Eve

[DougofTheAbaci]

Three words.

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

You know the problem with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? It's based on current technology. In order to see things at the molecular level you need an electron microscope since there is no magnification microscope capable of that area. The problem is that in order to find it's location you basically have to shoot a lot of other particles in the general direction. When one of them collides, the microscope picks up that there was some resistance met at that location. Problem is the collision changes the trajectory of the original particles, thus moving their location.

This is a big problem because we have no way of knowing how fast it was going, or what angle they collided at so we can't tell where it's going now. In order to measure speed you have to be able to tell the progress of a particle between point A and B, but if you obstruct it at any point it won't get to point B and you can no longer test it.

If we could find another way to detect the location of the elements, say by the individual magnetic pulls of the particles or some other form that did not actually effect they way they moved, we'd be able to tell speed and location, thus allowing us predict it's future interactions.

What does this have to do with the topic? It proves that you can tell exactly what is going to happen based on certain factors. Which means, on a root level, the motivations that guide our actions are just as predictable as a machine, say, Eve?

So on a base fundamental level she can be as human as we are. The difference being our parts are biological where hers are mechanical.

If you were able to write a difference engine program that could accept new data and cross reference it all endlessly you could make a living consciousness. The way people learn things is by getting multiple positive or negative reactions to a fact. If you get the desired or positive response multiple times your mind learns this as right. If you get an undesired or negative your mind disregards the previous connections and labels it as wrong.

You could simulate this with a machine, which is, in essence, what Hawk has theoretically done with Eve, thus making her as human as anyone else.

Wow that was long...

[Kron]

Three words.

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

You know the problem with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? It's based on current technology.

Your uderstanding of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is flawed. It has nothing to do with the shortcomings of our technology and methods of observation, it's a principle not a problem. Have you even read the wiki article you referenced?

I agree with Tsukaggin. The flaw with determinism is that it's based on classical and relatavistic physics. It ignores the quantum natures of our minds.

[Quiksilvr]

wow, i et on while on vacaion and i ind that the subject is getting WAY deeper then i ever hought it would. but anyways... Eve, i ery complex, much to comlex for any of use to understand unless more specs would be given. but, as fo all tha is in the comic, it brings out a lot of concept discussions.

eve if i don' understand a sing ting you guys are saying!!!!

[llleung]

um sorry to sink yor boat but pardon me? i did not understand the last bit

[DougofTheAbaci]

"Even if I don't understand a single thing you guys are saying!"

We're talking about advanced physics and how it applies to defining a conscious intelligence, in this case Eve.

[Placid]

It's worse if you do understand them.

"Quantum natures of our minds"?  What quantum natures?  We still have no evidence that there's anything fundamentally quantum mechanical about the thinking process.  All indications are that nerve impulses are simply classical.  Perhaps you mean "chaotic nature"?

"Infinite choice"?  Is that another way of saying "free will"?  We can't even define free will yet, much less measure whether we have it.

[Kron]

Our minds are emergent products of a biochemical system. This system is affected at a molecular level by quantum mechanics. While this effect is initially small, the butterfly effect amplifies it over time into genuine random impulses and unpredictable behaviour.

It's the fundamental principle of mental evolution according to me.

Also, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle is not dependant on instrument inaccuracy. When an object is observed, it's wave-function collapses. The more accurate the measurement the more complete the collapse. The point is, until we reach an instrument capable of 100% accuracy (a current theoretical impossibility), the Heisenberg uncertainty principle cannot be eradicated; only reduced. Even if we DO achieve this instrument, it would help remove the principle from observed systems; not the universe at large.

If we are capable of observing the ENTIRE universe with said machine (Omniscience), the principle would be utterly eradicated, but this is just speculation.

[William Dojinn]

Oooooookay then. Back to Eve shall we go now?

To get away from the uber scientific and more towards the psychological I pose this question. How would Eve react to Linux? Hawk said something about not making her OS Toleraint, yet OSX is essentially BSD, which i a Unix flavor, which Linux is simply another flavor in the same family. Still it isn't a Mac based system, so would it only be mild dislike as opposed to absolute loathing?

I bet she would be VERY confused seeing anyone running OSX86....

[DougofTheAbaci]

To get away from the uber scientific and more towards the psychological...

Psychology is the study of the mind and it's functions, we were just discussing her humanity on a base, theoretical level.

And a different OS is a different OS. She'd still be a very unhappy proverbial camper.

If we are capable of observing the ENTIRE universe with said machine (Omniscience), the principle would be utterly eradicated, but this is just speculation.

It could be done, you'd probably have to use some way to measure magnetic attraction in order to "sense" everything. But this is getting away from Eve and more to Quantum Theory.

I think we can at least agree that, on a theoretical level, her mental functionality is the same as a humans. Eve is pretty much just like a human only a lot less squishy.

[William Dojinn]

I am of the school of 'I think therefor I am.' She's sentiant, or at least close enough to it. Therefor she is, in my view, human.

You never answered my question on OSX86.

[DougofTheAbaci]

I am of the school of 'I think therefor I am.' She's sentiant, or at least close enough to it. Therefor she is, in my view, human.

You never answered my question on OSX86.

You mean this? She'd probably call it a traitor or an impostor depending on how she decided to look at it.

Hmm.. Do I date bring up the topic of Existentialism in relation to defining Eve's existence as human or not? *Evil grin*

[William Dojinn]

...only if you want random cranial explosions.

Oh and in reguards to the OSX86 thing. Why would Eve brand it as a traitor? She doens't seem to care about hardware, just the operating system, which in this case would be all Mac, which in her view could only be a good thing. I mean c'mon, it gives everybody else who doesn't want to poney up for mac hardware to experiance propper software ne?

[paxa]

the secret is that she is really a bot built from a combination of Dell and eMachines parts and an Intel Pentium, running Windows ME with an OS X GUI modification and 256 mb of RAM. She found this out when they plugged her in, and burst the radioactive containers on purpose to commit suicide upon learning the awful truth.

head just exploded as reading this

[Kron]

I think we can at least agree that, on a theoretical level, her mental functionality is the same as a humans. Eve is pretty much just like a human only a lot less squishy.

Agreed.

Sentience? It's obvious she's sentient and sapient.

[Gigo]

It's obvious that Eve is an Anthro-PC.

Duh.