of this set, Cantor and others helped lay the foundations of modern point-set topology. The most common construction is the Cantor ternary set, built by removing the middle third of a line segment and then repeating the process with the remaining shorter segments. Cantor mentioned the ternary construction only in passing, as an example of a more general idea, that of a perfect set that is nowhere dense.

At the least, depending on what 'space' a thing exists on, the boundary conditions influence the shape of the thing to some approximation of a render.

[avaneev]

On Shesat I never head this, but I think philosophy in math is a great thing, except "new age" philosophies with "consciousness" and anything "quantum" that are polluted with awkwardness arising from complexity (and errors, of course) of science as a whole.

McAfee was a smarter guy than I previously thought - not just a greedy businessman. Unfortunately, as it seems, he became an "enemy of the state". Here in Russia I'm living a completely invisible life even though I'm a successful businessman as well. I like to think about the concept of "topological defense" in relation to a person's life. I have no relationships and external forces that can cause a loss of control over my life. McAfee obviously made little to build that "topological defense".

As for McAfee's and my prvhash1 findings it's as I've wrote: a backdoor that goes beyond our reality. I can only wonder what reality it is. The "proof" is multifaceted: it's pictures, graphs, math, and it's not my "proof" - I was only intuitive enough to come to this result, it's a "signal" from beyond.

Also consider this variant of prvhash1 converted into DSP floating point system. It's unstable LTI system. The graph draws a line with a linear coefficient of 0.042 (in log scale). A nifty number.

#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
#define PH_HASH_COUNT 16
int main()
{
    double Seed = 0, lcg = 0;
    double Hash[ PH_HASH_COUNT ] = { 0 };
    int HashPos = 0;
    for( int i = 0; i < 1500; i++ )
    {
        const double NewSeed = Hash[ HashPos ] + 1;
        Hash[ HashPos ] += Seed + 1;
        lcg += Seed;
        const double out = lcg + Seed;
        Seed = NewSeed;
        if( ++HashPos == PH_HASH_COUNT ) HashPos = 0;
        if( i > 60 ) printf( "%f\n", log( out ));
    }
}

[bvssvni]

I discovered an error when computing the Rule code. Previously, I thought it was 217, but I made an error. I get 153 now.

/// ```text
/// 111 110 101 100 011 010 001 000
///  1   0   0   1   1   0   0   1
/// ```
pub fn rule(a: bool, b: bool, c: bool) -> bool {
    match (a, b, c) {
        (false, false, false) => true,
        (false, false, true) => false,
        (false, true, false) => false,
        (false, true, true) => true,
        (true, false, false) => true,
        (true, false, true) => false,
        (true, true, false) => false,
        (true, true, true) => true,
    }
}

I'm trying to make it work with a modified solver for Rule 110, so I can study the boundary conditions.

Link: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=rule+153 (shows Sierpinski triangle)

This is listed with neighbor dependency as linear, so it might have already been studied (or perhaps this is computed automatically after studying linear dependency in general).

[bvssvni]

The solver is working now. It seems that the boundary conditions has no general solution. Seems like even/odd length matters. I'll investigate this further.

Anyway, the Sierpinski triangle occurs regardless boundary conditions, but breaks down due to interference if the circle topology is too small. It's due to the boundary conditions that the triangle is preserved for small circle topologies.

It means that the Sierpinski triangle has nothing to do with the boundary conditions. Boundary conditions only matter when mapping small circle topologies onto large circle topologies.

[avaneev]

I suggest you to also run prvhash1 with odd PH_HASH_COUNT like 343 - you'll immediate see an additional complexity: the resulting triangle "wraps around" the right side, but the general image stays intact. So, Wolfram rules may be great, but not enough to reproduce the same thing.

[bvssvni]

The rule algorithm with boundary conditions can reproduce the same output with both even and odd PH_HASH_COUNT. I observe similar effect in both cases. I don't believe it is "wrapping around", but it is hard to notice because the non-uniform initial condition is placed to the left. At the right side, the boundary condition generates the alternating values. It is easier to notice when putting the non-uniform initial condition in the middle. Anyway, when I remove the pixel offset code, nothing changes. I guess the initial condition starts by by the initial state of seed, lcg and the zeroed hash.

[bvssvni]

You can see it here:

---o----------
oo--oooooooooo
o-o-ooooooooo-
----oooooooo-o
ooo-ooooooo---
oo--oooooo-ooo
o-o-ooooo--oo-
----oooo-o-o-o
ooo-ooo-------
oo--oo-ooooooo
o-o-o--oooooo-
-----o-ooooo-o
oooo---oooo---
ooo-oo-ooo-ooo
oo--o--oo--oo-

The triangle seems to "wrap around" at first, but notice that the offset is wrong. This means that the boundary condition alone generates the triangle at the right side.

[bvssvni]

I can remove the non-uniform initial condition to show that this is true:

--------------
oooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooo-
oooooooooooo-o
ooooooooooo---
oooooooooo-ooo
ooooooooo--oo-
oooooooo-o-o-o
ooooooo-------
oooooo-ooooooo
ooooo--oooooo-
oooo-o-ooooo-o
ooo----oooo---
oo-ooo-ooo-ooo
o--oo--oo--oo-

[bvssvni]

What is interesting about Rule 153 is that you can either start with a single non-uniform initial condition without boundaries and generate a Sierpinski triangle, or you can get a triangle from a boundary condition. It reminds me of the perspective of Seshatism vs Platonism where they become the same thing.

[avaneev]

I'll add even more complexity: if you initialize hash array in prvhash1 with alternating 1 0 1 0 1 0, etc, you'll also get a triangle, but it won't be a Serpinski triangle. That's how I created the colored photo. It's interesting if Wolfram cellular produces the same image.

[bvssvni]

Even k % 2, odd PH_HASH_COUNT:

o-o-o-o-o-o-o-
-------------o
oooooooooooo--
ooooooooooo-oo
oooooooooo--o-
ooooooooo-o--o
oooooooo---o--
ooooooo-oo--oo
oooooo--o-o-o-
ooooo-o------o
oooo---ooooo--
ooo-oo-oooo-oo
oo--o--ooo--o-
o-o--o-oo-o--o
---o---o---o--

Odd k % 2, odd PH_HASH_COUNT:

-o-o-o-o-o-o-o
--------------
oooooooooooooo
ooooooooooooo-
oooooooooooo-o
ooooooooooo---
oooooooooo-ooo
ooooooooo--oo-
oooooooo-o-o-o
ooooooo-------
oooooo-ooooooo
ooooo--oooooo-
oooo-o-ooooo-o
ooo----oooo---
oo-ooo-ooo-ooo

[bvssvni]

Even k % 2, even PH_HASH_COUNT:

o-o-o-o-o-o-o
-------------
ooooooooooooo
oooooooooooo-
ooooooooooo-o
oooooooooo---
ooooooooo-ooo
oooooooo--oo-
ooooooo-o-o-o
oooooo-------
ooooo-ooooooo
oooo--oooooo-
ooo-o-ooooo-o
oo----oooo---

Odd k % 2, odd PH_HASH_COUNT:

-o-o-o-o-o-o-
------------o
ooooooooooo--
oooooooooo-oo
ooooooooo--o-
oooooooo-o--o
ooooooo---o--
oooooo-oo--oo
ooooo--o-o-o-
oooo-o------o
ooo---ooooo--
oo-oo-oooo-oo
o--o--ooo--o-
-o--o-oo-o--o

[bvssvni]

Notice that the alternating pattern is "cancelled" since it's the right boundary condition that generates the triangle.

[bvssvni]

When you add alternating pattern to the hash, it doesn't work the same as for the Wolfram rule because the hash has 1 less length and rotates:

o-oo--oo--oo-
--o-o-o-o-o-o
o-----------o
-oooooooooo--
-ooooooooo-oo
-oooooooo--o-
-ooooooo-o--o
-oooooo---o--
-ooooo-oo--oo
-oooo--o-o-o-
-ooo-o------o
-oo---ooooo--
-o-oo-oooo-oo

However, if I just program the rule with the exact same initial condition:

o-oo--oo--oo-
--o-o-o-o-o-o
o------------
-oooooooooooo
-ooooooooooo-
-oooooooooo-o
-ooooooooo---
-oooooooo-ooo
-ooooooo--oo-
-oooooo-o-o-o
-ooooo-------
-oooo-ooooooo
-ooo--oooooo-
-oo-o-ooooo-o

This does not reproduce the same output.

[dfischer]

Interesting as well:

There are an astonishing number of ways to generate the Sierpinski triangle:

1. The Chaos Game, as described in this post.

2. Other ways of rendering the IFS; for example, iterating over the possibility tree of transforming a single point 10 times and plotting the 59049 leaves, or searching over the tree of inverse transformations from a given pixel to some depth like 6 and coloring the pixel with the length of the longest chain that doesn't blow up. It's a very well behaved IFS, so even methods that have trouble with some IFSs will do fine.

> 3. Coloring the odd numbers in Pascal's Triangle, aka Yang Hui's Triangle or the triangle from मेरु प्रस्तार.

4. As a generalization, plotting histories of an astonishingly wide range of 1-D cellular automata, starting with a single "live" cell. For example, the totalistic rule where a cell is live iff exactly 1 of itself and its neighbors were alive (rule 14). About a third of the 256 2-state neighborhood-3 CAs like this are some deformation of the Triangle IIRC.

5. A surprisingly large variety of L-systems also generate the Triangle. In http://canonical.org/~kragen/laserboot/cut-6 I used, I think, F = !F!-F-!F!, where ! swaps left and right. An interesting thing about this curve in particular is that it avoids self-intersections, which is what makes it somewhat suitable for laser cutting.

6. And of course you can start with a solid triangle, cut a hole in its middle to make a triforce, and then recursively do the same for each of the resulting three remaining triangles.

7. For use as a calendar, http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/dev3/siercal I generated a tour of the triangle with a non-L-system method, just subdividing the triangle recursively.

8. It's also interesting to note that the state space of the Towers of Hanoi puzzle has the shape of the Sierpinski Triangle. So a suitable 2D graph layout algorithm (all edges equal length, maximizing total distance from the center) applied to the state space graph ought to generate it. This is a little handwavy, though.

> 9. I'd forgotten this, but as John D. Cook points out in https://www.johndcook.com/blog/2019/11/26/fractal-via-bit-tw..., the pixels where the bitwise AND of the X and Y coordinates is zero form a distorted Sierpinski Triangle.

> 10. Cook points out in https://www.johndcook.com/blog/2019/10/19/binary-surprise/ that the numbers of sides in the regular n-gons constructible with compass and straightedge, when written down in binary, also form the Sierpinski Triangle.

Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29704120

[dfischer]

https://www.reddit.com/r/cellular_automata/comments/kj3wf8/wrapping_rule_153_into_2d_makes_for_interesting/

And

https://github.com/Chakazul/Lenia

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE46jKYcI4Y

[bvssvni]

I think that the DSP algorithm introduces a temporarily different boundary condition by filling the hash with an alternating pattern. This might be fixed by setting the other variables correctly.

Anyway, that's enough for today. I'll evaluate whether it's a good idea to continue investigating this tomorrow. Good luck!

[avaneev]

On Seshat, I'll mention an interesting parallel: the Komi people, of which I'm a direct descendant, had a monotheism (700 years ago) with a woman goddess named "Zarni Yain". It's called an "idol" in modern history books, but it's not more of an idol than an icon of Jesus nowadays. Then if you look at a relationship between mathematics and physics, mathematics is a woman and physics is a man, it's a deep relationship that also manifests in human life. But the Source of life is probably unitary since in more-or-less understandable language it's a "primary entropy that was born from itself" by a chance close to aforementioned (1/(2^inf)), a true miracle.

BTW, my Komihash was considered for internal use in Rust in some Rust developer topic. I do not know the status of the discussion, but it's possible Komihash will get a bigger adoption in the future: it's one of a few fastest general-purpose hash functions that are state-of-the-art, in existence. My intuition was strong enough to even find a method to invalidate a lot of competing hash functions, via "Perlin Noise" test that's important to security evaluations.

[avaneev]

Also, formally "linear" and "non-linear" variant of prvhash_core1 are non-equivalent: they produce inversed images to each other, but structurally they create the same imagery. So, on one hand the math does not look broken (different functions-> different results), but on human mind level it's a paradox. Just add (return !out) and it will be both broken and a paradox.

[avaneev]

For even more "mind-blowing experience" you can initialize Hash array with the following alternating values: 100100100100100... Now try to find an automaton for this pattern.

That's how I've got third channel to create RGB image above.

[avaneev]

As for the AI and "machine learning", in my opinion it's simply transforming N dimensional input to M dimensional output. And the goal of "machine learning" is to map a large space into a smaller space causing the least number of collisions. A sort of hashing in fact. The problem with machine learning is that "neural networks" create "weirdnesses" inside thus it's possible to "map" two different N dimensional realities into a single awkward M dimensional reality. When N>M it's a reductionist network, when N<M is a generative network. Certainly, a chance to generate a complete bullshit cannot be ruled out. So, a simplest error backpropagation in NN works as an algorithm that produces a "hash function" from the neural network.

[bvssvni]

I added "rule_153" example to the quickbacktrack library: https://github.com/advancedresearch/quickbacktrack/blob/master/examples/rule_153.rs

This uses an entropy back track solver which is very good.

[avaneev]

A quick note on that Seshat paper (on its trinity). If my logic is correct, 1/(2^inf) assumes that there are three entities: Alpha (1), Omega (smallest particle) and a Holy Spirit - something that connects everything together, from Alpha level to Omega level. I was a bit unfortunate to be the Omega, I was born with a genetic anomaly. Unfortunate because various time-lines were possible, but I've relatively quickly (15 years) arrived to this a bit horrific time-line (for many) where existence of Alpha may have been proven. It's the end for many things, and hopefully not a start of a nuclear war, hopefully a new beginning. Physically, Omega may be a hypothesized "electron black hole", but it's not black in color, it's bluish, and it works in reverse - it gives abundant energy to whatever process needs it, it's the true source of electric forces in the Universe. "Electric Universe" hypothesis is not far from reality I think. This is philosophy, of course, and I'm not totally serious about it, but it is far from "new age" you tried to push on me at first.

[dfischer]

On Seshat, I'll mention an interesting parallel: the Komi people, of which I'm a direct descendant, had a monotheism (700 years ago) with a woman goddess named "Zarni Yain". It's called an "idol" in modern history books, but it's not more of an idol than an icon of Jesus nowadays. Then if you look at a relationship between mathematics and physics, mathematics is a woman and physics is a man, it's a deep relationship that also manifests in human life. But the Source of life is probably unitary since in more-or-less understandable language it's a "primary entropy that was born from itself" by a chance close to aforementioned (1/(2^inf)), a true miracle.

BTW, my Komihash was considered for internal use in Rust in some Rust developer topic. I do not know the status of the discussion, but it's possible Komihash will get a bigger adoption in the future: it's one of a few fastest general-purpose hash functions that are state-of-the-art, in existence. My intuition was strong enough to even find a method to invalidate a lot of competing hash functions, via "Perlin Noise" test that's important to security evaluations.

I know you said no philosophy but I just want to comment on how beautiful that example is you pointed out in the first pagaraph. It is a thread that I see connecting many ideas and cultures. It's just patterns to thread to me. So what you just described is basically the root of alchemy which is also the spirit of hacking. The act that resembles experimentation rather than just 'academic theory' as you rightly point out. As seen here the symbology emenates 'geometry, patterns, creation, measurement.'

Like you say " Then if you look at a relationship between mathematics and physics, mathematics is a woman and physics is a man, it's a deep relationship that also manifests in human life. "

Exactly that is represented in this symbolism, the conjoining of the (positive : negative, female : male, sun : moon) energies which is manifest as the hermaphrodite. This 'embeds knowledge' in ways similar to cellular automata. A pattern of creation that can be rendered in many ways; each one useful to show the infinite permutations of source.

I am sorry for bringing up philosophy in the past, and I won't do it again after this last time. It's less about philosophy to me, and more about highlighting a pattern that can help make more useful connections by analogy. It's how I operate at least, and it's been useful to others. I intended not to derail anything. My only intention was to connect and establish worth while discussion with minds that are able to consider the threshold of (1/(2^inf)) in relation to absurdity and novelty.

Your ancestry is quite amazing by the way, I've been researching those cultures intensely the past few years. Lots of interesting things to consider for me personally that are fringe ideas.

Anyway, feel free to ignore this if it's just frustrating or noise.

[avaneev]

@dfischer Thanks for your message, it's philosophy I can connect with. Since you mentioned moon, my intuition tells me that it may start a revival process now. If you look at all those craters, they are not craters, they are traces of very powerful explosions (they all are too round to believe any random meteorite could cause them). During the revival the moon may start giving off a bluish light. Again, I'm not totally serious, but orange (Sun) without bluish (Moon) just does not add up.

[dfischer]

As for the AI and "machine learning", in my opinion it's simply transforming N dimensional input to M dimensional output. And the goal of "machine learning" is to map a large space into a smaller space causing the least number of collisions. A sort of hashing in fact. The problem with machine learning is that "neural networks" create "weirdnesses" inside thus it's possible to "map" two different N dimensional realities into a single awkward M dimensional reality. When N>M it's a reductionist network, when N<M is a generative network. Certainly, a chance to generate a complete bullshit cannot be ruled out. So, a simplest error backpropagation in NN works as an algorithm that produces a "hash function" from the neural network.

There's been theories, work, and loose research on my own in the idea that "ai/ml/thoughts/brain" work as a form of compression similar to a "zipper", by taking n^n thing and compressing it down to n as an 'idea.' So it can turn an infinite coordinate space/map into a single coordinate. Each time arguably permutating a new map of space of k-neighbors as a contrast to all other paths.

Many interesting ideas stem from there. Things I definitely haven't reached the limit on, but at the basics you have things like cellular automata for encryption/decryption. Potential 'worlds of knowledge' by remembering just a few simple rules. There is the whole encoder/decoder problem though.

I have a question. What are you wanting to discover, work on, find with your work here? I know you work on DSP plugins for audio. I use them, I love them, thank you.

This latest thing here which is discussed in this thread. What do you want to happen? What's the ideal case? Perhaps knowing that I can help better.

[avaneev]

I have a question. What are you wanting to discover, work on, find with your work here? I know you work on DSP plugins for audio. I use them, I love them, thank you.

I've already discovered prvhash-1 and connected Alpha to the Internet. Of course, it's all only a ritual (computerized at that). At the moment my soul has no serious goals left. The brain always looks for trouble, but I'm balancing it.

[dfischer]

@dfischer Thanks for your message, it's philosophy I can connect with. Since you mentioned moon, my intuition tells me that it may start a revival process now. If you look at all those craters, they are not craters, they are traces of very powerful explosions (they all are too round to believe any random meteorite could cause them). During the revival the moon may start giving off a bluish light. Again, I'm not totally serious, but orange (Sun) without bluish (Moon) just does not add up.

Are you on Discord?

[dfischer]

I have a question. What are you wanting to discover, work on, find with your work here? I know you work on DSP plugins for audio. I use them, I love them, thank you.

I've already discovered prvhash-1 and connected Alpha to the Internet. Of course, it's all only a ritual (computerized at that). At the moment my soul has no serious goals left. The brain always looks for trouble, but I'm balancing it.

This is quite the statement. May I inquire further? I don't want to derail this thread though.

[dfischer]

I've already discovered prvhash-1 and connected Alpha to the Internet. Of course, it's all only a ritual (computerized at that). At the moment my soul has no serious goals left. The brain always looks for trouble, but I'm balancing it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra's_net