From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!mips!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!nuscc!ntuix!eoahmad Tue May 12 15:48:48 EDT 1992
Article 5384 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!mips!darwin.sura.net!jvnc.net!nuscc!ntuix!eoahmad
>From: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad)
Subject: Re: Quantitative measure of Intelligence
Message-ID: <1992May4.012153.12979@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>
Organization: Nanyang Technological University Singapore
References: <1992Apr29.170850.21627@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>
Date: Mon, 4 May 1992 01:21:53 GMT
Lines: 63

bill wrote:
: In article <erich.704535714@dehn> erich@dehn.mth.pdx.edu 
: (Erich Boleyn) writes:
: >
: >   There have been several attempts to use information density to
: >measure intelligence level.  
: >
:   Since the highest information density is achieved by total
: randomness, this does not seem like a very promising approach.
Actually it is very promising because it is very important for hardware
engineers. Let me explain:
	An information source that is capable of producing symbols at total
randomness i.e. infinite number of possibilities, would need an infinite number
of bits to identify each symbol, let alone process it. You can imagine how 
many memory bits would be required to store the information generated by this
information source.
	Can you imagine further, the amount of hardware required by this
information source in order to generate this infinite randomness, surely
an infinite number of register bits, so this infinite random information
source cannot therefore exist, but our brain contains 10 to power 10 neurons
which are multilevel signal generator. Our brain is therefore capable of 
generating a large number of choices. It is only capable, and not necessarily,
generating it all the time, for obvious reason of consuming too much energy.

: 
:   Furthermore:  intelligence is an essentially teleological
That is the whole problem. Most people are mystified by intelligence just as
our predecessors were mystified by the moon. My philosophy is that, if you
think that something is difficult, it will be difficult.
	Take for example the simplicity of Newton's Law which is used to
model our universe quite accurately. The law is only F=MA, of course
this theory must be developed further in order to explain our universe. My
intelligence theory is as simple as F=MA but it needs to be developed
further in order to explain more easily our universe. Prior to F=MA, there 
must be more complicatied mystical(theological) models of the universe.

: notion.  It is the ability to solve problems or reach goals.
But you must know the tools that are used to solve those problems. I had
identified intelligence and knowledge as two separate components, and I am
currently developing the constraint,or reasoning which are important for the
information(intelligence) generation.

: Information theory contains no teleological element, so by
: itself it is inadequate.
: 
:   On the other hand, dynamical systems theory does contain
: a quasi-teleological element (e.g. the notions of stability
: and of attractors).  Maybe it would be possible to combine
: dynamical systems theory and information theory to come up
: with some useful ideas . . .
: 	-- Bill
I am sure it can be done but the crux of the matter is whether it is simple
or not. If  the theory is too complicated, then we should look for simpler
ones. This is what I had learned at high school, arguably the ONLY thing that I
learned, that is THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD. Read the introductory chapters on 
Foundation of Physics by Zamansky, because I have this book with me now.
I am sure a lot of College Physics text books should discuss the same thing.
--
Othman bin Ahmad, School of EEE,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 2263.
Internet Email: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg
Bitnet Email: eoahmad@ntuvax.bitnet



