TIL I may be an alien.
Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
11–20 of 61 posts
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#12The problem with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis as an argument against academic knowledge is it may be true for the general population, however, the entire purpose of STEM academia is to subvert the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Teaching a kid quantum mechanics or calculus inherently has little to do with the general population's belief in religion or astrology or virtue signalling, for example. The average Joe_6_Pack Arrival…
You are relying on implicit assumption that quantum mechanics is the only possible theory that could lead to an invention of MOSFET transistors. Maybe this assumption is true, but I do not know it to be proved. Of course QM is the only known to us theory that had led to MOSFETs, but it doesn't mean that one couldn't invent some completely different way to describe reality which would enable him to invent MOSFETs.
In order to build a MOSFET, you need to know how do electrons react in the presence of thin barriers, and how thick should the gate oxide be to prevent breakdown while still keeping the field strong.
Does a civilization know this? If no, they cannot make MOSFETs. If yes, than whatever branch of physics and math describes this is called “quantum mechanics”
Can it be different, can you do QM without Schrödinger Equation? Sure, but it will still be QM. One can rearrange terms on formulas, use different units, work with voltage instead of energy, introduce various metrics and so on. Physicists do it all the time, it is simply theory reformulation.
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#13I just found this week's blog posting by RJ Lipton: https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2019/10/21/a-polemical-overre...
The Mackenzie book chapter discusses both the Fetzer and DeMillo Lipton Perlis controversies.
It's really interesting that the debate got into the questions like, can one formally verify a bridge?
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#14I'm not sure I follow the argument at the end. The author has given a good explanation for why our current metaphors describing the lambda calculus might not be applicable to aliens (requiring the concepts of direction and containment), but I don't see why, for example, the gas-planet aliens might not have their own metaphors relating to wind patterns or aerial acrobatics or something we wouldn't understand at all. There can be multiple metaphors for the same math.
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are relying on implicit assumption that quantum mechanics is the only possible theory that could lead to an invention of MOSFET transistors. Maybe this assumption is true, but I do not know it to be proved. Of course QM is the only known to us theory that had led to MOSFETs, but it doesn't mean that one couldn't invent some completely different way to describe reality which would enable him to invent MOSFETs.
In order to build a MOSFET, you need to know how do electrons react in the presence of thin barriers, and how thick should the gate oxide be to prevent breakdown while still keeping the field strong. Does a civilization know this? If no, they cannot make MOSFETs. If yes, than whatever branch of physics and math describes this is called “quantum mechanics” Can it be different, can you do QM without Schrödinger Equatio…
>In order to build a MOSFET, you need to know how do electrons react in the presence of thin barriers, and how thick should the gate oxide be to prevent breakdown while still keeping the field strong.
And yet I somehow managed to produce a pretty complex quantum computer before I was even born: my brain. Or maybe my mom did, but she is nearly as ignorant of quantum physics and biology as I was as a fetus, so the point stands.
The person above was wrong about your implicit assumption about QM and dependency chains. Your real assumption is that interstellar societies will develop technologies intentionally using explicit knowledge that charts such a dependency chain, rather than evolving capabilities via or alongside implicit knowledge, such as the implicit knowledge we all share in which allows us to produce human brains with no intellectual effort whatsoever. We don't and can't know what chunks of those dependency chains are innate for other species, which in turn means we don't know how they will traverse such a chain, even assuming ad arguendo your hypothesis that the dependency graph is essentially linear.
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about a civilisation who never invented silicon diodes but kept using vacuum tubes? Or what about a civ. who invented logic programming first and never then invented lambda calculus. Or what if they come from a much lower gravity planet, their spaceships might look completely different. Or what if they're not a carbon based species; why do we then assume they'd have to travel a similar tech path as us?
Vacuum tubes are inherently limited by physics, they cannot be used to create an efficient and small power converters. So if civilization is stuck with vacuum tubes, it is highly unlikely they’ll get to renewable power sources, and therefore they’ll likely to die off once they run off of their oil-equivalent. If the civilization comes to us, it is likely they are at least as technological advanced as we are. Which me…
Maybe they only ever used hydro power, on their, hot and humid 2G rocky water planet.
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#17The problem with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis as an argument against academic knowledge is it may be true for the general population, however, the entire purpose of STEM academia is to subvert the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Teaching a kid quantum mechanics or calculus inherently has little to do with the general population's belief in religion or astrology or virtue signalling, for example. The average Joe_6_Pack Arrival…
You are relying on implicit assumption that quantum mechanics is the only possible theory that could lead to an invention of MOSFET transistors. Maybe this assumption is true, but I do not know it to be proved. Of course QM is the only known to us theory that had led to MOSFETs, but it doesn't mean that one couldn't invent some completely different way to describe reality which would enable him to invent MOSFETs.
[deleted]
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are relying on implicit assumption that quantum mechanics is the only possible theory that could lead to an invention of MOSFET transistors. Maybe this assumption is true, but I do not know it to be proved. Of course QM is the only known to us theory that had led to MOSFETs, but it doesn't mean that one couldn't invent some completely different way to describe reality which would enable him to invent MOSFETs.
In order to build a MOSFET, you need to know how do electrons react in the presence of thin barriers, and how thick should the gate oxide be to prevent breakdown while still keeping the field strong. Does a civilization know this? If no, they cannot make MOSFETs. If yes, than whatever branch of physics and math describes this is called “quantum mechanics” Can it be different, can you do QM without Schrödinger Equatio…
[deleted]
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are relying on implicit assumption that quantum mechanics is the only possible theory that could lead to an invention of MOSFET transistors. Maybe this assumption is true, but I do not know it to be proved. Of course QM is the only known to us theory that had led to MOSFETs, but it doesn't mean that one couldn't invent some completely different way to describe reality which would enable him to invent MOSFETs.
In order to build a MOSFET, you need to know how do electrons react in the presence of thin barriers, and how thick should the gate oxide be to prevent breakdown while still keeping the field strong. Does a civilization know this? If no, they cannot make MOSFETs. If yes, than whatever branch of physics and math describes this is called “quantum mechanics” Can it be different, can you do QM without Schrödinger Equatio…
While I agree in doubting that the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis can be used in the way the author does (for one thing, I do not think the strong version is supported by the evidence, and I think the strong version is required here), I think it is worth noting that De Forest, inventor of the audion (precursor of the triode), had a very mistaken idea of how it worked. Today, we have devices that use high-temperature superconductors without having a complete theory of how they work. The inventors of smelting and gunpowder did not understand the chemistry of their inventions...
Re: Would aliens understand lambda calculus? (2018)
#20Any article that congratulates hyoo-mons on their uniquely superior capacities instantly disqualifies itself from representing anything fundamentally correct.
Either (1) fundamental mathematical principles are universal, and every society that incrementally improves will converge on them, or (2) our mathematical principles are socially constructed, and other societies will evolve their own structures that may be closed to us. There is no middle ground.
There is, however, a third possibility: some of the universal fundamentals may be inaccessible to humans because of innate limitations in our savanna-evolved monkey brains, where aliens need not be so restricted. In other words, we (and everybody else) have access to the basics, but not everybody gets beyond the basics.
We can reasonably conclude that we have thus far only touched on the basics, because we have only just started looking. Whether we will progress beyond those basics has yet to be demonstrated. If civilization collapses as the natural world breaks under the strain put on it by industrial society, we might stop at this level. Or, if the number of people with mental capacity to comprehend increasing levels of sophistication declines, eventually it will reach one, and then zero.
Our only hope might be inventing machines that can progress beyond us, but they would then supplant us. The aliens might see no value in talking with us, but only with our machines, and we would never understand what they were saying to one another.
All of the above is the natural progression of the Copernican revolution: any assumption of specialness is flawed in exactly the degree by which it flatters us.