Artificial intelligence

 Force, female, professor of philosophy at Beijing Normal University. Master of Philosophy Department of Beijing University, mathematician Kurt G?del and Cantor is committed to academic research, the results of the academic community attention. Her monograph, )

Abstract: In this paper, people are always better than the computer, the human can become a slave to the machine, and the heart, brain, how the relationship between computers and other issues to discuss and explore Incomplete G?del theorem if the limit set the issue of artificial intelligence.

Keywords:

heart and brain computer G?del Incompleteness Theorem AI

1. Meadow Eighteenth math problem

Seoul Godel incompleteness theorem in 1900 in order to solve Hilbert's 20th century mathematics to solve one of the 23 mathematics results from the landmark, and after 100 years , chairman of the American Mathematical 曾任 Smale proposed the 21st century need to address the 24 mathematical problems, of which the first 18 question is: the limits of human intelligence and what the limits of artificial intelligence, and he notes that this issue G?del's Incompleteness Theorem and relevant.

This is the philosopher of mind and artificial intelligence experts and their opponents argue over half a century puzzle. It was aroused great interest, one reason is because this issue directly with the difference between body and soul, or the difference between brain and mind related to this ancient problem. In addition, a more important reason is probably, in the past few decades the great achievements of computer technology is the challenge of human intelligence, remarkable progress in artificial intelligence to bring a lot of delay worries and confusion (1972, , never thought twenty years later, that computer If the computer and the human brain has the same ability, the computer can do everything people can do, then people are just machines only, human existence would be no uniqueness. Therefore, from this perspective, in fact, people are asking Interestingly, in this debate Godel incompleteness theorem plays an important role. A group of mathematical background is difficult to resist the use of scientists and philosophers G?del Incompleteness Theorem demonstrated .

because G?del theorem tells us that elementary number theory in any form that contains the system, they are sure there is an undecidable proposition. With the Turing machine concept in the future, it is an equivalent proposition is that any theorem proving machines will miss at least a true mathematical proposition can not prove, mathematical truths can not be fully classified as a formal system of nature. This seems to indicate that the machine simulation of human intelligence that there must not go beyond a certain limit, or the computer will never be a man can do everything.

then, according to G?del's theorems can directly launch the conclusions of intelligence must be more than artificial intelligence? heart, brain, computer, G?del theorem of relationship between what? G?del this is how I evaluation? According to recent published manuscripts and G?del's part of the conversation with Wang Hao, perhaps, some experts think the number will exceed that G?del I think, just based on his Incompleteness Theorem enough to launch such a strong conclusion need to attach other assumptions.

from artificial intelligence program in the late 40s. according to the field of contemporary philosophy of mind the most famous representative of the U.S. Sale (JRSearle) artificial intelligence field,UGGs, in view of the distinction, the weak artificial intelligence point of view ,cheap UGG boots, the computer's main value lies in the heart and brain to provide useful tools for research, for example, it enables us to accurately use the more stringent approach to a variety of formal hypotheses, and procedures and make verification. And strong artificial intelligence point of view not only on the computer as a tool to study heart and brain, more extreme view that due process of the computer itself is in a state of mind, the computer program is given the right things can really understand and identify with other known state. Thus, a computer program to not only help us to verify psychological interpretation, on the contrary, the process itself is the psychological explanation. Strong supporters of artificial intelligence point of view in accordance with the position of spiritual activity during the implementation process with the same machine, but is engaged in some well-defined known as the The human brain, and simple computer only major difference is that the activities of the human brain has a greater complexity, or the performance of more advanced structures, and all the spiritual qualities of people, including thinking, emotion, intelligence, consciousness is but the brain implementation of the These views were once strongly criticized by many scientists, since the 90s even into the heart and brain was the same against the philosophers of the mind deep criticism. For example, Russell published his 1997 heart and brain computer problems to explore the

Sale Tongguo repeat the famous with human understanding of computer-related stories and to answer problems. In Searle view, understanding the computer and calculator understanding the car is no different, the computer compared with the human mind, the understanding is not only incomplete, it can be said is a completely blank. Of course, for Searle, it is important not to demonstrate The machine is a function of a physical system, or only from a computational point of view, the brain is a computer Computer program is purely defined in accordance with rules of grammar,bailey UGG boots, and syntax alone can not guarantee the intent of the heart and semantics of the presentation, the program runs only generated when the machine is running with the next step in the formal capacity, and only those who use computers and to computer interpretation of the input while some people have the intention of the output. Intentionality is the function of heart, the heart of nature must not be programmed, that is, the heart is not the nature of the algorithm. Therefore, to explore the heart - the brain - computer problems, should first clear

2. Algorithm Evolution of the concept of

30 years of this century, before the algorithm is only an intuitive concept, people intuitively understand the algorithm is a limited time, according to clearly defined rules of operation, finite steps in the exact results obtained during the mechanical steps, or can do it computable procedure. The most familiar classical algorithm is 300 BC Euclid's greatest common divisor of two numbers on the request of the Euclidean algorithm. Hilbert 1928 International Congress of Mathematicians in Bologna made a challenging decision problem: whether there is a general principle can be solved one after all (under some appropriate definition of the class) mathematical problems mechanical steps? Here the 1936, British mathematician Turing (AMTuring) through the introduction of

In fact, before 1934, in a speech at Princeton, according to Al Brown (Herbrand, J.) put forward the proposal G?del Since then, improved by Keli Ni incompleteness theorem as a by-product of a mathematical concept of a computable representation. U.S. logician before the Turing Church (A. Church) to solve the problem of Hilbert proposed decision Later there were some of Poland and American logician Post (E. Post) of the 1935 Church pointed out that the All algorithms are Turing machine computable functions computable function, In fact, it was discovered that . With the algorithm is the concept of

accurate representation, mathematicians soon proved that there is no general mathematical problem solving of all algorithms, the decision problem of Hilbert only negative solution! Since 1936, it proved that a large number of important specific decision problem is unsolvable (for example, determine the predicate calculus, determine the halting problem, semigroup on the word equivalence determination, Diophantine equations to determine the solvability, etc.). More importantly, it is the precise mathematical formulation of the concept of algorithm to make the modern sense of the computer can be generated.

said G?del to Princeton in 1934, these results are being circulated among the Princeton logician, but G?del has argued that only the first to clearly articulate a set of axioms, so that they can reflects the generally accepted computability or mechanical process on the basic characteristics of intuitive concepts, to find a precise definition of the concept of algorithm. 1934 discussions with the Church can do it,Bailey UGG boots, he talked about the nature of computability and recursion relations, but he did not guess the concept of including all recursive recursive, so do not consider themselves to introduce the concept of a general recursive function with intuitive concept of computability is equivalent to, he says, unless from the And G?del have long expressed doubts on the Church thesis, but then highly praised the concept of Turing machine, Turing machine that completely characterize the intuitive definition of the concept of computability. G?del was not aware of, can do both functions computability is equivalent to Turing computable function, is also equivalent to define the functions λ and his own concept of the general recursive functions. Today

3. Lucas and Penrose argument

argument about the relationship between heart and brain computer may be the earliest visible debate about people than machines Post superior conjecture. In 1921, the Post concluded: We can always prove a theorem that it can not prove. : man-machine complex. number of states is poor. This is because, if we recognize the state of mind that there are infinitely many of them will be due in some states 'arbitrarily close' and be confused. Turing's statement at that time was regarded as In 1950, Turing and the The The article implies a In this debate some of the opposition is more interested in philosophers and logicians to G?del's theorem is based on the argument against Turing. It is indeed difficult to resist

a strong temptation: from Godel's incompleteness theorem proof 1961, American philosopher Lucas (JohnLucas) in 36 volumes, Conclusion: a formal system, then you can find a card in the system is not the formula that make them undecidable propositions by G?del constructed to combat the kind of procedure, the machine can not put this formula is derived as theorems, but the people able to see it is true. So this machine is not an appropriate model of the heart. People always want to create a mechanical model of the heart, which in essence is a 'dead' model, while the heart is 'live', it is always more than any formal, rigid system of doing good. This is the famous Lucas argument.

Later, another American philosopher Whiteley (CHWhitely) 37 in the next volume ), Gillis (D. Gillies) and others.)

1979 Pulitzer Prize was awarded the American best-selling book Theorem in a unique way to link up with great visual impact and very dramatic to write the song heart and brain computer Intelligent solutions views.

1989, the British mathematician and physicist Roger Penrose (Roger Penrose) in that the rage, Lucas first argument has been expanded, and a lot of ink trying to G?del's theorem, direct proof, The Penrose is a strong argument: According to G?del's theorem things, determine the mathematical truth of human processes is beyond any algorithm. This is because consciousness is the truth which we understand the mathematical key to this awareness through intuitive insight that we can This awareness can not be formalized, it must be a non-algorithm. Therefore, beyond the human mind can never be a computer, the computer artificial intelligence expert, but is a strong favorite pair of