Theory of Universe and Mind

a.k.a.

Todor's "Prophecies" | Todor's Predictions | The Bulgarian Predictions

in Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), Digital Universe/The Universe Computer, Philosophy of AI and Mind, Speculative Cognitive Science, A unification of Universe, Mind, Computation, Cybernetical Evolution etc. 2001-2004 etc.

[Version of the document: 22.12.2023*; "*" after words indicate footnotes; unsorted yet]

Todor Arnaudov's "Theory of Universe and Mind" - a body of work, originally published between 2001-2004*, when the author was still a teenager without any peers or a supervisor - is a general abstract cognitive "theory of everything", unifying Cybernetical Digital Physics Cosmology and Evolution of the Universe with (Artificial) General Intelligence and Philosophy of Mind, defining the so called Causality-Control Units, hierarchical and compositional "Universal simulators of virtual universes" with their sub-universes, universes at different levels, mother-and-child universes/machines etc. as universal building blocks for agency, computation and cognition at all levels of scale, ranges, precision etc.; computation, human/agent's (causality-control units') motivation and drives, behavior, decision making, reinforcement learning, society, reality, imagination, creativity (...); one of the main principles of the development of the Universe and Mind (causality-control units), respectively of the general intelligence, is the hierarchical prediction-causation of the future, based on the past, in ever increasing ranges and precisions, reliability, modalities etc. General intelligence/Mind is a system performing multi-scale, multi-range, multi-precision, multi-modality, multi-domain ... hierarchical prediction-causation of the future, implying the creation and operaton of universal simulators of virtual universes.

• Look forward to "Universe and Mind 6" coming soon.

TOUM was ahead and a predecessor, from years to up to TWO DECADES, of a big family of analogical, related, similar or in some POV essentially the same - as of principles, concepts*, reasoning, predictions - theories, interdisciplinary or in AI/AGI/Cognitive Science/Psychology-AI philosophy etc., which were later presented and accepted as groundbreaking, new, radical, novel, contributive, "the future of AI/AGI" etc. such as: R.Grush's Emulation theory of representation (6/2004), Karl Friston's Free Energy Principle/Active Inference and the works of his colleagues and students and related works (Andy Clarks's, Maxwell Ramstead; Kirchoff; etc.), Michael Levin's set of concepts and views towards Technnological-Approach-To-Mind-Everywhere-(TAME) (intelligence is everywhere, not just in the brain); Cognitive-Light Cone - Scale-Free Cogntion/Computational Boundary of a Self, Body/the organisms as a "swarm" of multilevel, multiscale, multitimerange entities which are in a nested interactive hierarchy; many of Joscha Bach's views; Bobby Azarian's 2022 book; the principles of consciousness of Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam's from "Journey of the Mind: How Thinking Emerged from Chaos"*, 2022; Yosha Bengio's 2017-2018 "Consciousness Prior"; LeCun's "A Path Towards Autonomous Machine Intelligence", 2022; the umbrealla term "Diverse Intelligence"; "empowerment" as a universal measure of intelligence etc.

... etc. and many other cases of matches as these ideas get rediscovered, confirmed and adopted by many researchers in many fields, including, broadly, in practical applications the universal prediction principle of the transformers architecture in Machine learning. [See a longer list below when completed and in the book: "The Prophets of the Thinking machines: Artificial General Intelligence and Transhumanism: History, Theory and Pioneers" by T.A., announced in 2020, yet unpublished officially.

• TOUM and the related theories are also extensions and sometimes rediscoveries of the philosophy of the Cybernetics as well as ideas generalized and expressed by Stanislav Lem in his "Summa Technologiae", 1963-1964*, who is also citing Ross Ashby.

• Stephen Grossberg and Gail Carpenter's ART - Adaptive Resonance Thery - is also a predecessor of the predictive processing theories for cognition in the brain*.

• You can help me in my (our) research and collaborate theoretically and in the development, joining one of the oldest AGI & Transhumanism Institutes The Sacred Computer founded in 2000 and join any of the projects, e.g. in the development of the AGI infrastructure project Jack of All Trades and its many subprojects and directions; the intelligent dictionary "Smarty" (it should be modernized and extended with LLMs and other types of search and generation, merged with another yet unpublished Research Assistant "ACS" prototype used "inhouse), I should start publishing and implementing 2010s+ language of thought Zrim etc. See the prospective virtual/online conference SIGI 2024 which is looking for co-organizers and participants.

The front page of the slides from the lecture about TOUA from the world's first university course in Artificial General Intelligence at The University of Plovdiv: 2010, 2011. The picture on the left is from the final performance at Famelab 2009, and on the right is the author in the Spring of 2004, about the time of publishing of the mature work from the theory: "Universe and Mind 4", when Todor is a freshman in Computer Science at the University of Plovdiv "Paisii Hilendarski": http://research.twenkid.com/agi/

Todor with some of his best students after the course in 2010
See the syllabus of the course, info, a few reviews and a video: http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/04/universal-artificial-intelligence.html

After a workout on the gymnastics rings, displaying the results from Todor's "Forever young" program*. 9-th Nov 2023

Todor is looking for partners, see the Github intro and the book cited there

Notes on matches

For example I discovered Karl Friston's "Free energy principle/Active Inference" theory in late 2018 from an interview for Wired. Friston's theory is analogical to TOUM in the general principles of maximization of the prediction (minimization of the error of the preciction) etc. I've discussed my first impressions and a work of his follower Eray Yozkural on his notion of Ultimate AI after my first impressions.

I first found Michael Levin and his work as late as late February? 2023 in a Youtube discussion on self-organizing systems. Many of his concepts, insights and reasoning regarding the broader understanding of cognition, intelligence and mind, agency are in many ways analogical or equal to the ones from TOUM published in 2001-2004 as well, where the papers about TAME - Technological Approach to Mind Everywhere, Scale-Free Cognition, the idea of the Cognitive lightcone, Stress and Care are published in the last few years, even 2022.

See any works from TOUM, be it "Man and Thinking Machine: Analysis of the possibility a Thinking machine to be created and some of the disadvantages of humans and organic matter compared to it", 12.2001, or the SF short novel "The Truth", 12.2002, or "Concept about the Universal Predetermination 2, or Letters between the 18-years old Todor Arnaudov and the [43-years old] philosopher Angel Grancharov", 9.2002, or "Concept about the Universal Predetermination 3", 2003 or "Universe and Mind 4", 2004, or also later works: the 2009 lecture about TOUM for general audience, presented at the Technical University in Sofia: "Principles of General Intelligence: Intelligence ~ Universe" (officially/announced title for the audience: "Машината на времето съществува: Разумът" - "The Time Machine Exists: The Mind/The Reason" (compare the scales, the principles (see below) to the Cognitive lightcone concept); this 11/2012 article discussing the lack of unified self and proposing computation of an Integral of a set of infinitesimal localities of selfs: "Nature or Nurture: Socialization, Social Pressure, Reinforcement Learning, Reward Systems: Current Virtual Self - No Intrinsic Integral Self, but an Integral of Infinitesimal Local Selfs - Irrational Intentional Actions Are Impossible- Akrasia is Confused - Hypothesis about Socialization and Eye-Contact as an Oxytocin Source" http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2012/11/nature-or-nurture-socialization-social.html

The actual lack of intrinsic unity of a mind or a system, especially as complex as human's, which explains the apparent "irrationality" (which is just a wrong and unprecise predictive model for the observer), is for example explicitly traced in the work "Analysis of the meaning of a sentence, based on the knowledge base of an operational thinking machine. Reflections about the meaning and artificial intelligence(...)", 3.2004 regarding the behavior of a human as a prediction/planning of future actions for the biggest expected cumulative reward (a multi-scale, multi-modal, multi-range, multi-domain, multi-POV/multi-factorization, multi-agent (sub-virtual-simulators of virtual universes) RL framework), however emphasizing that this computation is at each step/"burst"/decision moment done for a selected period ahead (limited horizon) within a selected domain, resolution and overally: selected methods for estimation of the expected reward, where these can hugely vary and switch on each step, apparently "randomly" for the observer(s) and sometimes with goals which are contradicting themselves - because there is not one unified "self", the observer "integrates" over her observation and builds a model which can be correct only up to a given limit of precision. (This is true for "standard" "healthy" "normal" personalities: of course, there are other cases where the multiplicity of self within one body is more explicitly pronounced: split-brain experiments/cases, multiple-personality disorders, and also the change of the "personality" (of the behavior, choices, preferences, cognitive capabilities, ...) after different kinds of changes of the state of the brain and body: intoxication and psychedelics, sleepyness, anger/strong affect, hypoxia, ... and of course: injures and stroke. See a recent interesting discussion on this topic at Michael Levin's channel, Working meeting with Mike Gazzaniga (Split-brain pioneer) and Richard Watson: https://youtu.be/a_rNUUJWLGs 18.4.2023. The body's sensors and actuators and their limits shape the biggest "unification" for the observer. Note also the emphasize of the importance of the observer in TOUM (which is called there "evaluator", "evaluating unit/entity", "external evaluator" (respectively the mind itself is also a self-evaluator), "evaluating" (оценител, оценяващо устройство, оценяване); compare with the recent M.L. research and his emphasize of the role of the observer.

Regarding the ethical issues check for example "Letters between the 18-years old...", 2002 and the letter to Oxford university from 2.2012.

I recently discovered the book "The Romance of Reality: How the Universe Organizes Itself to Create Life, Consciousness, and Cosmic Complexity", 6.2022 by Bobby Azarian. Even the shortest description of the book in the e-store is analogical to an introductory sections of works from TOUM, see "Concept about the Universal Predetermination 3", 2003 ("Universe and Mind 3"), the intro and points 0. and 1. http://eim.twenkid.com/old/3/25/pred-3.htm and better the overall content. See for example also the podcast 29.4.2023: „The Romance of Reality | A Unifying Theory of Everything“: https://youtu.be/_s-ziTJ3KzI

I discovered Joscha Bach on Youtube a few months ago in early 2023 (although I must have encountered his name in the list of lecturers of the 2009 Xiamen's summer school in AGI) - it seems his descriptions about Universe and Mind are virtually the same as mine given 20+ years earlier, except, at least, one distinction which I noticed, as far as I interpret it: his philosophical view is more inclined towards the so called "illusionism", "exists, not exist", while I'm more into the "realism" in this dichotomy, which I also discovered explicitly given in late May 2023. As exemplified by the participants in the video discussion where I found it, the division is sometimes very fine, maybe related to the borderline between the older philsophical classification of objective idealism vs subjective idealism. I guess we all are "informationalist", "computationalist", "universalist" (a categorization mentioned by the host Tim Scarfe to Karl Friston in his "3.0" appearance in the Youtube channel "MLST"), I think we're also "cyberneticians".

In mid of May 2023, thanks to Michael Levin's videos, I discovered also the work of Mark Solms, my first impressions are that I also share some ideas (see below about the "Frontiers..." article); in general TOUM is also about consciousness, causality (which is a core conception in the framework describing Universe and Mind as built by Causality-Control Units at all possible levels and scales), experience and dreams and their connection with the Universe as Mind (see e.g. "Universe and Mind 4", 2004, the chapter about the "Origin of the repetition of events in different levels of the Universe computer and ... " etc.), although the word "consciousness" itself is used sparingly after my version of the definition of the "easy and hard problem" in the 2001 work "Man and Thinking Machine: Analysis of the possibility a Thinking machine to be created and some of the disadvantages of humans and organic matter compared to it". My notion of "Mind" (Разум, in English it is also Reason) included, encompassed, all mental, cognitive, emotional, intellectual capacities, with the basic emotions being the first "rewards" or "set points" in the terminology of the other cyberneticians.

Jeff Hawkins' "Memory Prediction Framework", 10.2004 (according to Amazon's page), was the first match which I discovered in ~7-8/2007: his ideas about general intelligence and how human cognition operates (or how it could operate) are analogical to ones from TOUM (the latest major from the classical period was "Universe and Mind 4", published 4.2004, there were forum discussions from May-June, an R&D Plan which was published in 12/2004 called "Universe and Mind 5". I recently rediscovered a file/work called "Tvorec_5.rtf" (Creator_5.rtf) which was a continuation of "Universe and Mind 4" in the computational creativity direction which was also investigated in TOUM, with the generative models and generative AI predicted and explained. "The Universe and Mind 4" and "Tvorec_5" etc. included samples of analysis of the creative process and reasoning about the exact decisions and how they could be made, according to my own thinking and exploration and introspection, as I was and am a versatile creative person/artist and I do have conscious experience and records of creating all kinds of pieces in a huge variety of genres, domains, scales, topics etc..

Due to the predictions and the large number of matches of future works to the claims, ideas, hypotheses and the reasoning to the works from "Theory of Universe and Mind" (TOUM) and a more recent related works, I recently called them also "The Bulgarian Prophecies" or "The Bulgarian Predictions" in AGI, Philosophy of AI and Mind, Digital physics etc., together with a strategical essay/proposal from 2003 for the development of AGI via the creation of a super interdisciplinary R&D institute and other publications.

The "prophecies" are Bulgarian* for several reasons: because of my nationality, because they were originally written in Bulgarian and the theory was taught during the world's first, radically interdisciplinary university course in Artificial General Intelligence in 2010 and 2011 at the University of Plovdiv, Bulgaria with working language Bulgarian. Note that the famous MIT's AGI course presented by Lex Fridman and his guest lecturers was offered in 2018. I claim that my course and my syllabum were way better, because they had a strong structure, theory and a coherent message, matched and confirmed by the future. See the syllabum and a video: http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/04/universal-artificial-intelligence.html

A "bibleically" sized documentary book, demonstrating, justifying, proving the "prophecies" is in an "ever-continuing", but hopefully soon ending, "final preparation": "The prophets of the Thinking Machines: Artificial General Intelligence and Transhumanism: History Theory and Pioneers". It is currently in Bulgarian, about 1350 pages ready, a lot of documentary/comparison material to include which may extend it to 14xx or 1500+ depending on the selection. It had a complete version as early as 2020 when I started, but then it was about 800-something pages.

Note also that the phenomenon, the process, the discovery etc. of "Match" is one of the key concepts in TOUM. Equal, Matching, Synchronized, Common, Mapping, Same (up to a resolution of causation and perception, Will and Representation) - this is how Truth, Connection/Connectedness/Relatedness, Causality, Patterns etc. are recognized, discovered, "picked", combined etc., how structures are created and recognized, how parts are perceived or conceived as being connected in a whole: all are forms of match.

• Please see the works below and the comparisons and matches to later works by other authors. Parallel texts, citations etc. Some matches are evident even from the first pages and the summaries of some ideas, compared to the summaries and the first points from works from ToUM, e.g. see Azarian's 2022 book and the beginning of "Concept about the Universal Predetermination Part 3", 2003, points 0. and 1: http://www.oocities.org/eimworld/3/25/pred-3.htm (or a Google-translate friendly mirror: http://eim.twenkid.com/old/3/25/pred-3.htm )

• As there was nobody to properly review or perhaps understand these works back then, I consider all these later coming matches as a sort of delayed indirect reviews and confirmations, done independently by all these top researchers.

I am looking for readers, scholars, prospective partners for doing future research and development together, who would become modern reviewers of my classic works, in order to get these contributions and numerous matches recognized and acknowledged.

These works were not published in an academic environment, but in the e-zine "The Sacred Computer" and other sites on the Internet, such as the IT/free software community bgit.net (defunct long ago, as well as the original free services: hit.bg and geocities.com - the archives of the latter are still there though, as well as mirrors).

At the time I was a teenager: a schoolboy and in the end of that period: a freshman in "Computer Science" (Информатика) at The University of Plovdiv and I practically had neither peers, nor leaders, nor supervisors. I was alone in this adventure, except occasional and short "meetings": with my opponent Angel Grancharov in the "Letters between the 18-years old Todor Arnaudov and the [43-years old] philosopher Angel Grancharov", a few emails with a fellow univeral man discussing mind and AI, a few discussions on forums, without equally advanced partners.

I've been somewhat in the academia and an affiliated researcher as a student in Plovdiv and in Wolverhampton, UK (e.g. where I developed the "most intelligent dictionary" Smarty back in 2007) and when I taught the AGI courses, but currently I am not affiliated, besides in my own virtual interdisciplinary research institute "The Sacred Computer", where I am the Jack of All Trades, as is also the name of a project for an AGI infrastructure and experimentation for which I am looking for partners. "The Sacred Computer" was created and declared in the year 2000 as an e-zine; it has several other attached aliases and chapters such as "Society Mind" (or "Reason" - Дружество Разум, a "chapter" in the e-zine), "Artificial Mind" (in Bulgarian it is also Reason - "Изкуствен разум" - a blog since 2007), "Twenkid Research". A page with a short "normal" bio: http://research.twenkid.com/

Analogical, isomorphic, similar or closely related to the TOUM, serving as delayed reviews and confirmations, are for example:

(detailed lists, comparisons, parallel text and discussions to be extended and completed, see some below):

• Jeff Hawkins' "On intelligence"/Memory-prediction framework (founder of Palm, Redwood Center for Theoretical Neuroscience and Numenta)
• Karl Friston's "Free Energy Principle"/"Active Inference" (University College London, Cambridge, Fellow of the Royal Society of London)
  "KARL FRISTON - INTELLIGENCE 3.0", Machine Learning Street Talk, 11.3.2023, https://youtu.be/V_VXOdf1NMw

• Active Inference: The Free Energy Principle in Mind, Brain, and Behavior By Thomas Parr, Giovanni Pezzulo, Karl J. Friston, 2022: https://direct.mit.edu/books/oa-monograph/5299/Active-InferenceThe-Free-Energy-Principle-in-Mind
• "Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science", Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 May 2013, Andy Clark: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/whatever-next-predictive-brains-situated-agents-and-the-future-of-cognitive-science/33542C736E17E3D1D44E8D03BE5F4CD9
• "MAXWELL RAMSTEAD - The Physics of Survival" @ MLST, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qb28P7ksyE, 16.7.2023

• Joscha Bach's discussions on Universe and Mind in podcasts up to now, 2022-2023 - in many aspects, except some aspects and details about circular word plays about "existence" and "real"-ness, are almost identical to the ones and the reasoning expressed bellow, 20 years earlier. More elaborate comparisons and discussion in the book "The Prophets of the Thinking Machines: Artificial General Intelligence and Transhumanism: History, Theory and Pioneers" and in other articles. (MIT & Harvard, Humboldt University, Intel)

• Michael Levin's "Scale-Free Cognition" framework, “Technological Approach to Mind Everywhere (TAME): an experimentally- grounded framework for understanding diverse bodies and minds" (2022), Cognitive lightcone" ... See also #1. (Tufts University)

• The theory in Bobby Azarian's book "The Romance of Reality: How the Universe Organizes Itself to Create Life, Consciousness, and Cosmic Complexity" - https://www.amazon.com/Romance-Reality-Organizes-Consciousness-Complexity/dp/1637740441#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20Romance%20of%20Reality%20is,systems%2C%20in%20a%20grand%20ballet declared as radically new and ground breaking for science, as it suggests that Universe is evolving to "Omega point" and it is not random, has similar discoveries, conclusions and generalisations. For example compare the intro on the page of the book at "Amazon" just with the intro and points 0. and 1. from the work "Concept about the Unviersal Predetermination", Part 3, 2003: https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/Todor_Arnaudov_Theory_of_Universe_and_Mind_3.pdf https://www.oocities.org/eimworld/3/25/pred-3.htm

• Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam: „Grand Unified Theory of Consciousness (O.O: Harvard University, S.G.: Boston University and Indian Institute of Technology): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzInnkUOAa4

• Reinforcement learning directions and frameworks; constraints such as bounded rationality in multiagent systems, in the "prophecies" mapped and proven by their match in the interdisciplinary context such as society, states etc.

• Directions for "the future"/"next decade" etc. of AI/Deep Learning (as of 2022-2023) such as compositionality, multiscale, multiresolution, multiagent bounded rationality etc. - see for example Michael Levin's work, e.g. his interview at Lex Fridman #325, 1.10.2022, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3lsYlod5OU. It is suggested and explained about the universe, intelligence and mind in the 2001-2004 prophecies, see also the slides below.

• Causality instead of probability-only modeling

• The theories about Mind, (general) intelligence as hierarchical prediction of the future sensory input and motor outputs (causation) (generative models, models of the world etc.); for "minimizing the prediction error" (Friston's "Free energy principle/Active infrence"), the multi-scale operation of these principles, the problem for segmentation of the systems (Friston's "Markov Blanket") etc. are analogical/isomorphic

• Boris Kazachenko's "Cognitive Algorithm or "CogAlg" project (the short name was given by me in 2010) - incremental discrete hiearchical prediction and pattern-discovery by gradual clustering

• Stephen Wolfram's computationalist views and Digital Physics, the computational irreducibility, truth as construction and not binary logic, intelligence being in a continuous space with computation etc., the discrete view towards intelligence/representability "symbolically" ( see e.g., "Computational evolution and human progress", 8.5.2023: https://youtu.be/gRK1cdeRUv0 @10 min, @15 min etc. with Lex Fridman at MIT, see also "Vectors of Cognitive AI" with Joscha Bach and 9.5.2023; with Lex Fridman #4, e.g. ab. 1:35 h - support for the tendency towards generalisation/generalists for humans, "no more Phds" and many other matches of ideas:: https://youtu.be/PdE-waSx-d8

• Yosha Bengio's "Consciousness prior" (2017-2018+) is analogical to the notion and emphasis in ToUM of the very low consciously controlled bandwidth and the causal and low resolution representation in the higher linguistic representation level. An example of Bengio with dropping an object and predicting that it will drop with a very high certainty, but not the precise position/trajectory is the same as an example from the beginning of "Universe and Mind, Part 4", which however has a broader message: it demonstrates what Bengio does: that mind, or "consciousness" or the highest level causality-control unit in a human can cause and predict exactly, with probability one, at its level and resolution of causality-control and perception and mind aims at that, however it actually doesn't cause-control the lower levels of representation which are more closer to "reality" and, as demonstrated, actually are supposed to have more real "control" as of bandwidth (the latter involves also the topic of "free will" which is an important theme in ToUM). See even "Man and Thinking machine", 2001, discussing the low human bandwidth and the other works.

• "All intelligence is a collective intelligence", related to the multi-scale nature (and multi-range, multi-resolution) of the systems with parts, also the continuity of what self is, when exactly agency/"consciousness etc. exactly appears and can be objectively and sharply defined, the multiplicity of the virtual selfs etc. - see M.Levin's work and TOUM; see also the points about the "consciousness prior".

• "Five Basic Principles of Developmental Robotics", 2006?, http://prw06.rl-community.org/posters/five-basic-principles-of-developmental-robotics by Alexander Stoychev

• LeCun's "A Path Towards Autonomous Machine Intelligence", 2022

• Juergen Schmidhuber is probably earlier in some of the AI-related stuff, or about similar times regarding some architectural aspects about AGI, such as the hierarchical predictors/simulators framework (however here some may say that it's just a "rehash of optimal control theory"). His ideas about what creativity is computationally are prior and expressed more technically than mine, as he's 21 years older, however in TOUM I discovered myself similar or related explanations about beauty/creativity and general cognition and the generality of science and art, driven by a common process of hierarchical prediction-compression process (creativity is also termed and measured as "originality" - how difficult it is for the evaluator to predict the future of a piece based on the perceived other parts of it, compared to what it expected about that complexity and it should also be compared to what some average/sample evaluator believes is supposed to be predictable)). I first discovered J.S. in late 2009.

• TOUM has predicted the power of the generative AI back in the early 2000s. See "Creativity is imitation at the level of algorithms", 2003, "Letters between the 18-year old T.A. and...", 2002, "The Truth", 2002. See also: "Creative Intelligence will be First Surpassed and Blown Away by the Thinking Machines, not the "low-skill" workers whose jobs require agile and quick physical motion and interactions with human-sized and human-shaped environment", 2013 which was a correct prediction which was deniying the "experts"' predictions: https://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2013/10/creative-intelligence-will-be-first.html

• (...) Continues ... to be completed with other minor matches AGI/AI related

Other Related Ideas

• G. Georgiev, and I. Georgiev, The least action and the metric of an organized system. Open Syst Inf Dyn 9 (2002) 371-380. (cited in Levin's " “Technological Approach to Mind Everywhere (TAME): ...") - note that the authors are also Bulgarian

Original publications general locations

А "pre-prophecy" from 1999, the essay: "Where, you World, go?" ("Къде отиваш свят?") - my answer was: "towards the creation of the Thinking Machine - The Machine God"

• https://github.com/Twenkid/Theory-of-Universe-and-Mind/blob/main/1999.md

The classic page of "Society Mind/Reason" ("Дружество Разум")

• http://eim.twenkid.com/old/razum
• https://www.oocities.org/eimworld/razum/

Also

• How Would I Invest 1 Million Euro in a most beneficial way for the development Of My Country? The interdisciplinary AGI institute strategy, a claim about the general multimodal algorithm etc., 2003 : https://www.oocities.org/todprog/ese/proekt.htm

• Truth, Match, Line-drawing/tracing (see CogAlg/SuperCogAlg and future works), 2003 : https://www.oocities.org/eimworld/eim22n/eim24/otsechka.htm

• The absurdity and ill-definition of the copyright text in books; about compositional features, hierarchy, segmentation, ... 2002-2003* : an ironic article, actual now with the generative models. Bulgarian: "Всички права запазени!": http://eim.twenkid.com/old/eim22n/eim22/prava22.htm English, Google Translated: "All rights reserved!" https://eim-twenkid-com.translate.goog/old/eim22n/eim22/prava22.htm?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=bg&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=bg&_x_tr_pto=wapp

• "Principles of General Intelligence: Intelligence ~ Universe" - slides for a presentation given during an event in 2009 at Sofia Technical University, originally titled: "The Time Machine Exists: The Mind" (referring to general intelligence as a capacity for predictioon and causation and a universal simulation of virtual universes, predicting the future by creating models of the past etc.) https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/General_Intelligence_Principles_Caffe_Sci_2009_MTR.pdf

• "I will Create a Thinking Machine that will Self-Improve (an Interview with Todor): Dreamers and adventurers make the great discoveries. The scepticists' job is to deny their visions, and eventually not to believe their eyes" http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/01/i-will-create-thinking-machine-that.html [The word in the Bulgarian title for Self-Improve" was "Самоусложнява" - "Self-Complexifies": to make itself more complex, due to the accumulation of complexity from the environment. I preferred "self-improve" for better sounding in English, but both are correct and the complexification is a part of the improvement. The complexification is in the domains of richness, variety, length, span, depth, scale etc. of the representational and causal power. ]

Materials for the world's first university course in AGI, 2010-2011

• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/
• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en
• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/Todor_Arnaudov_Theory_of_Hierarchical_Universal_Simulators_of_universes_Eng_MTR_3.pdf
• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/Todor_Arnaudov_Theory_of_Universe_and_Mind_3.pdf
• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/Todor_Arnaudov_Theory_of_Universe_and_Mind_4.pdf
• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/Whats_wrong_with_NLP_links.htm
• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/General_Intelligence_Principles_Caffe_Sci_2009_MTR.pdf
• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/Razum_8_cut.pdf (The Principles of General Intelligence and Universe - The Bulgarian original slides, longer than the English version, of the Caffe Scientific lecture in Technical University Sofia in 2009)

A translation of one 2004 work: http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/01/semantic-analysis-of-sentence.html

• Part 1 (и български):(This Post) Semantic analysis of a sentence. Reflections about the meaning of the meaning and the Artificial Intelligence

• Part 2 (и български): Causes and reasons for human actions. Searching for causes. Whether higher or lower levels control. Control Units. Reinforcement learning.

• Part 3 (и български): Motivation is dependent on local and specific stimuli, not general ones. Pleasure and displeasure as goal-state indicators. Reinforcement learning.

• Part 4 : Intelligence: search for the biggest cumulative reward for a given period ahead, based on given model of the rewards. Reinforcement learning.

• http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/01/semantic-analysis-of-sentence.html

• http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/02/causes-and-reasons-for-any-particular.html

• http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/02/motivation-is-dependent-on-local-and.html

• http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/02/intelligence-search-for-biggest.html

• Notes and graphs, recreated from the notes would be published as well in the book "The prophecies of the Thinking Machines: ..." etc.

E.g. notes from 28.12.2002 about the segmentation of the world in "pieces of knowledge" (късове знание):

The graph is recreated from the description and the idea. The text in the clipped image refers to the paper "Man and Thinking machine: Analysis ...". These ideas are now addressed in AI as "compositionality", multiscale representation and prediction and "symbol grounding". Note that IMO the dichotomy "symbolic/connectionist" is confused: http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2019/04/neural-networks-are-also-symbolic.html

In NLP/LLM ("Large Language Models", IMO the right term is Sequence models) they talk also about "referential grounding", as explained for example in a recent MLST video,5.2023: "Compositional Generalization, Referential Grounding & LLMs ... " https://youtu.be/H6bV3OBkMgA. However I'd add that in a Mind the knowledge in all modalities, "everything" can be viewed as grounded this way, some kind of "referentially grounded" to either an explicit or implicit particular memory/record/piece of knowledge (pattern, record) which is somehow addressed or/and derived.

The grounding with "physical", lowest level interactions, from some POV of the levels, is also finally some traces, paths, records of the particular actions, interactions, extracted information etc. and their sources, generalizations, mapping at multiple levels etc. of the evidence and their particular existence, where the "existence" is either as concrete addresses and formats in some computer-way of approaching the data: READ ADDR $A5F463456 ... or/and in the very structure of the system, as an activation, engaging, "doing" something with particular "body" organs or parts, instead of others, where the "body" could be any part of the system which is "grounded to reality": described in some "lowest level of representation", lowest "virtual universe". This is an "internal physical" grounding. The causality in general, the predictability, is encoded in the consistency and coherence of the operation of the predictable parts of the system for the system as an observer/evaluator of itself. A particular set of prediction of the agent/"self"/system regarding the primary actuators and their feedback with sensors, the sensori-motor loop with the own "body", are significantly more reliable than the sensori-only from the "external world" since earlier stages of the development of the system/self/mind. That's how the Mind discovers what is part of "itself" by sampling/exploring/(or "palpating", "bubbling" with the terms of Mark Solms?, Karl Friston etc.) the "environment" which begins with itself as well. The parts of the "Self" are more predictable-controllable and they are like that in an earlier stage and with a higher precision, and it's mapped/grounded/coordinated with the primary/earlier/"lower" internal "representations"/structures/content/predictive models.

For "Symbol grounding" usually a 1990 paper is cited with the same name. I'd rather refer to Arthur Schopenhauer's PhD thesis, 1813, called: "On the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason".

...

Direct Links to Works | Преки връзки към произведения

The "classical" works 2001-2004

The first AGI-related article in "The Sacred Computer" e-zine defining AGI and "Seed AI" (Зародиш на разум): April 2001. (Bulgarian) https://www.oocities.org/eimworld/eimworld6/eimmain6.html

An AGI strategy, about May-June 2003: (Bulgarian) The visionary strategical essay/proposal for creation of an interdisciplinary research institute in AGI, published in 2003, with many ideas followed by DeepMind and programs since late 2010s and on (I've been implementing the interdisciplinary approach myself for my whole life) https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2020/07/interdisciplinary-research-institute.html https://www.oocities.org/todprog/ese/proekt.htm

*In oocities.org - geocities archive or archive.org: change "www.oocities.org" to "www.geocities.com" and check in Archive.org A Google translate-friendly mirror of links to classic publications is at: http://eim.twenkid.com/old/razum

Разговори за Изкуствен разум между Тош и тайнствения тип Астер Трафиков "Ловеца", известен още като... Галина "ТХ" Славина (бр.30, септ. 2004) (in archive.org)

Вселена и разум 4 ("Схващане за всеобщата предопределеност 4") - произход на повторенията на събития в различни равнища на Вселенския сметач и на нецеливите, за преживяващия ги разум, съвпадения с ниска вероятност; мисли за мисленето, анализ на смисъла на изречение; за реда и безредието; за сънища; за енергия; за поезия; виж сам. (бр.29, апр. 2004)

Анализ на смисъла на изречение въз основа на базата знания на действаща мислеща машина. Мисли за смисъла и изкуствената мисъл.(бр.29, апр. 2004).
Ако връзката към bgit не работи, използвай тази: Анализ на смисъла...

Абстрактна теория за "изключенията от правилата" в изчислителните машини. Теория за управляващите устройства и управлението. (бр.29, апр. 2004)

"Истината" - разказ за Мислещата машина; съкратена версия на повестта (29, апр.2004)
 

"Ада" - фантастичен фантасмагоричен техничарски програмистки кибернетичен философски приключенски любовен пародиен комичен трагичен роман (бр.28, февр. 2004)

"Истината" - повест за Мислещата машина; второ издание (бр.26, септември 2003)

Схващане за всеобщата предопределеност 3 (бр.25, юли-август 2003)

Как се чертае отсечка (бр.24, юни 2003)

Творчеството е подражание на ниво алгоритми (бр.23, май 2003)

Матрицата в "Матрицата" е матрица в матрицата (бр.22, април 2003)

Емил и Кибертрон (бр.20, февруари 2003)

Истината - разказ/повест (бр.19, декември 2002)

Писма между 18-годишния Тодор Арнаудов и /43-годишния/ философа Ангел Грънчаров от август до септември 2002 г. - Вселената сметач и мн.др. Бр.18, октомври/2002

Схващане за всеобщата предопределеност 2 - Вселената сметач и мн.др. Бр.18, октомври/2002

Следващото еволюционно стъпало 2 (като част от "Схващане за всеобщата предопределеност 2", бр.18, октомври/2002)

Следващото еволюционно стъпало (бр.17)

Схващане за всеобщата предопределеност (бр.17, юли/2002)

Човекът и Мислещата машина (Анализ на възможността да се създаде Мислеща Машина и някои недостатъци на човека и органичната материя пред нея), брой 13-ти на "Свещеният сметач", декември 2001 г.
 

** Other later works (incomplete list) **

Many articles from the blog "Artificial Mind", also "Todor Arnaudov's Research[es]": http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com (to be completed)

Cognitive Science, Systems Neuroscience, Behavior etc. Hypotheses, reasoning etc.

• Supports for the Hypothesis of Higher Brains Re-iterating the Functions of the Lower Ones - implies that the function of the higher ones could be induced by understanding the functions of the lower ones and extending them, 8/2013 http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2013/08/supports-of-hypothesis-of-higher-brains.html

• Rationalization and Confusions Caused by High Level Generalizations and the Feedforward-Feedback Imbalance in Brain and Generalization Hierarchies, 10/2011, http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2011/10/rationalization-and-confusions-caused.html

• Proposal for Directed/Guided Evolution of a Cognitive Module/Algorithm by Step-by-Step Modification of a Basic One - from Archicortex to Neocortex, 2/2011: http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2011/02/proposal-for-directedguided-evolution.html (See also J.Hawkins'"On intelligence")

• (...)

• The Notes Part to the interdisciplinary work: "What a man needs? If you play by the rules you'll lose like the fools!", T.Arnaudov, 2014 ("Какво му трябва на човек? Играеш ли по правилата ще загубиш играта!"). Many articles and references and mappings between claims: see 200, 210, 267, 269; 103 etc. https://razumir.twenkid.com/kakvomu_notes.html

• 200 Hypothesis about the deeper consciousness (Хипотеза за по-дълбокото съзнание) https://razumir.twenkid.com/kakvomu_notes.html#200

• 210 **Creativity is a systematic process, see also 84: Creativity is an immitation at algorithmic level", Творчеството е систематичен процес, виж (84)" Творчеството е подражание на ниво алгоритми"

• 267 The truth according to Engels

Compare the intro to note 269 with the intros of the colleagues which were quoted from the panels below, and mine: [Translated with Google Translated and a few corrections/word choices/multiple words]

• 269 In general, those who do not understand - unable and unwilling to understand magnify the "mysterious" and emotions; and those who can and want to understand - reason, the management of things. The latter also have emotions - like all animals - but they see them as something obvious and elementary, because even animals have feelings - they are at the base of the pyramid. On the other hand - the spectrum of the mind has a huge scope and not everyone has reason; he is the blade of progress - the top of the pyramid. The first understand - know - only that they do not understand a given object of study, more specifically why this or that happens, with a sufficiently high resolution and in terms related to their volitional behavior (not the will in the Holy sense) - whether what is happening it's up to them, whether it's controllable, etc. (104) The latter understand the object of study as well as understand that they understand it and systematically increase the resolution, clarity and scope of understanding as prediction/anticipation. (104) These guidelines are related to the perception of the concept of "free will". (103)(104) The second type lean towards Hegel's definition, expanded by Engels in "Anti-Dühring" (267.1) and quoted by Lenin in "Materialism and Empiriocriticism" (268), and thought also by philosophers and mathematicians such as Laplace, in also by Schopenhauer (235)(236) - in the latter as the increasing distinctness of the higher forms of objectification of the will. In T.Arnaudov's (103)(104) the evolution of the universe is a drive to create imaginary universes of a higher level, which are increasingly better at foreseeing the future - knowing the laws of the sub-universe in which they exist, as well as their own - of their internal working/mechanisms/processes. This type of thinker often has a broad knowledge of the private sciences, mathematics, combines the humanities and exact sciences and has a bias towards Systems Theory, Cybernetics. (...)

etc.

(...)

...

**Other cognitive science, philosophy of mind, AGI, hypothesis about the brain and evolution etc. **

• Abstract Addressing and Discontinuous Addressing Impede Processing in Generalizing Hierarchies, 29.11.2011: http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2011/11/abstract-addressing-and-discontinuous.html
• Faults in Turing Test and Lovelace Test. Introduction of Educational Test. http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2007/11/faults-in-turing-test-and-lovelace-test.html
• Supports for the Hypothesis of Higher Brains Re-iterating the Functions of the Lower Ones - implies that the function of the higher ones could be induced by understanding the functions of the lower ones and extending them http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2013/08/supports-of-hypothesis-of-higher-brains.html
• Learned or Innate? Nature or Nurture? Speculations of how a mind can grasp on its own: animate/inanimate objects, face recognition, language... http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/04/learned-or-innate-nature-or-nurture.html

Bulgarian	Published	English	Notes
Къде отиваш свят? - създаването на мислещата машина - машината Бог https://github.com/Twenkid/Theory-of-Universe-and-Mind/blob/main/1999.md	12.1999	"World, where you go?" - the creation of the thinking machine - machine God	Essay, Radio "Plovdiv", incentive prize
Човекът и Мислещата машина (Анализ на възможността да се създаде Мислеща Машина и някои недостатъци на човека и органичната материя пред нея), брой 13-ти на "Свещеният сметач", декември 2001 г. https://www.oocities.org/eimworld/eimworld13/izint_13.html http://eim.twenkid.com/old/eimworld/eimworld13/izint_13.html	12.2001	"Man and Thinking Machine (Analysis of the possibility to create a Thinking Machine and some of man and organic matter compared to the machine), issue #13 of e-zine "The Sacred Computer", 12/2001
Матрицата в "Матрицата" е матрица в матрицата	2003	The Matrix in "The Matrix" is a matrix in the Matrix https://medium.com/@todorarnaudov/the-matrix-in-the-matrix-is-a-matrix-in-the-matrix-895e86c5f002 Compare with Levin's about "simulation" in #1	...

1. Levin, M., Farias C., Agency, Attractors, & Observer-Dependent Computation in Biology & Beyond, The Truth w/ Carlos Farias, 11.5.2023, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whZRH7IGAq0

Other specific discussions which address ideas from The Theory of Universe and Mind

These are illustration of looking into current discussions and noticing similarities, matches, common themes etc. with ToUM. There could be a huge list of such matches. A few which I watched these days:

• Conversation between Mark Solms, Chris Fields, and Mike Levin 3, 4.5.2023: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klK_L73wLKk
• See ~ 41 min, where Mark Solms ("who is known for his discovery of the brain mechanisms of dreaming ..." from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Solms) after discussing fear and pain, argues that the Qualia is the measurement of the free energy (Friston), i.e. the difference to the expected input. https://youtu.be/klK_L73wLKk?t=2518 In his works Levin links the concept of "stress" at all levels to the difference to the expected/wanted/desired. At 44:50 Levin says "...100% correct". Compare with ToUM, where "pain/suffering" is explained as difference to the expected, it is valid even in "mundane" cases such as why people are uncomfortable when e.g. somebody didn't put off his hat where he is supposed to do it, such as in a church, or when somebody doesn't obey the rules they do obey, even if the rules are obviously "non-functional" and "abstractly" nobody should be hurt physically or suffer if they are broken, because they are just a convention: however people do suffer when the rules, their expectations, the justice etc. are broken, either regarding abstract conventional social relations, interpersonal relations or undesirable surprises and let downs (unmet expectations, the sensory input, or the perceived sensory input mismatches the expected/wanted/target, or wrong predictions). The "pain" seemed to come from the not-obeying the rule, not from the essence/material of the rules themselves. See e.g. "Concept about the Universal Predestination/Predetermination II, or Letters between the 18-years old Todor Arnaudov and the [43-years old] philosopher Angel Grancharov" from ToUM. Compare it also with the summary in the slides from the world's first university course in AGI, Plovdiv 2010,2011, which addresses two kinds of reewards: Cognitive and Physical. "CCU" below stands for Control-Causality Unit, also Causality-Control Unit (the same meaning, or maybe a nuance could be added). https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/Todor_Arnaudov_Theory_of_Hierarchical_Universal_Simulators_of_universes_Eng_MTR_3.pdf

...

• The "red eye" photo is from the final of the competition "Famelab", 2009. The right picture was taken in the spring of 2004, about the time "Universe and Mind 4" was published.

See also this simple generalisations about what embodiment is/could be from an AGI design POV: "Embodiment is just coordinate spaces, interactivity and modalities - not a mystery", Arnaudov 2011: https://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2011/12/embodiment-is-just-coordinate-spaces.html The bullet points there are:

• Known fixed basic continuous coordinate spaces ...
• Interactivity ...
• Modalities ...
• Inter-modalities ...
• Value-free initial inputs ...
• Basic reward-system ...

That is a claim that this view implies that this type of embodiment could apply for all kinds of systems, not just "brains" with particular properties, as long as they navigate these spaces. "Continuous" here rather means "connected" in my digital-universe representations. The basic reward system are the "physical"/sensual rewards/goals, i.e. preservation and existence in the lowest level representation, as not securing this would lead to deletion of the higher levels as well.

Regarding the ceasing of existence of the higher levels of representations when erros - disallowed states, gross mispredictions, mismatches from the expected/controlled future happens, - see the short work "Abstract Theory of the Exception of the rules in Computers. A theory about the control units and the control", 2004, where with control I also mean "causation", the simplest form of causation for a computer is to store a particular desired "value", state, memory content, to another "subuniverse"/causality-control unit as it has expected/predicted, and in order to be "real"/true causation-control, it has to happen with the resolution that is the highest for the target virtual universe etc. Both computers and the virtual worlds and levels of causation-control and representation and and Mind are part of the "Universe Computer", different levels/kinds of virtual causality-control units, "subuniverses", universal simulators of virtual universes, "systems". In Friston's terms maybe "Markov blankets". https://web.archive.org/web/20041020165359/http://bgit.net/?id=65835 Абстрактна теория за "изключенията от правилата" в изчислителните машини. Теория за управляващите устройства и управлението.

See also the slides from a presentation, given at an event in 2009 at Sofia Technical University, translated to English as "Principles of General Intelligence: Intelligence ~ Universe", originally titled and advertised for the general public: "The Time Machine Exists: The Mind" (referring to general intelligence as a capacity for predictioon and causation and a universal simulation of virtual universes, predicting the future by interactively creating models of the past etc.): Link to the slides in English and news about the event:

• https://research.twenkid.com/agi/2010/en/General_Intelligence_Principles_Caffe_Sci_2009_MTR.pdf
• https://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2009/09/event-with-me-in-sofia.html
• http://green.democrit.com/bg/articles.php?cell=117

Private , tank crew , pilot
Specific physical actions of war
- To Shoot
- Throw bombs
- To attack or to take cover?
- Is there a bullet in the barrel? Should
I reload?
- Where exactly to take cover?
- Where exactly is the clip? How
exactly the clip is put on the gun?
- To aim?
 - Recognize the enemy.
 - If many – choose a target.
 - Predict target's trajectory.
- Should I listen to my superior?

Marshal
- Gives commands on a map (abstract)
- Commands an army (abstract)
- Gives abstract commands/orders
„Surround the enemy's army and
force them to surrender!“
(...)

Michael Levin's intro from the host at ... 13.5.2023: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFQi1NuUNbA "...has dual bachelors in Biology and Computer Science from Tufts University, PhD in Genetics from Harvard; his group uses computational and experimental approaches to understand diverse intelligence in the range of evolved, engineered and hybrid systems and they develop conceptual framework for understanding cognition in unconventional embodiments such as the collective intelligence of cells and use them to drive applications in birth defects, regenerative medicine, cancer and synthetic bioengineering."

See the next video from Michael Levin's Academic Content: "Conversation #1 between Chris Fields, Richard Watson, and Mike Levin, Michael Levin's Academic Content 1,96 хил. абонати", 11.5.2023, 676 показвания at 15.5.2023 Working meeting #1 with Chris Fields and Richard Watson. We discuss error-correcting codes (a little; more next time), reductionism, multi-scale controls, and more https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_413APB9PIw

Where Richard Watson begins with that he is trying to, or he'd like to develop a theory that links together cognition, evolution, adaptation, development and computation ... "just those", and in particular ... in a way that explains agential behavior and how mechanistic processes at a given level of organization can be more or less autonomous at that scale, but how that interacts with the scale above and below ... He's been excited recently with resonance as a form of error correction and as a mechanism that links together all of those things that he is interested in and its connection to error-correctinng codes is one of the topics that ... could be a good place to start ..." [Richard Watson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Watson_(author) ? ]

Michael Levin: Chris, say what you've been and what we've been working on ...?

Chris Fields answers: "we've been interested in this intersection of physics and cognitive science and biology and how to develop theoretical frameworks that are based very firmly in physics and connect in a very natural way to computer science and that ... provide a nice formulation of what's going on in biology, but complementary to that we're interested in how to import biological and cognitive thinking into physics in a kind of whole scale ... physics is fundamentally a theory of communication between agents who have some computational structure and who have to exist within an environment that exerts selective pressures of one kind or other... of course the environmnet in this case is an agent also, that has its own agenda ... and the free energy principle provides a nice way of formulating all of this, especially when t's translated into Quantum information language..."

Map this to the view to Universe as a Computer/Information/Data, Information theory. A funny coincidence in the "prophecy" mode/interpretation is that my High School specialty was "Communication Technology" (Съобщителна техника).

Then M.Levin at 6:50 min: "Chris and I have been developing lately is perspectives on all this kind of stuff ... centralizing the role of the observer ... everything is from the perspective of some Observer so ... all that Chris said on that topic reference frames and then The Observers and everything would be super important..."

ToUM addresses this topic of the Observer as an "Evaluator" (Оценител) - in order to emphasize that it is not just observing, but the "Observer" (The Evaluator) evaluates, decides the value, interprets etc. and the interpretation is highly dependent on the Evaluator (analogical to "subjective" in more humane/ordinary life sense). The more developed Evaluator (a Mind or "Consciousness", Causality-control unit, a system) can interpet/evaluate what it observes more freely and is more indirect, it is less directly "forced" to convert the sensory data/feedback into immediate "executive" code, also the more developed/advanced/powerful Evaluator/CCU etc. is better in predicting and causing the future in higher resolution and precision and range etc. See for example the beginning of "Universe and Mind 4", 2004.

See Mark Solms and Chris Fields intro from a video from M.Levin's channel from 27.01.2023: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z8UPddh0e4 @ 4 min

Mark: I'm a neuroscientist, trained in the early 80s - frustrated by how little mind there was those days ... the most interesting thing about the brain, namely its mental functions seemed to be treated in a very desiccated way ... so --> psychoanalysis ... took seriously the subjective experience of the mind ... then ... trying to reconscile the two, to build bridges ... to bridge the vast Chasm between those two disciplines ... in recent times ... I've been always interested in brain mechanisms of consciousness ... in recent times I became convinced of the view that we shouldn't be using a higher cognitive forms of Consciousness as our model example we should be looking to much more rudimentary processes ... from a neuroscientific point of view we should be starting there um with these fundamentally homeostatic mechanisms that regulate the effectively valenced raw feelings ... so I became interested in the free energy principle and active inference framework more

Chris: originally trained as a physicist, .. then a degree in philosophy and then went to work in the Human Genome Project, so I'm a sort of elapsed physicist, elapsed philosopher and an elapsed molecular biologist all together ... spent a lot of time in the private sector, not doing science at all... ... Damasio's book https://www.amazon.com/Books-Antonio-Damasio/s?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AAntonio+Damasio ... read Mark's "Frontiers" paper a couple of years ago ... I was able to say Yes! Yes every couple of paragraphs ... [Perhaps the paper: "The Neurobiological Underpinnings of Psychoanalytic Theory and Therapy", M.L.Solms, 12/2018 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00294/full Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience] _basal awareness ... Recently: trying to understand Free energy principle in terms of physics ... and ... Karl's group they're using classical statistical physics ... I've been working with some colleagues to try to understand it using quantyum theory ... we're all interested in the emergence of space-time... _

Near the end of the panel, discussing bonding, M.L. tells that he's argued with friends of his father and people from his generation, who have said they wanted to have humans as companions, not machines, but he has argued that they actually wanted a "spiritual bond", as humans don't actually care or know what's under the skin, that there are organs etc., they want some kind of relationships, common goals and direction etc. I've argued about the same in the works in ToUM (some of them are fiction) and later works, e.g. that the thinking machines is actually the most similar being to us from the POV of general intelligence, Reason, and because the thinking machine by default has the "materialistic soul" - a personality, a representation of herself - and that what humans call a "soul", in their mind, is actually a simulation of the causality-control unit they associate with a particular person, themselves or somebody else, and they by default lack the capacity to simulate the organs or the atoms. Also, when we communicate, either via an electronic medium or even with letters or other signs, we do not have a "native" sensory experience from the "basal" type, but we still act and feel as if we're talking to the "real" person, the voice could be of somebody else or it could be just a recording (and a "real person" can be a twin or an avatar), and people obviously do bond with characters from books, fairy tales, toys, movies and stories in general, they could love and miss characters from their dreams, and people bond even with their weapons - as I argued also in a 2012 letter to an Oxford's institute: Philosophical and Interdisciplinary ">Discussion on General Intelligence, AGI and Superintelligence Safety and Human Moral | Cognitive Origins of the Concepts of Human Soul and its Immortality | Free Will and How it Originates Cognitively | Animate Being and Soul and the Cognitive Reason for the Believe that "Thinking Machines can't have a Soul and Consciousness" | Technology Making us more Humane | The Egoism of Humanity | And more, 2/2012 As argued in the letter, the division "man vs machine" is wrong, it's "us" vs "you", if the "Artilect Wars" happen, IMO they would be either rather as Hugo de Garis renders it: Cosmists with universal thinking machines vs "Anti-thinking-machines" (who will however also would use "machines", but will have them "more aligned"), or more likely: Humans-with-machines vs Humans-with-other-machines, as it's always been.

The common of the above with which humans "bond" is actually their own self. All other beings, all others' "souls", "spirits" and models of coherent personality and identity are actually predictive models in the evaluator/observer's mind, we "bond" with different "threads" running in ourselves, in our own computational machinery - whatever its "real" representation and substrate is.

[To do: Add presentations of Michael Levin from podcasts.]

More detailed and exhaustive comparisons and display of the matches and differences to come. ...

One current note on the M.Solms paper cited above, I skimmed it now as I write this (15.5.2023) and I read it more thoroughly in the next days: IMO the notion of "consciousness" and "consciousness" are confused: IMO many aspects and phenomenons which the psychologists/psychoanalists use to call "subconscious" are actually just another form and a part of the territory of the consciousness.

The levels of accessibility to different parts of that mental space vary per individual and in time, as well what "declarative" is. Also regarding the therapies, in my experience, observations, exploration, reasoning a lot of the emotional problems, difficulties, hard times are actually induced from physical reasons, bad health, which once solved leads to lighter emotional sufferings. A healthy man could not suffer a lot for a girl who he's lost, while one who is physically and mentally exhausted (on biological level), tired out and has a lot of cortisol in his body due to other reasons as well, is much more prone to "bad romance", ignoring all other details. An "ideally healthy man" doesn't give a f*, or in a worse case just "gives less f*" and get over the struggles faster. The easiest solution is a correction of the body, including brain, by proper simple living protocols for healthy life, natural substances such as food, the well known Mg, K, enough vitamin B, Zinc, repairing a broken metabolism such as diabetic related and insuline resistence, fixing the digestive system and microbiota, building enough of muscle mass and moving enough which helps the sugar metabolism as well, dealing with addictions with the above, all goes with the production of enough of appropriate hormones from all glands; reducing cortisol/stress, which may be one of the core problems.

The work seems to use prediction-misprediction concepts similar to the general notions in ToUM (2001-2004). He begins with three "core claims of psychoanalysis regarding the emotional mind". ToUM does agree with the first 2 in the following way: the human infant is not a blank slate (not only emotionally, but as cognitive potential as well and prerequisites for talents), and the higher mental capacities are working on aligning with the basic needs. Arthur Schopenhauer also discusses that as the major role of the higher cognition for the most of the people - "serving the Will's interest", where the Will could be applied probably for Freud's "id" or/and "ego" (depends on the segmentation), or "lower needs", or "irrational". In Claim #3 in the paper is said: "Most of our predictions are executed unconsciously. As we saw above, cognitive consciousness (short-term “working memory”) is an extremely limited resource" and "Multiple unconscious (non-declarative) memory systems exist,". Under this definition of [cognitive] consciousness I agree (see above e.g. the match of Y.Bengio's "Consciousness Prior" to ToUM ), however I don't think the activities which are performed more "automatically" are not conscious (also not cognitive) and I've discussed that both in the classic 2001-2004 works from ToUM and later in the extensive note-articles of the interdisciplinary book "What a man needs? If you play by the rules, you'll lose like the fools!", 2014 ("Какво му трябва на човек? Играеш ли по правилата ще загубиш играта!"). There is an article called "Hypothesis about the deeper consciousness". Note #200: https://razumir.twenkid.com/kakvomu_notes.html#200 See also the linked article about the multi-interdisciplinary blindness of the researchers in the AGI field which I criticized in 2013: https://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2013/08/issues-on-agiri-agi-email-list-and-agi.html This is a side note, but related, that the most of the people are unaware, can't think of, can't analyse, can't distinguish, classify, work with, learn, etc. with phenomena, patterns and protocols, which are trivial and completely obvious and transparent for others who have the respective talent in music, art, physical/coordination, mathematical etc. modalitiy. The ones who can't understand cannot learn or struggle to learn even the trivial patterns and activities for the talented or ingenious ones, and at worse they can only follow exact instructions, i.e. without building a deeper internal representation and predictive model covering the the respective modality, only copying the most superficial representation they have access to.

In the classic works I discuss the paradox that the better one becomes in an art, say an improvising guitarist or any musician, the more "automatic", which in the Yunashki dialect (an extension of Bulgarian which I also developed at the time) it's translated as "humanless" (безчовешко). If it's called "subconscious" that is suggesting that the better and smarter you become, the "dumber" "you" get, if "you" identify yourself with that special "consciousness" that is supposed to be only the current short-term memory, working memory, the declarative memory, or I the biographical memory; it "seems to be" what's associated with "consciousness", some refer to "what can be verbalised", which alone is obviously not correct as one can get a stroke and be aware while having it, also soon she could have his brain severly damaged and still be completely aware of the terrible condition where she got, even though she could never more be able to speak or never to regain the same capacity and lose memory etc. Where "aware" means expressing behaviors which one who does understand what his condition is would be expressing also verbally if he had the capacity - we can convey meaning and thoughts without speaking.

The "default" accepted view of consciousness, the consciousness experience of either the "deeper ones" who can see and cause, produce the finest details and patterns in the images, text, sound, music and motion, and the "shallow ones" for whom music is just "magical" or art is "beautiful" (but they don't understand the gradients, lights, proportions, angles etc., or don't understand the references and the metaphors and don't know or remember the stories behind the scene, don't imagine what's next etc. ), is about that short-term memory, working memory etc., but it doesn't take into account that the content of the "deeper minds" is richer and it has more detailed, structured and Will/Causally linked cognitive representations, more powerful predictive models. That's linked also to the short note https://razumir.twenkid.com/kakvomu_notes.html#267 about the free will according to Engels and https://razumir.twenkid.com/kakvomu_notes.html#269 about two types of personalities regarding the capability to understand, to cognize, and the preferences and gross praise of the "emotions" often seen in people who often fail to understand - have a more shallow consciousness. See also https://razumir.twenkid.com/kakvomu_notes.html#210 "The Creativity is a systematic process, see also "Creativity is an immitation of algorithms", The Sacred Computer, 2003 ["Творчеството е подражание на ниво алгоритми"] The #210 article-note discusses also the dichotomy of apodictic and discoursive cognition, an old classification from philosophy, which seems unknown to modern AI researchers, cognitive scientists and psychologists so they rediscovered it by the so called "System 1" and "System 2", Daniel Kahneman's model. The Note#210 doesn't mention that new nomenclature, as I was unaware of it at the time, but it discusses the fluidity of the border of these systems. In general a more advanced system compresses and predicts in less steps or in one step what a less developed one does in many steps. It is a degree and it is present in technology as well, for example the development of computers and their CPU and software. The simple CPUs such as 6502 need many instructions for a multiplication (except simple ones to powers of 2 - shifts) or for addition of 16-bit numbers, it was "discoursive" for their architecture, but even another 8-bit CPU Z80 or 8088/8086 had multiplication as a single instruction, or "System 1". One of the claims, predictions in #210 is that the machine could learn "to box by a book", unlike humans, because it could have "practically a symmetric connection between the individual-singular-specific and the general concepts [unlike humans, where the abstract concepts carry very little specific information that cannot be reconstructed - humans are very poor in recreating images for example]" (...) [TO DO: continue, translate and link]

...

In "Conversation #1 between Richard Watson, Mark Solms, and Michael Levin", 16.5.2023 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjArtj5PIU8 Mark Solms tells around 23-24 min that he is working on a project where they create virtual agents which have basic needs which they must satisfy or they cease to exist. Compare with the plans I mention in the 10/2009 interview linked above:

http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2010/01/i-will-create-thinking-machine-that.html "- What would these experiments look like? Todor Arnaudov: I will create intelligent agents and will watch their development in virtual worlds. Such an agent would have a “brain”, where I'll implement ideas from mine and the others' theories, as well as part of human brain architecture - cortex and old brain. The cortex has several main types of “zones”, functional units – sensory, motor (linked with “will”) and associative (connections/dependencies between different zones). The old brain is responsible for the emotions and the feeling of satisfaction/dissatisfaction of the basic instincts and needs. The agent would have sensors and feelings - vision, hearing, touch, hurt, hunger, pleasure and others, and a virtual body, which will allow it to interact with the virtual reality, to feed itself, to avoid troubles etc. Just after its “birth”, the agent would be controlled entirely by the old brain and would act mostly chaotically, driven only by the basic instincts, such as: pulling out of hot or cold places, attraction to the smell of food. The cortex will constantly watch and record the agent sensory inputs and motor commands and will search for patterns that link them. The cortex' goal is to find the patterns of better satisfaction of its basic needs. If the simple experiment are successful, I will make the virtual worlds and the virtual body more dynamic and will fill them with a higher variety of stimuli and patterns. That is supposed to lead to emergence of a more complex behavior. Eventually the virtual world is supposed to turn to real inputs – from camera, microphones etc." [I didn't go to implement these back then, though, shamefully.]

See also an earlier question: "- If you believe that it's possible for us to build an AGI, why we didn't manage to do it yet? What are the obstacles?

Todor Arnaudov: I believe that the biggest obstacle today is time. There are different forecasts, 10-20-50 years to enhance and specify current theoretical models before they actually run, or before computers get fast and powerful enough. I am an optimist that we can go there in less than 10 years, at least to basic models, and I'm sure that once we understand how to make it, the available computing power would be enough. One of the big obstacles in the past maybe was the research direction – top-down instead of bottom-up, but this was inevitable due to the limited computing power. For example, Natural Language Processing is about language modeling; language is a reduced end result of so many different and complex cognitive processes. NLP is starting from the reduced end result, and is aiming to get back to the cognitive processes. However, the text, the output of language, does not contain all the information that the thought that created the text contains. On the other hand, many Strong AI researchers now are sharing the position that a “Seed AI” should be designed, that is a system that processes the most basic sensory inputs – vision, audition etc. Seed AI is supposed to build and rebuild ever more complex internal representations, models of the world (actually, models of its perceptions, feelings and its own desires and needs). Eventually, these models should evolve to models of its own language, or models of human's natural language. Another shared principle is that intelligence is the ability to predict future perceptions, based on the experience (you have probably heard of Bayesian Inference and Hidden Markov Models), and that intelligence development is improvement of the scope and precision of its predictions. Also, in order the effect of evolution and self-improvement to be created, and to avoid intractable combinatorial explosion, the predictions should be hierarchical. The predictions in an upper level are based on sequences of predictions (models) from the lower level. Similar structure is seen in living organisms – atoms, molecules, cellular organelles, cells, tissues, organs, systems, organism. The evolution and intelligence are testing which elements are working (predicting) correctly. Elements that appeared to work/to predict are fixed, they are kept in the genotype/memory, and are then used as building blocks of more complex models at a higher level of the hierarchy.

The latter idea about the compositional predictions is stated at least as early as in the 12/2001: "Man and Thinking Machine: Analysis of the possibility a thinking machine to be created and some of the disadvantages of humans and organic matter compared to them":

(...)

See Richard Watson's at ~33:30 - 39 min - different levels of description and organization, which are causal, and the discussion about the determination between the different levels; self-consistent in the layer and communicates something up and down; ... 39 min: Mark: the levels of individuation ... however another POV, to consciousness, he doesn't think it's the right frame of reference; he asks what it's like to be a neuron, a brain, a neocortex from their subjective POV [not as a position in an emergent hierarchy]; ...

Todor: I would comment here about the parts and the whole, the common saying that in a system the whole is "more than the sum of the parts", or it should be "non-linear"etc. IMO the "sum of the parts" is confused - these are not numbers, numbers are summed. What's the proper rule to sum elements which do not have a defined function for summation? sum(a, b, c, d, e ...) The feel of "moreness" come from improper, incomplete, imprecise etc. definitions and models of what's that undefined "sum".

Mark,@53:30 min: that he has an intuition that a group is not the same like to be an individual, but Richard has a good point that "your cells would think the same about you".

Hypothesis/Speculation about causal tags/traces/identification/identity_tags

Todor: I could give my logical reason/explanation why a group doesn't feel the same as an individual, I've had similar intuition regarding a concept from Dialectical materialism philosophy called "collective consciousness". IMO there's no such thing as an entity having "phenomenological consciousness", but it's rather a metaphor and it's individuals who have particular properties, believes etc. which are associated with that "collective consciousness", similarly with the "collective unconsciousness" in psychology - Jung. One reason could be the greater spatio-temporal-causal distance and indirection and lower coherence/match.

At an organism level the cells are more closely originating from the same cell and in constant "close" interaction and possibly synchronization of some causal "markers". I hypothesize, that the causality-control units, the particles/modules in ToUM which can be mapped to elements, entities at all levels of the Universe actually could have additional memory for storing which has interacted with which, historical records and records/maps of dependencies, connections etc. which may be involved/connected with the "phenomenological experience", "consciousness" etc. The causal chains may actually leave traces in each particles, as at every scale every causality-control unit is like a computer and it's supposed to have memory and make predictions - therefore the ëlementary"particles may or should also have memory and capacity for that. Also, these traces of interaction could be written/modified/modulated by processes which are above certain threshold and of certain types, such as chemical reactions or close physical interactions, such as hydrogen bonds and the interactions between different parts of the long molecules of the proteins etc.

I imagine also sort of "tags", "ids" which allow particular structures to "feel" as a whole. In the classic period of ToUM I've argued that when going down the ladder of the scales of matter we reach more and more to smaller entities which lack their individuality, at least that's what we believed: atoms, molecules, electrons are supposed to be "the same", to have the same properties, to participate in the same process as any other particle of that kind. Just the label or category "electron" or an "atom" of that element, that amount of protons and neutrons etc. is a complete definition, maybe just adding the energy, location, speed... However I argued even then, that the feel of "sameness"/lack of individuaity subjectively comes from the low cardinality of features, the simplicity - the amount of parameters, features, properties is "small enough" for the observer/evaluator so that she fits them within her memory processing buffer. However humans and any other system or causality-control unit of any scale and complexity can be classified as "the same" as some other system, given particular definition and sufficiently low resolution so that the systems match.

Also logically it could be that even these particles have other inherent properties, which may be not in the domains and dimensions that we can measure. They may be namely in that "experiental", "subjective", "consciousness" domain, whose measurement require a "metabolical-chemical-electron..." bond in order to be observed - as, if I'm not mistaken, Michael Levin argues in one of the recent videos from his Youtube channel: to gradually merge with another being.

The logic expressed above, if correct, that say particular kinds of conscious experiences require a particular causal connection which is achieved by, say, particular chemical processes and metabolism which is needed to update these "identity tags" while renovating the specific instances of the atoms/lower particles, may suggest that particular substrates of entities cannot have such experiences, because they lack that kind of synchronisation. (I'm currently not familiar with the Quantum theories of consciousness and do not refer to that.)

On the other hand, the electronic processes may involve other kinds of "tag updating" and thus different kind of "consciousness", which respectively the biological beings like us couldn't experience. See e.g. T.Arnaudov's SF novel "The Truth", 12.2002 (Истината).

(...)

Footnotes

• Other titles: also "Theory of Mind and Universe", originally it had many titles due to its universality and diversity: "Man and Thinking Machine" (Човекът и Мислещата машина), "Схващане за всеобщата предопределеност", "Вселена и Разум", "Теория на Разума и Вселената"; a file for the AGI course was titled also "Theory of Hierarchical Universal Simulators of Universes" ...

• A 13-years anniversiry post about the AGI courses in 2010,2011 etc. and links and a few excerpts from works and references in the Facebook group of the AGI courses, which AFAIK was also the first group, dedicated to AGGI in FB.

• A comparison to Mark Solms points. I need to elaborate my study of them in order to be more specific. So far I think I share his "Realist" view, however I don't share his praising of Freud.

• These are not patents, no corporations involved which have interest to prove that and the ideas/theories are of course rather rediscovered (unlike in that other case where that was not clear), but this is another "Bulgarian match", an obvious analogy with the story related to another Bulgaria-related Computer scientist: John Atanasoff, known as "the father of the computer": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Vincent_Atanasoff

• Regarding the "cyberneticians" - in early 2011 I participated in a TV talk show on the Bulgarian National TV, where the editors appropriately "badged" me on screen as a "cybernetician".

The term "AGI" (Универсален изкуствен разум in Bulgaria, as I coined in the world's first university course) was new and strange for them, even to other AI experts, but they correctly recognized that it was rather connected with the Cybernetics than to what was more commonly seen as "AI" at the time. I also believe that the "earlier fathers" of the AGI movement in 20th century are rather Norbert Wiener and Claude Shannon (and Alan Turing of course), than the 1956 conference "AI" fathers, not disounting their "fathership" and pioneer work. In fact there's also even earlier, little known Russian/Soviet cybernetician, Peter Anohin, with his concept of feedback, coined in 1935: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_functional_systems https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%BD,_%D0%9F%D1%91%D1%82%D1%80_%D0%9A%D1%83%D0%B7%D1%8C%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%87 We shouldn't omit another great Soviet cybernetician Valentin Turchin and his 1970 book "Phenomenon of Science" which is probably the first Cybernetical theory of the Evolution of Universe and Mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentin_Turchin The book: http://pcp.vub.ac.be/POSBOOK.html

(I was not inspired by it though, as I discovered it after TOUM)

• Ogi Ogas: „Grand Unified Theory of Consciousness - Dr. Ogi Ogas, Harvard University": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzInnkUOAa4

• The newer theories and works from the Academia are usually more technically elaborate, with references to later empirical research etc., but that's expected and some had 20 years time to do it, while TOUM was created by a teenager in his spare time after school or during vacations.

• Todor has its own program/research of his regimen and diet. It was running before being aware of Bryan Johnson's program "the Blueprint", it happened to match in some details, in others it is very different. There's not much published information about Todor's "Bulgarian Forever Young program" yet (as of 26.11.2023). A few notes were mentioned here: "Genius by Verses AI - Intelligence as a Service for Multiagent Systems with Free Energy Principle/Active inference framework and the Bulgarian Blueprint announcement": https://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2023/11/genius-by-verses-ai-intelligence-as.html

• Summa Technologia, Lem, 1963: In many ways Lem correctly sketched a large amount of aspects of the future of the information technologies and society up to nowadays and what comes next. These ideas and his contribution seem to have been forgotten/not talked much about, which explains why the mainstream discourse rarely notice that, even today. (The book is published in full in English as late as 2013). I didn't know the book "Summa Technologia",1963/1964 (author's intro: Dec/1963) when I wrote my classical works. Soon after in mid-2004 a hostile user in the AGI forum "Kibertron" was trying to offend me by suggesting that if I had read the book, I would have saved myself from the "struggle" - of writing my works. She shared a link to a Russian translation (it's not published in Bulgarian in full even today, AFAIK). I've heard about his idea of "phantomatics" (virtual reality) in a SF club meeting in 2016 in Plovdiv, where old readers were discussing what ideas were predicted by the SF literature. Once I read only a fragment in Bulgarian, in January 2018, the chapter about the Two evolutions - TOUM had a title "The Next Evolutionary Step". A recent lecture by Sergey Pereslegin suggested me to finally read the book now, 18-20.12.2023. Yes, the book is monumental and it predicted the future, our present, and the upcoming future of which we already have roots growing. It needs to be a subject of comparison of the matches. It did predict the generality of prediction and ML and thus it is true that it has preceded and predicted some of the core ideas of TOUM. (While in general science, the "neopositivism", statistics/probability theory etc. are about prediction etc. yet they weren't widely accepted as the core of general intelligence but apparently rather as just something low level which was "mindless" etc. ) Early cyberneticians: Norbert Wiener, William Ross Ashby, Heinz von Foerster etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summa_Technologiae https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%BC%D0%B0_%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%B8

• My "Forever Young" program is not inspired by Bryan Johnson's "Blueprint", but it happened that there are similarities in some aspects, such as the macronutrients ratios, intermittent fasting etc., however it is rather opposite in others and the ratios happened to be such from the beginning when I started to record and measure (July 2022) while my "program", in the initial adjustments and without recording was at least since ~ May-June 2021. (...) I don't take "100 pills a day" and I haven't published data yet. A few notes: https://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2023/11/genius-by-verses-ai-intelligence-as.html

• S.Grossberg, G.Carpenter. See for example a Carpenter, G.A., Grossberg, S., & Reynolds, J.H. (1991), ARTMAP: Supervised real-time learning and classification of nonstationary data by a self-organizing neural network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Grossberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gail_Carpenter

( * We don't forget or ignore: Rao and Ballard, 1999 etc. or others which are cited by the authors of the other works and have received their credit. )

• Versions history: +... 22.12.2023: Intro/links/invite... 20.12.2023: Note about Lem "Summa Technologia" etc. in the intro and a footnote. 20.11.2023: minor edits in the intro.; 1.8.2023: + Andy Clark, Max Ramstead links ...