The Singularity of Evolution and the Future of the Fundamental Science -- A.D. Panov, MSU, Moscow, Russia
СИНГУЛЯРНОСТЬ ЭВОЛЮЦИИ И БУДУЩЕЕ ФУНДАМЕНТАЛЬНОЙ НАУКИ А.Д. Панов, МГУ, Москва, Россия THE SINGULARITY OF EVOLUTION ANDTHE FUTURE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCE A.D. Panov, MSU, Moscow, Russia
The evolution is an accelerating process. The singularity of evolutionis a point of time where the predicted rate of evolution formally tends to infinity and simple extrapolations behind this point are impossible
Various ways to the singularity of evolution.1. The demographic singularity. The hyperbolic law of the growth of the Earth population → t* - the point of singularity H. von Foerster, P. Mora, L. Amiot. I.S. Shklovsky, Doomsday: Friday, 13 November, A.D. 2026 1965 Science, 1960, V.132, p.1291 t* = 2026 I. S. Shklovsky. The Universe, Life, Intelligence. 1965. t* = 2030
Various ways to the singularity of evolution. 2. The technological singularity. Smarter-than-human intelligence → prediction of future is impossible Irving John Good, 1965 - intelligence explosion Vernor Vinge, 1988 - technological singularity, 2005-2030 Hans Moravec, 1988 - technological singularity, 2030-2040 Raymond Kurzweil, 1990th - technological singularity,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PPTExponentialGrowthof_Computing.jpg 2045
Various ways to the singularity of evolution. 3. General singularity of evolution. Brain and humankind evolutionGraem Snooks, 1996: The evolution of the biosphere and then the evolution of the humankind is a joint accelerating process expressed in terms of waves of life with the acceleration factor ~3.0
General singularity of evolution. Ray Kurzweil, 2001 The Law of Accelerating Returns. Paradigm shifts‘ unite the biological and the social evolution into one chain.
General singularity of evolution. 8 phase transitions in humankind history from I.M. Diakonov, 1994. Historical singularity - was predicted but the position in time was not calculated
S.P. Kapitsa, 1996General singularity of evolution. Mustier Acheul Chell Palaeolithic revolution Anthropogene A.D. Panov, 2005 All biological points t* = 2004 y. - all points t* = 2015 y. - A.D. points Properties of phase transitions: - overcome of evolution crises (endo-exogenic, thechno-humanitarian) - using of superfluous variety factors - Sedovs law of hierarchical compensations
General singularity of evolution. The singularity is not a point - it is a period of time, approximately from 2000 to 2050. The law of all planetary evolution from the origin of life must be changed during the period of singularity - the weight of the present time is comparable with the weight of origin of life. Any exact predictions over the singularity based only on the scale-invariant law of evolution t* ~ 2000-2050 before the singularity is impossible.
Examples of post-singular troubles:Post-singular evolution Depletion of mineral resources → closed-circuit production Depletion of fossil fuels →+ What may be a base for renewable energy sources, predictions? thermonuclear energy+ The singularity is a region of Environmental protection → concentration of crises. general humanization, possible prohibition of+ If the humankind survives after experiments on any animals, the singularity, all crises must O Other prohibitions (web etc.) be compensated. The rate of exploration of outer space in XXI has slowed down+ Numerous of compensators dramatically compared to the must be supported XX century → permanently after the humankind will be restricted by mainly planetary evolution singularity point → during a number of decadesSUCH A LIFE IS NOT EASY! or even more .
Information crisis (S. Lem) and the future of science. ( (Is the future civilization a civilization of science?)+ Progressiveness is limited in time We should expect signs of a for any evolution factor. The law crisis in the science. of leadership change.+ The science is a typical progressive S Stanislav Lem (1963) factor of the evolution: + Each solved problem bears a number - Science method is related to industrial of new unsolved scientific problems → revolution of XV-XVI century (resolution o of agrarian crisis of Middle Ages) + Number of problems grow exponentially, - The ancient mathematics and astronomy – but the number of scientists is restricted → the factor of surplus variety + There is a lack of scientists to study - The science became a leader in formation of all actual problems → the vector of evolution of the civilization + Disrupt of the front of science -+ Conclusion: the science could not be Information crisis eternal leader of the evolution (???) ( (predicted to the beginning of XXI c in 1963)+ Sedov’s law → a change the place of A sort of a lack of resources! science in the social history in the future.
Resource restriction and possible collapseofo funding of fundamental science (micro world and cosmos) During accumulation of the science knowledge about the Nature, new fundamental knowledge become more and more expensive. More and more perfect methods and innovations cannot solve the problem of the cost rising of the fundamental science. Examples: L Larger and larger accelerators of particles (like LHC) Larger and larger telescopes (cosmic and ground) L However the resources (number of scientists, money) are restricted from the top.
Positive feedback loop could produce collapse of funding Stabilization of the fundingof science implicates reduction Decrease of funding of the amount of discoveries implicates further reductiondue to increase of mean cost of the amount of discoveries of one discovery Positive feedback Collapse of loop funding Reduction of the amount of Decrease of interest of the discoveries implicates society to the fundamental decrease of interest of science implicates decrease the society to the fundamental of funding of science science Crisis of loss of interest to the science
Mathematical model of the dynamics ofscience. Step 5 years recurrent model.
Predictions of the model (January 2006)The absolute funding of science increases but the upper level is restricted.The number of discoveries increases due to funding increasing, but then begin to decrease due to increasing of the cost of one discovery.There is interval of time where the funding increases but the number of discoveries decreases.The final collapse of funding (near t ~ 500) is a result of positive feedback loop
Number ofpapers per year1817-2010 1817 2010 http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/03/best-science-maps?pid=1052 - from Mhamed el Aisati
After 2006the number ofpapers decreasesfor the first time inall science history.But funding ofscience increases USA science funding http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf11313/
The dynamics of electronic papers(arXiv, http://arxiv.org/ )
Increasing of funding of science A paradoxical result: increasing of A practical example: funding implicates more early collapse Freezing of funding of SSC collider of funding of science with almost the same in USA and particle physics on total sum of results as for lower funding. circle collidersIncreasing of funding of science brings the future closer and makes it more safe.
Could Artificial Intelligence (AI) compensate the crisis of science? = Information crisis (Stanislav Lem) = Crisis of loss of interest to the science = Resource crisis of science Could AI-robots compensate a lack of number of alive scientists? Could AI grow knowledge instead of study of nature with real experiments? ...........
A prediction that AI will exceed human mind in all parameters is basedThe Moors law and AI capabilities mainly on Moors law. 1. A question: Is the estimation of brain’s rate correct? An amoeba has comlicated behavior, but it has not neurons at all. The amoeba’s thinking is molecular, whit is the rate? 2. Actually the Moors law provide only necessary but not sufficient condition for AI to exceed human mind in all parameters.
За прошедшие 15 лет «разум» наших The «mind» of our computers wasэлектронных вычислительных машин improved million times during the lastулучшился в миллион раз... В течение 15 years... A new improvement ofнескольких следующих десятилетий computers «mind» no less than aследует ожидать увеличения number of thousand times moreхарактеристик «разума» машин еще should be expected within the nearestпо крайней мере в несколько decades. The «mind» of such computersдесятков тысяч раз. «Разум» таких will definitely overcome the humanмашин по основным параметрам mind in basic parameters.будет заведомо превосходить разумчеловека. И.С. Шкловский, 1975 I.S. Shklovsky, 197537 years have passed! An improvement about million times since 1975 took place. Where are the expected computers to overcome human mind?
What is a source of mistake in predictions? The necessary and sufficient condition for computers to overcome human mind in all respects is sufficiently fast and powerful hardware (Moor’s law) together with software that can reproduce human’s mode of reasoning.But software is much more conservative than hardware.
maxima — one of the better systems of analytical computing now. A classical AI system (heuristic programming). Was written in 1972, 40 years ago. Computer power was improved more than one million times. Many other contemporary systems of analytical computing have same core.Microsoft Word — windows version was written in 1989, 23 years ago. Computer power was improved about 105 times. No changes in main functions of the Word system up to now. The main system of documents preparation in the world now.Computer translators from foreign languages — now are almost so feeble as at the beginning of 1990th were Computer power was improved about 105 times after 22 years.
Main AI technologies: •Neural network All are known since •Heuristic programming late 1950-th - early 1960-th •Expert systems (more than 50 years no essential news) •Evolutionary programmingThere is hard stagnation in the field of AI programming ideas. It is unknown what is the human’s understanding. Nobody know exactly what problem should be solved to reproduce human’s understanding. A problem could not be solved if it was not formulated.
What is a source of troubles? •A computer operates with information. •A man operates with meanings. •It is supposed by default that human meanings may be represented in information terms. •But nobody proved that human meanings actually may be represented in information terms. One possible counter-example: If meanings are represented in brain by quantum states (not classical bit-like states) than meanings are not represented in information terms, since such states have not properies of information: - information is something that can be copied (duplicated) - quantum states is something that cannot be copied due to no-cloning theorem of quantum theory. Quantum state is not information.Real situation might be (and possibly is) even much more complicated
Rodger Penrose’s no-go theorem for AITheorem: The rough idea of proof:Any finite computer system constructed The theorem is similar to the Noether’swith usage of any known physical incompleteness theorem. A finite computer system is describedprinciples cannot reproduce some like a finite system of ‘axioms’.special mathematical capabilities of Then there exist Noether’s propositionsa human mind. that may not be deduced in the system but can be understood by aCorollary 1: human mind.Operation of human mind is based onunknown physical principles Nobody could predict when and whetherCorollary 2: the new required principles will beTo reproduce or overcome human mind discovered. Therefore nobody could predict when a computer couldwith computer one should discover some overcome human mind.new physical principle(s) and construct a‘computer’ system based on it. The collapse of fundamental science funding might prevent the discoveryPenrose’s hypothesis: new unknown of this new principles at all.principles related to quantum gravity.
Contemporary direction of evolution of AI is not at all one to overcome human mind in all respects.Rather, the actual direction is to integrate the humankind into one unit information system.AI is only an instrument in man’s hands in this context.The acivements in this direction are actually huge: - online-communications and virtual societies - fast search and indexing of information in the web - direct network democracy become compete with usual representative democracy “Towers and the Moon” metaphor
My private opinion:AI alone may not overcome possible crisis of science. It may be used only as a kind of an instrument. However, I can’t propose any absolutely firm way to overcome this crisis… But there are a number of other possibilities to discuss in this respect.