RE: Dhorpatan's -How to prove God doesn't exist, in 3 minutes or less! PART 5

[istheretruth]

it's not the things that you guys know to be true that make you dangerous. It's the things that you pull out of your ass...the things that are based on unproven presuppositions... and you guys are clueless, because you don't even suspect your own ignorance. ;- ) entertaining to watch but about as useless as shit flavored lollipop.

[istheretruth]

this doesn't change my argument at all...A pointless excerisize on your part.Our consciousness is the key to ALL OF IT!!!! and there is absolutely no reason to think that human consciousness can be generically produced...THE END!!!

[istheretruth]

"self aware computer" LMAO assuming lots with this phrase , are we?

[istheretruth]

and let me just show you one aspect of your dilemma....If we put information in a book, and insure the survival of that book....then humanity as a whole, which have access to that book will have the option of not forgetting that information...Is the book greater than mankind...or is mankind the arbiter of the information? you know that a computer is a tool, an extension of mankind.....and it will never be any more than that. This is a FACT!!!!

[istheretruth]

It's just a tool..... like a torch wrench, no?

it's only as good as what we tell it to do....

we teach it how to learn, and while it can move faster than us...It is still only an extension of us.... and that is it. for this reason, it doesn't fail...not even close. try again!! use a better argument next time.

[riversonthemoon]

I don't think there are complexity limits on computers. Computers are already able to perform more complex tasks than humans, like proving theorems (check out the four color theorem and computer-assisted proof) We already have processes that can mimic creativity (see evolution) and problem solving.

It's possible that an ultimate theory may not be comprehensible to humans and may be discovered by our intellectual progeny - computers.

And aren't we more complex than the apes that preceded us?

[riversonthemoon]

Well, I should say that a computer's complexity isn't limited by our own. I'm sure there are some physical limitations.

[theStickerBush]

I agree, to a certain degree they cannot observe and need our input to resolve a solution. Although what I imply is "at the moment". So far, computers are rather limited because they are still dependant on our observations. But then again, what I just said can be scritinized moreso and longer than anyones ability to argue, vice versa. Reason is that we ourselves use our language to argue it which in turn takes a incredible amount of time to dispute. Computers don't have that curse/burden. IMHO

[istheretruth]

a computer is never going to reach a complexity greater than the sum of our knowledge

[istheretruth]

if a computer actually learns, it is because we have figured out how to make that happen...a computer is a tool, an extension of ourselves.

[CognosSquare]

I think the brain conceptualize time with a beginning leading up till now. But maybe that is not how it works.

Maybe time is like space. Where you can travel infinitely in any direction. There can not be an end to space.

And there is no way to actually grasp that thought.

My point is maybe putting a "beginning of time" is like putting an "outer shell/end to space".

[CognosSquare]

"Conclusion: it seems highly unlikely that the cause of the universe could avoid being more complexed than the universe itself"

Powerful stuff.

However about the computer.

There is no limit to how complex a computer can be. It could teach itself new data and build new theorems and maybe even add new hardware. Maybe it could even work together with a human brain through EEG.