Saturday, March 30, 2013





Now that the God particle (Higgs boson) has apparently been found and made it to the media on Pi Day (!), how about we search for God himself or, at least, his nephew (and that’s a poetic license, but of course, since both I and Peter Higgs are atheists).



After watching the glorious idea of the song for π (which could go by the name 'the pi in piano') it hit me: how about the DNA of (i.e. generated by the sequence of numbers in) π, e and, eventually, other famous transcendental numbers*?

* See some HERE. Some consider e^π to be the most intriguing one.

I know, the DNA plays with 4 letters and 10 is not a multiple of 4. Of course we can be creative and find plenty of ways around that. Quite handy, for instance, would be to use the Base 4. To each digit (out of 0 – 1 – 2 and 3) we assign a letter. There will be 4! = 24 possible combinations.

Now I’m not saying we’ll be able to create some impossible entities such as, say, an honest politician, but could any (even only partially) meaningful DNA sequencing pop up? Of course that a combination of the meaningful DNA sequences of different transcendental numbers is also to be considered (remember, the intriguing e^π is a combination of two transcendental numbers).

P.S. I just saw the “song for π” some 2 hours ago, I did some quick online search and didn’t find anything close to the "DNA of pi" in the sense I've mentioned it. Someone let me know if it already happened, it looks like a fine brain teaser to me.
       2. And since I’m at it, how about April 13 (4/13 --> 413 = 314 backwards) being declared the Anti Pi Day? Hey, we can all use another paid holiday, this one celebrating the mathematically challenged (i.e., most of the) humans.

***

Added on May 2nd, 2013

(So I won’t have to write long emails to the academics/researchers that show interest in this matter)

This reverse engineering research, if intelligently done, can’t but spectacularly advance our knowledge. There’s an infinite set of numbers, DNA-wise, that make sense, and this is not some hypothesis or theory, but a FACT: just take into account the trillion of trillion of … trillion of life forms/living entities in the history of this planet, AND the ones that come to life every second. And counting …

Common sense also tells us that, at least within our universe, there’s an even larger infinite of numbers that would lead nowhere, life/intelligence-wise.

So where do we start? (A) Choose the lottery numbers for the last 30 years and see what, if anything, comes up? (B) Starting from a dubious (to say the least) premise* like in this story (and, hey, their research got funded!)? Or

(C) Looking for some particularly intriguing AND FUNDAMENTAL numbers? Remember, we’re trying to create life, the more intelligent, the better.  The Fibonacci series, so much associated with life, should also be taken into account.

And speaking about life we can’t but remember the fine-tuning of the universe issue. Plenty of glorious fundamental constants (although not all of them have enough digits for us to play with). But the transcendental numbers have all the digits we need and then some.

OK now, we cannot – as of right now -- process all the π’s digits (or any infinite display of digits, for that matter) to achieve the absolute knowledge, but if we can process enough numbers, for now, to create (A) the best ever guinea pig (I imagine a computer model, not some sort of entity to torture) for medical/lab research and/or (B) some cheap and abundant alternative energy and/or (C) detection and cure for any disease, and/or…. (N) and so on, that’d clearly be fantastic steps forward.

In my opinion if we could create an intelligent machine/entity able to create a smarter machine/entity we’ll be on our (asymptotically) way towards absolute knowledge. So how about we start with π …

… Although if I had the funding, the team and a state of the art lab I would check “n” fundamental numbers in parallel and constantly compare the results. I’d also check – within the resources and common sense -- if any mixing would lead somewhere. Remember: There are infinite combinations of numbers that DO lead somewhere, but we have to intelligently design a research method to improve the probability of hitting this infinite, rather than the larger infinite leading nowhere.


* Bottom line: I’m sure that my proposal is based on a by far more solid premise than the Moore’s Law: The fundamental constants/numbers are here, to rule our universe, for more than one reason (or, should I say, for ALL the reasons that, so far, we’ve been too blind, or inept, to figure out?)

*****
(added on 1/24/2016)

OK so the Comments section somehow vanished, just glorious, Google! I found an inept comment from some Tom O and there's no option to answer so I'll answer his (in red text) humble opinion here.

Tom O's comment:
"I' m sorry to break it to you but you suffer from a serious case of grandiose delusions. As a master student 
Artificial Intelligence I can tell you that your ideas are very poorly worked out and will simply not work. 
As a person that actually studies those matters, these ideas make as much sense as saying "Hey guys lets
 tie some ropes together and solve all our problems". It simply does not work that way. I motivate you to continue
 studying these interesting topics, but I suggest you put some actual work into them, and not waste the time
 of professors by these vague discovery channel inspired ideas."

Tommy boy: (1) I have more Intellectual Properties than you have years of school; (2) If someone (like me) is (way 
more) creative (than you) AND thinks BIG -- as opposed to small thinkers (like you) -- that doesn't make him 
"a serious case of grandiose delusions"; (3) I received offers for some of my Intellectual properties (how many offers 
did YOU have?) -- "4 Letters and a Tale", 4moola, DiCheetal, to name just a few -- which I declined cuz they were 
shitty offers (only $50,000 for my devastating masterpiece, the script, just cuz I have no name in H'wood?); (4) so 
let's come down to FiT-DNA which you so violently hate probably cuz AI and Kurzweil is all you fanatically believe
in (deluded small-brains like you can find a religion and gods in anything). Except you, nobody (PhD's included) 
said that FiT-DNA is bollocks since only the actual research can prove it wrong. Actually a PhD and University 
Professor and famous Researcher from a top University had an exchange of (over 20) emails with me regarding 
FiT-DNA, below are two samples (but you probably know better and your god, Kurzweil, is just infallible ..)




HOME               HOME     caviar4thought   RANT  CONTACT     © Copyright Dan Mimis

5 comments:

  1. Is this the craziest idea ever? What if this research will create the Devil, God or any other monster in between?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mirela, thanks for your comment.

      1. The idea might seem crazy indeed, but as Einstein put it, “If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.”

      2. Monsters aside, how about we’ll discover some good entity, way more evolved than us (or, at least, how to communicate with him)? Or some exotic new source of energy that will allow a car to drive 2,000 miles with $2 investment and 0 (zero) pollution.

      Delete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I' m sorry to break it to you but you suffer from a serious case of grandiose delusions. As a master student Artificial Intelligence I can tell you that your ideas are very poorly worked out and will simply not work. As a person that actually studies those matters, these ideas make as much sense as saying "Hey guys lets tie some ropes together and solve all our problems". It simply does not work that way. I motivate you to continue studying these interesting topics, but I suggest you put some actual work into them, and not waste the time of professors by these vague discovery channel inspired ideas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Umm, so Google lets me comment -- on MY Comment section! -- again. Tommy boy: so you're "a master student Artificial Intelligence"?!?! Well, how about you get an education (don't forget to also learn English) and then amuse your superiors with your inept comments, eh?

      Delete