Long ago the Greeks asked,
          "What more accurately characterizes existence, 
                    being or becoming?"
         (Which is more important,a state or a process?)
                (Potential or current flow?)
      Nowadays we have an even more fundamental question,
                     upon which is based
      all human activity attempts to reverse engineer the universe
                            and mankind.
      No doubt you realize that I am referring to the age-old                                                            


Semi-intelligent, Semi-Random, Semi-Jocular Thoughts and Semi-thoughts about Intelligence and Semi- intelligence

............................................................................ (C) B Maccabee, 1998, 2001 ........................................................................... QUESTION:

What is intelligence, MIND, or is it MATTER?

If you answer ***NEVER MIND, DOESN'T MATTER***, you may as well stop reading now and get on with your life. However, if you wish a less trite answer, consider the following:


manages to establish some sort of "unnatural order" of natural things... order that exists "outside nature"..... In order to determine the degree of order there must be time and dimension and memory. (Why do time theorists often seem to ignore memory? Without memory there is no "memory" of "time passing.") In ordinary space we notice differences by comparing a configuration of "things" with a reference configuration (sometimes called "reference frame" or "coordinate system). Memory is needed in order to allow for comparison between one "thing" - a configuration in dimension/space - and another "thing" - another configuration. This is memory of state or arrangement. (And comparison requires time.) Memory is like a sort of "temporal inertia." (You heard it here first, folks.) Just as mechanical inertia can establish a reference frame in space (send three balls flying along mutually perpendicular axes and they will travel "forever" defining 3 axes in space), memory provides a means for establishing a reference frame in time. That is, we recognize that "things have changed", i.e., the "new" configuration of things is different from the "old" configuration by using memory of the old to compare with the new. Without memory, and the time and ability to make a comparison, there could be no realization of time. Any physics of the universe plus life that leaves out an understanding or meaning of memory is not complete. Memory introduces a non-symmetry in time. The non-symmetry comes as follows: we don't "remember" future events, or at least not as well as we remember past events. Even the terminology is non-symmetric: remember means to bring to the present a configuration from the past so that the present and past configurations can be compared to see if there was change. The "opposite" is prediction or bringing from the future a configuration to compare with the present to find out if things will change. But then there is this past-future polarity that must be taken into account: comparison shows there is a difference. Only by taking into account the polarity of the difference (positive or neegative) will we know whether the difference is between the present and the past, or the present and the future! (You heard it here first, folks,.....and that requires memory and comparison.) Comparison is a process which requires time....time to make the comparison. But, on the other hand, time requires memory.... otherwise, who or what would know that "time had passed" or that "time will come"?

All is comparison. All is difference.

With no differences, variations, in space and time there would be sameness...a complete lack of information. Being. States of Being. These must show differences or there is no change, no information, nothing.

All is Being.

And yet, time is important because without time there could be no comparision... There would be no "becoming" ...

All is Becoming.


(The ancient Greeks would be understand our quandry.) We need references for comparison. Can we Self-reference? Or do we need to get "out of the system" a la Godel, in order to "know?" Who would know? Who is outside the system? (That which created the system?) Without memory or "prediction" (= memory of the future) of the arrangement of "things" there would be no way of comparison to determine whether or not there are differences. There would be no information ... no intelligence
....no intellecton.
Bear with me: I imagine myself in an enclosure of uniform grey. I can see, feel, hear only grey. There are no differences. It is the ultimate "DC level." There is no information. I die. (Bored to death, no doubt!) Within some volume of of Space-Time-Other (herein called STO; where Other stands for other dimensions or other degrees of freedom, such as charge, spin, etc.) there is a form or ordered arrangement of "some things" which can be created and, at a later date, measured. Matter and energy in the universe have a crude form of "memory." This memory is manifested in conservation laws, one of which is related to what is generally called inertia, but I call it "Newtonian memory." A piece of matter "remembers" which direction and how fast it was traveling after a collision (conservation of momentum in some STO). A large Newtonian memory bank (non-relativistic) could be constructed of "stupid matter" particles in which the input of information causes them all to move in various directions along simple trajectories in STO. This is stupid memory. A bunch of hockey pucks. Each particle carries at least two types of information: direction and speed. (It could also carry charge, spin and values of the other allowed degrees of freedom.) If, later on in time, we needed to know some of this stored information we would simply measure the directions and speeds in which they are moving. Well, not so "simply measure." If these are subatomic particles then we have the quantum measurement problem that there is "inaccuracy" built into the measurement. A sort of inherent fuzzy memory. Assuming there were no modifications to their inertially determined paths, the directions and speeds at STO(2) (the second space-time-other position) would be the same as at STO(1) (the first or initial STO position). (Of course, collisions between these stupid particles are not allowed.) On the other hand, if these particles are small enough to be "quantum mechanical" or are noticably affected by the continual buffeting of "zero point fluctuations" then the memory will have a "decoherence time." Quantum effects destroy the precision of stupid memory. Direction and speed are relative to some reference in STO and both must be measureable in some way. If the measurement destroys the reference frame, may as well forget it (forgetting is like negative memory). However, if the measurement destroys the remembered information by altering the particles, that may be OK if we can re-store the information in a new set of particles... a "dynamic" memory. If a stupid particle endowed with inertia could measure its own direction and speed with respect to STO or some reference frame it could have "Newtonian memory." If it could act on this information and do something "smart", something not bound by conservation laws, it would no longer be stupid. It would have a sort of self-awareness. It might be an intellecton.

What is an intellecton?

QUESTION: Is there such a thing as a subunit or building block of intelligence? Where does intelligence start in the scale of STO? Intelligence manages to establish some sort of "unnatural order" of natural things... order that exists "outside nature"..... Is the universe intelligent? Is a galaxy intelligent? Is a star intelligent? Is a planet intelligent? Is an animal intelligent? Is a bacterium intelligent? Is a cell intelligent? Is a molecule intelligent? Is an atom intelligent? Is an electron intelligent? Is the field around an electron intelligent? Is a quark intelligent? Is a gluon intelligent? Is the vacuum intelligent? Is intelligence localized at a point or distributed throughout a volume? Is intelligence "inside" our universe..... or is it "outside" our universe... .....perhaps in a "multiverse? We now know about nanobacteria. There are recent suggestions that the precursors of life exist in comets and that in the cold of space the addition of ultraviolet (UV) radiation to the carbon compounds that adhere to tiny grains of material may be able to create cells. Perhaps nanobacteria are created from random processes involving carbon compounds and UV light. If so, this would imply that the precursors of life were created soon after the "big bang" that started the universe. Did these precursors have a rudimentary form of intelligence? If so, does this mean that intelligence grew with increasing complexity of the universe? Or did intelligence already exist as a "field" into which the universe has expanded? (A "field" is a measurable something that has a value at all locations in STO, or at least all the locations of interest in STO.) As the scale size shrinks does intelligence drop out in a "quantum step" or does it fade gradually away to a minimum level at some scale size, the scale size of the intellecton, below which there is only non-intelligence? Does intelligence reside in some tiny volume of STO or is it distributed throughout STO? Does basic intelligence reside in a subunit of matter or a "volume" of some field (EM,gravity,weak,strong, other)? Or does intelligence reside in groups of elements of matter and or volumes of field? Does intelligence require the presence of matter for anything other than memory and comparison?

.... for Being and Becoming?

Or is it superimposed from "another reality" or a "higher dimension" of STO onto our version of STO?
Perhaps the intellecton knows.
But how would we know? Are we smart enough to reverse engineer intelligence? Can we understand ourselves? Does a group of intellectons have the capability of understanding a single intellecton? Or are we sufficiently imbedded in it to be unable to recognize it? Is it impossible for us to prove ourselves? ("Godel imbedding"). (I can imagine a situation in which an intelligent entity is not sufficiently intelligent to understand itself.) How do we determine the presence of intelligence? Intelligent "things" perform activities or processes within STO which unintelligent things (Non-Intellectons; NIs) don't perform. Intelligent things have may have "free will." NIs don't have free will. NI's are perfectly random in their activities when free of "binding forces." When not free of binding forces, NIs are constrained to obey "conservation rules" of the forces. These rules force the NIs to act according to some order. Their actual motions may appear random to semi-intellectuals like us, but they are, in fact, acting strictly according to rules of the interacting forces. They are the ultimate "hockey pucks." They do not "kick against the pricks of chance" but rather allow themselves to be buffetted by the activities around them. This is true of NIs. If you don't believe me, just watch one. Watch for a few nanoseconds, or a few microseconds, or a few seconds, or a few days/months/years/eons/ages of the solar system, etc. Did you see a NI do anything that is "smart?" Of course not. On the other hand, you can't be sure. Perhaps this "candidate NI" is actually an intellecton. How would you know? After all, you haven't watched forever. Perhaps the candidate NI will do something intelligent after you stop watching. Perhaps it will resist the pricks of chance. Perhaps it will go someplace not dictated by the actions of stupid force fields and other particles. Perhaps it did something non-random before you started watching. After all, you didn't start watching when the universe began. And, even while you watch for intelligent activities by NIs, you can't watch on an extremely small or extremely large scale in STO. Therefore you can't determine whether the activities are perfectly random or not. Perhaps an electron/proton/quark,etc. does something intelligent (disobeys simple physics) within a time period of 1 femtosecond (=1/10,000,000,000,000 of a second) once every microsecond or millisecond or second or .... or once every eon. How would you know? Can you watch for a millisecond with a time resolution of a femtosecond? Probably not. But even if you did, you might be watching the wrong electron/proton/quark/etc. Perhaps the electron/proton/quark, etc. does something intelligent within a space of 1 picometer everytime it travels 1 nanometer. You would never know. Perhaps the basic building block of intelligence has "free will" for short periods of time and space... perhaps there is a very short "lifetime" or "decoherence time" of fundamental "free will." You would never know. Perhaps "macroscopic intelligence" arises when there are so many (millions, billions, zillions) of intellectons in a small volume of STO so that in any small interval of time (but much larger than the time it takes for light... or at least the speed of information transmission... to cross the volume) many (thousands or millions or billions) of these are exercising their short-term "free will." In other words, perhaps intelligence is a time average of the sporadic activities of many individual intellectons, each of which has a very short "intelligence lifetime."

We don't know, but perhaps the intellecton knows.

Just how big does an intelligence have to be before we recognize it as such? Is the scale size or order parameter 1 m or 1 cm or 1 mm or 1 micron or 1 nm or 1 fm...... or should we go the other way.... 1 Megameter, 1 Terameter, 1 parsec, ......? What if non-perfectly-random/non-perfectly ordered "free will" activities are being carried on on a scale of 1 femtometer or 1 megameter. Would we know? Could the intellecton be the size of a nucleus or the size of a universe? Could it be outside the universe but penetrating at one point in time and all space... or one point in space and all time? Is a nucleus just a NI, bouncing stupidly around at the whimsy of four (or more) forces of nature? Or does it occasionally exercise its "free will?" How would we know? Can we measure the activities of a nucleus? If it has inertia and therefore basic "Newtonion memory," can it exhibit intelligence? Where can we find an intellecton? WIthin a brain? Within a group of cells in a brain? Within a single cell in a brain? (Is a bacterium intelligent?) Within a portion of a cell? (Is a mitochondrian or cell wall intelligent?) Within molecule of a portion of a cell? (Is a gene intelligent? Is a virus intelligent? Is a protein intelligent?) Within an atom of a molecule? (Is hydrogen or oxygen intelligent?) Within the constituents of an atom? (Is an electron/proton intelligent?) Or is the intellecton superimposed from without? Is the arrangement of atoms/molecules/cells within a brain actually an antenna into another reality or dimension? Is the brain our connection with a universe of intelligence? Or is intelligence just an accident of...or perhaps guaranteed by...the complexity of certain arrangements of stupid atoms and molecules? Is the intellecton actually acting over a large scale size in STO in such a way as to give groups of NIs (stupid electrons/quarks/atoms/molecules) the ability to act non-random...as if they had "free will?" And, if the intellecton is huge in STO, does it create pathways for the transmission of information between groups of NIs (e.g., "telepathons")? Could it cause communication at a distance? Remote Viewing? Superuminal transference of information? All subunits or matter have Newtonian memory (conservation of momentum) which decoheres over a very,very short time because of collisions between the subunits. Yet, groups of atoms/molecules/chemical compounds/cells, in which the subunits are held fixed in certain places relative to one another, seem to possess another sort of memory with a relatively long coherence. Is the memory built into the binding of the atoms/molecules, a binding which lasts longer than stupid Newtonian memory/coherence? Is the memory built into the substrate upon which the intellectons exist (the vacuum state)? And what about the other part of intelligence, the action part. An intellecton is as an intellecton does. If it does nothing then it provides no evidence of intelligence. There is just no change. No information. No "becoming." Just a steady state..."being." Death. An intellecton must do something "unnatural." Something. Becoming. It uses the forces and energies and vibrations to help it carry out its "free will" either alone or in concert with other intellectons. The intellecton is the ultimate freeloader, living off the continual activity of the NIs which reside in and make up the STO. Can we build an artificial intellecton? If so, would it resemble a "natural intellecton?" Would an artificial intellecton have the same capabilities and "free will" as a natural intellecton? (And, speaking of artificial intelligence, once you know that Other Intelligences - OI - as manifested by the UFO phenomenon are real and messing around in human affairs, and perhaps have been doing so for eons, you can ask....

are we the artificial intelligence?)

....................................................... THIS HAS BEEN CHAPTER 1,234,567,etc.... OF AN UNENDING SEARCH FOR THE INTELLECTON. brought to you by the International UBB (Universal Brotherhood of Backengineers....reverse engineering the Universe for the good(?) of mankind...and mainly because we want to know WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON, ANYWAY!!!!) The intent has been to cause your intellectons to get together and think about this. The questions above may be considered rhetorical.... no specific answers needed. ........................................................................... (copyright by Bruce Maccabee, Universal Vision Unlimited,1998, 2001) _______________________________________\ DISCUSSION: prompted by a reader who wrote: >Fascinating... >I would say that an Intellecton is a Force Quanta -- the >fundamental >impenetrable in principle, yielding classical physics, >unity existence, >>infinite morphology ordered by itself, and all kinds of >apparently-non-local >behaviors possible. What physics calls an Electron is a >good candidate for >this fundamental... < TO WHICH I RESPONDED Perhaps.... I certainly raised the question, is the electron the fundamental "unit of intelligence." The idea of such a fundamental unit makes some sense if our brain is like a "hive mind" where a bunch of creatures, each complete in its ability to sense the surroundings and to affect its surroundings (e.g., ants, bees), can act together to accomplish "great things." In fact, I suppose one could speculate that all intelligence is a form of "hive mind", with the hive being either internal to the creature or external...or both. (INTERNAL: the BRAIN as a "hive mind" as all the "little neurons/cells" work together while living "independently..in a wram bath of nourishing fluid.... to accomplish....life of a human!!! You read it here first, folks!) Humans, too, act in concert.... so this could be a "hive mind" activity of humans. Thus one might have a heirarchy as follows: 1)fundamental unit of intelligence (capable of sensing surrounding and acting on it): intellecton 2) correlation or group intelligence is an (quantum "entangled"(?)) collection of intellectons within one larger scale individual (e.g., with the brain of an ant or a dog or a human) 3) "hive mind" is a correlation between "larger scale individuals" (e.g., correlation between ants, dogs, humans) The level of intelligence we typically assign is based on the operationally observed capabilities of individual creatures. Humans (apparent) can do more things than any other creature and hence are considered the most intelligent. Furthermore, human's can work together to create a "hive." On the other hand, this does not rule out the possibility of a "hive mind" composed of a group of entities such that the collection "hive mind" is more intelligent than a single human or perhaps even more intelligent than all humans taken together. It is thinking like this which establishes a three- dimensional size scale for intelligence and it was reversing this sort of thinking that caused me to go back to asking.....just what is the smallest scale for which we could attribute intelligence? And how do we know intelligence as opposed to random activities, anyway? And then there is memory. Without memory there is "nothing." Well, there may as well be nothing because without memory no one would be able to realize change... or even to realize realization... because it all takes "time" and time is tied up with "memory", as described in the above paper on the intellecton. Unfortunately in many (or most? or all?) theories of consciousness the importance of memory gets left behind. Emperical fact: messing with the brain screws up or loses memories! Certainly sounds as if the "meat computer" stores information in hardware...... unless.... (bizarre) the brain is a communicator with "another world" where memories are stored and the ADDRESS LOCATIONS in the other world are what is stored in the brain, so that cutting out a piece of the brain can remove the address locations and hence the access to the memories. Hmmmmm.Sounds like another science fiction movie possible here! (You read it here first, folks. Universal Vision Unlimited.)