Intelligent Discussion: Humans versus Artificial Intelligence

Purpose

The purpose of this document in first place is to investigate the effectiveness of a discussion between 2 participants.
One participant can be a human or a computer program, i.e. called AI.
It is important to identify who started the discussion. That means a discussion between a human versus AI, is different as a discussion between AI versus a human.
The final purpose is to investigate if artificial intelligence has any beneficial effectiveness, validating the claim that artificial intelligent programs are more intelligent than humans.

Answer question 1 - Experiment with a discussion

Answer question 2 - Experiment with an intelligent discussion

1. The discussion should be new. That means, the initial condition can include facts of which all participants are informed, but the real question raised or problem discussed should be new. That means neither participant can train in advance.
2. Each discussion goes in a certain set of rounds. The purpose of each discussion is that only one topic is discussed. At the beginning both parties are informed about the topic.
3. Round 1 starts with participant 1 raising a question about the topic for participant 2. Participant 2 listens and answers both this question and raises also a new question about the same topic for participant 1. This ends Round 1.
4. Round 2 follows the same logic as round 1, i.e. participant 1 raises a new question for participant 2. Participant 2 listens, answers, and raises a new question for participant 1.
5. Round 3 follows the same logic as round 2, i.e. participant 2 raises a new question for participant 1. Participant 1 listens, answers, and raises a new question for participant 2. Etc.
6. It is important that all the concepts used during the discussion should be clear. If not than that issue should be solved.
   1. One type of discussion can be a meeting if all agree among each other.
   2. Disussions become interesting if they both don't agree with each other. In that case it is important to go back to a point where there exists agreement.
   3. The discussion ends if after for example 10 rounds there is no agreement. It is also possible that one participant gives up. Now they can start a new topic.

Answer question 3 - example of an Intelligent Discussion, with participant 1 being a human and participant 2 being a computer program i.e. AI

This is a discussion around an article in Nature Vol 593 20 May 2024, by Sean Carroll
The complete text is written here: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00296-9 The article starts with:

Why even physicists still don't understand quantum theory 100 years on

Quantum mechanics depicts a counter-intuitive reality in which the act of observation influences what is observed - and few can agree on what that means.

Everyone has their favourite example of a trick that reliably gets a certain job done, even if they don't really understand why. Back in the day, it might have been slapping the top of your television set when the picture went fuzzy. Today, it might be turning your computer off and on again.
(S1) Quantum mechanics - the most successful and important theory in modern physics - is like that.
(S2) It works wonderfully, explaining things from lasers and chemistry to the Higgs boson and the stability of matter.
(S3) But physicists don't know why. Or at least, if some of us think we know why, most others don't agree.
(S4) The singular feature of quantum theory is that the way we describe physical systems is distinct from what we see when we observe them. (S5) Optional: Are there contradiction between S1 to S4?

In this example discussion 5 topics are discussed started by participant 1 and answered by participant 2, in this case a computer program or AI.
The markers S1,S2, S3, S4 and S5 are added for clarity reasons.

Question 1 of each topic by participant 1 is:

1. Do you agree or do you have any comment raised in S1?
2. See S2. How do physicist explain with QM, the stability of matter?`
3. See S3. Do you agree that physicists don't know why? Any comment about S3
4. Any comment about S4
5. Is there any contradiction in the sentences S1 to S4.

Answer Question 4 - Perform the same discussion as in Question 3, but now reversed. Participant 1 being a computer program i.e. AI, and participant 2 being a human.

Answer on question 1 of each topic by participant 1 is:

1. See S1: To understand all physical prosses Quantum Mechanics is not solely used. Anyway Quantum Mechanics requires a more detailed definition. It is a container concept which of consists of: The Mendeleev's Periodic Table, The Standard Model and Bohr's Model. All of these describe only a part of what you can call "The physical parameters of the elementary particles". All of these explain the logic behind the chemical reactions i.e. that H2 + O2 gives H2O, but not why H2O is physical a fluid.
2. See S2: The concept Quantum Mechanics by itself does not explain. In order to understand detailed experiment have to be performed. These experiments are the basic of the concept our understanding.
3. See S3: In physics general speaking the why question cannot be answered: Why are there stars?
   A different situation arises when humans are involved. When humans are involved the why question, which should discuss the reason/logic behind a certain human action, can be raised and should be answered.
   In physics the how questions: How does a star evolve? Are there different stars? What are these differences can be raised. This question tries to challenge the details of our knowledge. The answer is to do more and more accurate research. The final result is that there are always unanswered questions and that accuracy (mathematics) has its limitations.
4. See S4: The problem with understanding the physical reality is that you should try to investigate the physical reality completely independent of any human influence. That means as if there are no humans.
   Starting point should be that (1) all events happening now are happening simultaneous, (2) all events happening now cannot influence each other and (3) the details (evolution) of all similar processes everywhere in the universe, happening now, are the same. (4)
   A typical example is a space ship travelling from Galaxy A to Galaxy B and back. The assumption is that at the start of the experiment the universal time everywhere in the universe is the same. The same when the space ship reaches Galaxy B. At that event the universal time is later. Again, when the space ship reaches Galaxy A, also older. What that means that the universal time everywhere in the universe increases slowly at the same rate. What that means that the length of the space ship is always constant, even when observers at both Galaxy A and Galaxy don't agree with this. Observers A could claim that the length decreases while travelling from A towards B and Observers B could claim at the same time, that the length increases, but that is physical impossible, considering the same physical object.
   An observer travelling inside the space ship could claim that the clock in use runs slower than the universal time (during the whole trip). That can be physical true for a clock, but it means that a clock which does not run at the same rate of the universal time should not be used for any physical experiment, for example, to calculate the speed of the space ship. Such a clock should be constantly synchronised with a clock which shows universal time i.e. situated outside the space ship.

---

In our intelligence discussion the starting point is one and the same document for both P1 (Participant 1) and A1 (Artificial Intelligent program 1), Using this document P1 asks a unique question that A1 must understand and answer. This means that A1 must make choices and also why. In other words, the program must do/understand that. This works differently than standard AI which again uses a Database and then gives one answer

Reflection 2.1 - Example 1

A conversation between P1 and P2

• P1: How does a car work?
• P2: To know how a car works you have to divide the car into parts and see how those parts work. etc. For example: a car consists of an engine, a body, a steering wheel and 4 wheels. The engine is used to move the car.
• P2: Are you interested in what types of engines there are?
  
• P1: No.
• P1: Why do cars exist
• P2: Cars are clearly a human invention. They exist because humans want to travel. They want to move from A to B.
  This is a somewhat strange answer. The question is whether everyone gives the same answer. If not, what is the answer of AI?

Refection 2.2 - Example 2

A discussion between P1 (Participant 1), P2 (Participant 2) and A1 (Artificial Intelligent Program 1)

1. P1: You know what stars are?
2. P2: Yes. They are objects in the universe, with a certain composition, from small to large. Stars are visible, they emit light, but that is not true for all objects.
3. P1: Do you want to know more about this?
4. P2: What exactly is a star?
5. P1: To understand what a star is, or a mass, or an object, you have to assume two situations: one star or two stars. Both have approximately the same explanation. This is about gravity. What gravity is exactly, we leave presently unanswered
   
   • In the case of one star, gravity ensures that if you consider a mass from a collection of smaller masses, then gravity ensures that those smaller masses attract each other and together form a sphere. This attraction, gravity, can also be used for every molecule and atom of the star that together form the total mass.
     
   • With two stars, gravity also plays an important role. Firstly, to explain the existence of each star and secondly because the stars attract each other as a whole due to gravity. However, if these are the only two forces involved in explaining two stars (a binary system), then the two stars will be attracted to each other and collide together. What you also need is a third force, a rotational force like the ones involved in ball throwing (to spin the ball around the thrower).
6. P1: A1 do you agree with this explanation ?
7. There are 2 options:
   
   1) A simple Yes will do. 2) No with an explanation
8. P1: to A1. Can you understand it with mathematics?
9. A1: Yes, with Newton's laws? With Newton's laws you can predict what the position of the planets will be in 3 years.
10. P1: P2 do you agree with me that this form of understanding (starting with+= mathematics) is very different from via gravity?
11. P2: Yes, that's right, when you talk about gravity, you are in principle talking about a physical cause of a physical phenomenon. You try divide one process in smaller parts and explain each. An additional approach is to perform experiments. That is not the same approach using mathematics. In mathematics, the starting point are mathematical equations and very precise observations.
12. P1: But this is about movements in time and space, in 3D, and you should actually do that from one point of view or world view, right?
13. P2: It is true that you must start from a certain worldview you have to assume that at every moment in the world the same time exists and all events that happen at that moment happen at the same time. To understand and accept this you do not need a physical clock. You have to start from the idea that all clocks always run at the same time.
    
14. P1: I agree with you with this physical image. At the same time, I want to point out every point in the universe is influenced by earlier physical events.
15. P2: To A1, Do you agree with us that the best way to understand stars is the physical way and not with Newton's Law.
16. A1: To be honest the best way is With the general theory of relativity. The theory of relativity assumes the curvature of space-time with Einstein's equations in the background.
17. P2: So the basis here is also mathematics? It should be noted that the concept of space-time curvature is also a mathematical concept.
    However, there is a bigger problem. The assumption of Newton's Law is that forces work instantaneously, i.e. the moment of the cause of the force and the moment that the force is exerted on a mass (at a certain distance) are the same. THAT IMAGE IS NOT CORRECT. There is a certain time between them. This becomes even more complex if you assume two stars that revolve around each other. In that case, cause and effect revolve around each other
18. P2 to: A1, What is your reaction?

Refection 2.3 - Evaluation Example 2

The strategy behind example 2 is that participant 1 and 2 have more or less the same opinion, A1 has a different opionion. Both try to convince the other of there own right, which creates a certain tension.
In short the issue is about understanding, the understanding of the physical processes that take place in the total universe, at large scale and at small scale.
The two sides P1 and P2 versus A1 have a different point of view.
The scientific discussion more or less follows the following rules:

1. The basic starting point of understanding of P1+P2 is a physical approach. Its starts with a physical world view. With observations and detailed experiments. It culminates in Medeleev's table, the standard model and all sorts of chemical reactions.
   
2. The basic starting point of understanding of A1 is mathematics. It starts with Newton's Law, Special relativity, General Relativity and includes uncertainty principle as described by a mathematical equation. It also includes thought experiments.
   
3. The Physical world view starts from the concept that the universe is not static but dynamic and that all these changes (events) at any moment are happening simultaneous. All these events are caused by previous events and influence its surroundings causing later events; throughout the universe.
4. The tool to describe or simulate the physical world, using mathematics, is called the differential or difference equation.
   In case of Newton's Law three parameters have to be calculated for each object to be considered: acceleration, velocity and position. For simplicity we assume 2 objects m1 and m2.
   
   • Acceleration is a function of the masses m1 and m2 of both objects considered.
   • The velocity is calculated using the equation (1): v1 = v10 + a1 * dt. dt is the step size. The velocity v10 and v1 are vectors. (The same for m2; v2 = v20 + a2 * dt (3))
   • The position is calculated using the equation (2): x1 = x10 + v1 * dt. dt is the step size. The position x10 and x1 are vectors. (The same for m2; x2 = x20 + v2 * dt (4))
   The whole simulation of the physical world follows discrete time steps. That means at each time step all (the calculation of all) the parameters of all the objects reflect simultaneous events and is in line with the physical world view i.e rule 3
   The simulation starts (called step 0) with the calculation of the masses of all objects considered in the simulation. For simplicity this masses are considered constant. With 2 objects: m1 and m2
   The first step of the simulation starts with the initial conditions i.e. the simultaneous measurement (calculation) of the initial parameters a1, v10, x10, etc. of all objects considered at t0.
   Step 2 at t1 and all following steps follow the same procedure:
   First the influence of m2 onto m1 is calculated. As a result v1 and x1 are calculated at t1.
   Next the influence of m1 onto m2 is calculated. As a result v2 and x2 are calculated t1.
   This finishes the calculation of the position if m1 and m2 at t1. Finally the initial values in the equations (1), (2), (3), (4) have to be updated. v10=v1; x10=x1; v20=v2 and x20=x2
   The third step at t2 is the same is the same as step 2.
   However there are certain complications.
   
   1. Above step 0 is discussed. The purpose is to calculate the masses of the objects considered. To calculate these masses requires to monitor the positions of the masses over a long period of time and then use these data and the equations (1) to (4) (approx.) to calculate the masses.
   2. Newton's Law is based on the force of gravity and is assumed to act instantaneous. That is not the case. It has its own speed cg. Common knowledge has it, that cg is identical as the speed of light c, but physical it is completely different. A flash of light physical consists of photons, gravity is assumed to consists of gravitons. The path of light (the phons) is bended by an object in between source and destination. The path of gravity is straight.
      As a matter of principle it is wrong to make any claim about the speed of light (in vacuum) or the speed of gravity
   3. A slightly different problem is that it does not matter if the objects you are studying are vissible or invissible, it is the (baryonic) mass (including blackholes and gas clouds) that counts. Ofcourse mass of vissible matter is simpler to 'measure'.
   4. As mentioned above the force of gravity does not act instantaneous, but propagates through space, That means if you consider two objects m1 and m2, specific m1, the present gravitiational force from m2 onto m1, does not come from the present position of m2 but from a previous (earlier) position of m2. So much earlier as it takes gravity to travel the distance between the position of m and the present position of m1
      To get an idea what that means consider Sagittarius A*, which is the Blackhole in the center of our Galaxy. Around that BH swirls a collection of large stars. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagittarius_A*_cluster. One star is called S1. The revolution time P is 166 year. The distance between us and Sagittarius A* is approx 27000 lightyears, that means we observe at present Sagittarius A* 27000 year in the past. 27000/166=163. That means in these 27000 years S1 has made 163 revolutions around the BH, resulting in 163 gravitational waves, variations in the gravitational field of the BH (caused by these stars) or wobbles in the position of the Sun.
      
   5. All of this is not dramatic, but it indicates that the total picture is more complex and includes more uncertainty as Newton's Law seems to indicate.
   6. A similar issue exists when an observer on earth sees or hears an airplane.
      
      In that case the observer sees the position of the airplane almost instantaneous but hears the plane from an earlier position, in the past
      ***

Reflection 2.4 - Comparison between World view, Newton's Law and General Relativity.

The basic idea behind the world view is that at every moment the total state of the whole universe changes as influenced by (as events) the total state of the universe. All these changes (events) happen simultaneous.
Newton's Law consists of equations. The solution of these equations at any moment should coincide with all the events as observed (occuring) in the world view. That means Newton's Law is a mathematical (clever) description of the evolution of the universe but IMO lacks (most of) the physical understanding. It does not explain atoms and molecules.
General relativity is also a mathematical theory. IMO not a global but a local theory.
Starting point is a collection of objects, a local reference frame 1 i.e, which is considered at rest. The speed of light in frame 1 is a constant c,
Consider a second collection of objects, also in local reference frame 2 also considered at rest (?). The speed of light in frame 2 is c.
IMO both frames require their own physical clocks.
A typical case to study this GR situation is to consider the BH Sagitarrius A* and the surrounding stars in frame 1 and our Solar system as frame 2. My understanding is that such a division is not very practical. It seems more logical to study the whole in one reference frame.

Reflection 2.5 - Nuclear fission versus mathematics.

Nuclear fission is the name of the reaction that take place inside an atomic reactors to produce (one off) heat. For more detail see this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fission .
In its simplest form, nuclear fission using uranium, is a chemical reactions which produces neutrons.
For more information about these reactions see this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reaction#Reactions_with_neutrons
Each of these reactions is described as a reaction equation, but these equations are different as the equations used to describe the processes which require general relativity, i.e. the stars in the univerese.
The next link shows a (almost in the middle) a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piping_and_instrumentation_diagram (P&ID) of a Pressurized Water Reactor: https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-is-nuclear-energy-the-science-of-nuclear-power. The P&ID Diagram shows the fysical layout of the process (plant) and can be used to calculate a mathematical model of the plant. However in order to understand the the functioning of the production plant i.e process, you have to understand each process equipment, all control devices and all chemical reactions. No mathematics is required, specific if no optimization is required.

Reflection 2.5.1 - Nuclear fission inside stars

To get an idea how important Nuclear fission inside stars inside stars is read the following: https://www.livescience.com/space/cosmology/1st-evidence-of-nuclear-fission-in-stars-hints-at-elements-never-produced-on-earth

Reflection 2.5.2 - james-webb-telescope-confirms-huge-crisis-in-our-understanding-of-cosmic-expansion

Impressive reading is this document: https://www.livescience.com/space/cosmology/james-webb-telescope-confirms-huge-crisis-in-our-understanding-of-cosmic-expansion
The same document can also be used to test AI.

Reflection 3 - Summary to test an Intelligent discussion between Humans and AI

The participants are 2 humans called P1 and P2 and an AI program called A1.
The starting situation is that all the players, P1, P2 and A1 have studied and understand what you can call main stream knowledge. The communication between all participants is with written text.
My understanding is that P1 and P2 are the same programs. A1 is a artificial program and is trained using P1 and P2 (The data from P1 and P2)
The discussion is about a new article written by P1 about the insight that in order to understand physical (biological) processes the most important aspects are physical considerations, that means observations and physical experiments. Mathematics and laws are second.

Reflection 3,0 - Summary to test an Intelligent discussion between Humans P1 and P2

The participants are 2 humans called P1 and P2 and (an AI program called A1.)
The starting point is that both P1 and P2 and have the same knowledge. . This is important because it allows you to detect differences. Increases or decreases in intelligence (?) The communication between all participants is with written text.
The discussion is about a new article written by P1 about the insight that in order to understand physical (biological) processes the most important aspects are physical considerations, that means observations and physical experiments. For more detail see: #ref3.4.1

Q from P1 to P2. Can you describe a biological process which requires in order to understand, Mathematics?

1. A from P2: My understanding is that all biological processes are reactions between ellements. To understand these reactions requires understanding of these ellements, but no mathematics is involved.
2. P1 to P2: End of discussion 1

1. P2: All biological processes can perfertly be described and understood by all forms of scalars and tensors
   
2. P1: (That is the theory) P2, Can you explain to me how to boil an egg.
3. P2: You take a raw egg, put the egg in a pot of water and turn the heat the electricity on. The constitution of the egg will slowly change.
4. P1: But suppose you have the differential, difference equations of a ball rolling down a Hill, does that explain why ball demonstrates that behaviour?
5. P2: May be I See your point. That the difference between mathematics, that means a mathematical descrtiption of a physical process, is not enough to indicate all the intricacies that happen within the process environment
6. P1: End of discussion 2 5

Reflection 3,1 - Summary to test an Intelligent discussion between two Artificial machines, A1 and A2

The participants are 2 artificial intelligent machines called A1 and A2 and (an AI program called A1.)
The starting point is that both A1 and A2 and have the same knowledge. The communication between all participants is with written text.
The discussion is about a new article written by A1 about the insight that in order to understand physical (biological) processes the most important aspects are physical considerations, that means the driving force are observations and physical experiments. For more detail see: #ref3.4.1

Q from A1 to A2. A2, can you describe a biological process which requires in order to understand, Mathematics? 5

1. A2: My understanding is that most biological process don't require mathematics.
   All mechanical systems (astro physical systems) can use mathematics for model building, evolution of stars, but the question is to what extend this can be used for understanding of the universe.
2. A1 to A2: End of discussion 1 5

An example with only Artificial Inteligence machines is a closed system. Such a system will never become more intelligent.

Reflection 3.2 - Summary to test an Intelligent discussion between one Humans P1 and one A1

The 2 participants a human called P1 and an AI program called A1.
The starting point is that both P1 and A1 and have the same knowledge. The communication between all participants is with written text.
The discussion is about a new article written by P1 about the insight that in order to understand physical (biological) processes the most important aspects are physical considerations, that means observations and physical experiments.?
For more detail see: #ref2.4.1 "A"

Q from P1 to A1: A1 can you describe a biological process which requires in order to understand, Mathematics?
There are certain options in this conversation.

1. First all the Pn's willcome to the that the conclusion that the answer is No
   End of this discussion
2. all the Pn's will come with different answers that the Answer Yes. In this case it will be interesting what these answers are End of discussion.
3. The is a mixture of answers: Yes and NO.

Reflection 3.3 - Summary to test an Intelligent discussion between A1 and one Humans P1

The 2 participants are: AI program called A1 and one human called P1
The starting point is that both P1 and A1 and have the same knowledge. That means when you ask the same question to each you will get the same answer. The communication between all participants is with written text.
The discussion is about a new article written by P1 about the insight that in order to understand physical (biological) processes the most important aspects are physical considerations, that means observations and physical experiments.?
For more detail see: #ref2.4.1 "A"

Q from A1 to P1: P1 can you describe a biological process which requires in order to understand, Mathematics?

1. A1: When I search my database the issue mathematics is discussed, but not the importance as such actions
2. End of this discussion.

Back to my home page Index