Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by arethuza | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

arethuza·

Doug Lenat's Automated Mathematician (AM) apparently did "discover" multiplication by itself:

http://web.onetel.net.uk/~hibou/ai-course/lenat.txt

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

Of course, you could argue that multiplication was implicitly there in the rules and facts it was programmed with.

View on HN

Let me know when humans invent something not governed by the rules the universe was programmed with ;-)

Theoretical physicists do that every day. It's only noteworthy when they find one that actually corresponds to the real world...

A lot of mathematics doesn't correspond to anything happening in the known universe. Mathematics describes infinities, infinitesimals and uncomputable numbers that are only hinted at using symbols which are not to be confused with those numbers themselves.

Literature, Art, Music, Philosophy, Religion...

Basically everything that isn't a science.

Poetry.

I wouldn't go that far. Maybe, "witty", but I wouldn't call it Shakespeare.

Write me program that could write Doug Lenat's Automated Mathematician. ;)

I think the OP's point was until humans invent true strong AI there is a qualitative difference between human and computer intelligence.

And even if/when a true "thinking machine" is invented, the intelligence which was able to create said machine would be nothing to sneeze at!

Write me a programs that could write me a program that could write Doug Lenat's Automated Mathematician ... and so on and so forth.

I wonder how many people in this thread have read Hofstadter's Gödel, Escher, Bach?

That's what Lenat himself argues in his follow-up paper. But I generally agree, there's nothing preventing computers "as we know it" to exhibit human level general intelligence. Humans weren't just smart enough so far to program it yet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com