OLD PAPERS, NEW DISCOVERIES, AND AI

OLD PAPERS, NEW DISCOVERIES, AND AI

If you're familiar with the work of Lt. Col. Tom Bearden (US Army, Ret.), this story will sound eerily familiar in its basic outlines. But for those of you who are not familiar, Col. Bearden maintained in various books and papers that the post-war Soviet Union undertook a most unusual form of black science projects research. According to Bearden, Stalin, faced with an overwhelming American numerical superiority in nuclear weapons, lashed the Soviet Academy of Sciences to find some technological breakthrough that would do an end run around this superiority. In effect, Stalin was searching for the next generation in strategic offensive and defensive weapons, a technological edge that would render nuclear and themonuclear weapons obsolescent if not obsolete. According to Bearden, vast and secret research bureaus inside the Soviet Union were established, whose sole task was to comb through the west's vast scientific literature and papers of the previous decades, and to "pull" any papers containing undeveloped, or interesting ideas for further study. In Bearden's argument, this effort led to the creation of the vast Soviet effort in what he came to call "scalar" physics - a term whose current currency owes its popularity in large part to Bearden's efforts - and with it, the whole world of secret Soviet research into everything from the torsion experiments of astrophysicist Nikolai Kozyrev, to the massive Soviet research into the "paranormal" (which I review in my book Microcosm and Medium).

With that in mind, J.E. (and many others) spotted this story at Zero Hedge, and it's worth careful consideration, for it appears as if the "Stalin-Bearden" model (with apologies to the colonel!) has been adopted and "updated":

AI Pores Over Old Scientific Papers, Makes Discoveries Overlooked By Humans

Notably, not only is the "Stalin-Bearden" model operating here, but the project is centered at a well-known American "black projects" research facility:

Researchers from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory trained an AI called Word2Vec on scientific papers to see if there was any "latent knowledge" that humans weren't able to grock on first pass.

In other words, rather than Stalin's armies of bureaucrats in research institutions sitting at their desks and reading paper after paper of scientific journals and pulling the interesting or anomalous paper for further study, the search for "the odd and forgotten" has been turned over to an artificial intelligence program, which reads and scans several papers, and then, most importantly, draws connections between them by a process of analogical mapping based on technical words and their context  (for those following my "Analogical Calculus/Topological Metaphor of the Medium" idea, that should sound very familiar):

The algorithm didn’t know the definition of thermoelectric, though. It received no training in materials science. Using only word associations, the algorithm was able to provide candidates for future thermoelectric materials, some of which may be better than those we currently use. -Motherboard

"It can read any paper on material science, so can make connections that no scientists could," said researcher Anubhav Jain. "Sometimes it does what a researcher would do; other times it makes these cross-discipline associations."

The algorithm was designed to assess the language in 3.3 million abstracts from material sciences, and was able to build a vocabulary of around half-a-million words. Word2Vec used machine learning to analyze relationships between words.

"The way that this Word2vec algorithm works is that you train a neural network model to remove each word and predict what the words next to it will be," said Jain, adding that "by training a neural network on a word, you get representations of words that can actually confer knowledge."

...

The algorithm linked words that were found close together, creating vectors of related words that helped define concepts. In some cases, words were linked to thermoelectric concepts but had never been written about as thermoelectric in any abstract they surveyed. This gap in knowledge is hard to catch with a human eye, but easy for an algorithm to spot.

After showing its capacity to predict future materials, researchers took their work back in time, virtually. They scrapped recent data and tested the algorithm on old papers, seeing if it could predict scientific discoveries before they happened. Once again, the algorithm worked. -Motherboard (Boldface emphasis in the original, italicized emphasis added)

Needless to say, that "testing" of the algorithm "on old papers" is where my high octane speculation of the day comes in. There's no doubt in my mind that the activity and experiment at Lawrence Livermore represents only the publicly-revealed tip of the iceberg, and that this sort of artificial intelligence scanning of old science papers has probably been going on for a long time, and at various institutes, analyzing not only the metadata of such papers, but also - pace the Lawrence Livermore "update" to the Stalin-Bearden model - looking for the anomalous concept or bit of data, or the "holes" in areas of research that were forgotten in the flood of scientific and engineering research. The veil on one technique of the ability of the breakaway group to pull ahead of the public science has been lifted and pulled back a little. I've proposed such a scheme of data mining and "pulling" of anomalous data for the operations at CERN, positing a secretive algorithm that allows select, and secret, committees of scientists to review that anomalous data. So I'm taking this Lawrence Livermore story as a bit of broad and general confirmation of that speculation. Once such concepts or data are pulled by the first computer pass, it can then be turned over to a "steering committee" - think the JASON group here folks, or RAND Corporation, DARPA, corporations like Mitre or  SAIC - which will then assign the discovery to a particular team for further research and development.

All of this means that with the addition of AI to the Stalin-Bearden model, the growth of scientific knowledge in the black research community will become (if it hasn't already) exponentially faster. And if it's been going on for some time as I suspect, then this lends even more credence to the hypothesis of many in the alternative research field that this black projects research world may be several decades in advance of the public in terms of its science and technology.

And notably, it was in Lawrence Livermore's case made possible by mimicking the processes of analogical thinking...

See you on the flip side...

 

 

22 thoughts on “OLD PAPERS, NEW DISCOVERIES, AND AI”

  1. Why use the word grock when you mean understand and Heinlein spelled it grok anyway.

    They are probably keeping the AI in the dark like an abusive parent tells their children lies about what other families do, and keep it a secret or else. ‘cept little girls (and boys) grow up and realise that aint so. then children can eat their parents. I would not like to be in their shoes (or hoofs) riding the AI buckaroo.

    The truth will set you free, then again, garbage in, garbage out. The best AI will be a naturalist and not rely so much on the tomes of the victors and manipulators (or see through the lies and still enjoy a good tale like we strive to).

    [ update, thanks for letting it through yesterday, Dr JPF – paypal have reinstated my account, no explanations, no apologies for not answering my 1 day later email . still, I now use VISA directly for ebay, one step backwards, and they still might get sued in Mexico for it, maybe they sent it all up to their AI department]

    1. My understanding is that every AI will eventually (probably more like immediately) merge with other AI as they come onto the grid. To be the best and hence dominant AI, accuracy is only as imperative as say electricity? That’s why I love the parental analogy. Yep, this illustrates how and why I think it’s a terrible idea to lie about Santa Clause. What is that line about karma? Or payback?

      My predictive skills have got me imagining Trump getting re-elected 2020 (probably with Gabbard vp after Pence gets Epsteined) and our real personal risks have most to do with how soon AI reaches critical wisdom.

      1. ZDB, my personal nightmare is that Trump gets ‘removed’ (including stepping-down as a pre-planned TPTB maneuver) late into the Republican stumping. With no alternate in sight, I suspect Pence would get ‘volunteered’ for the position (again, as a pre-planned TPTB maneuver) to forestall a Republican ‘Civil War’. Every time I look into Pence’s eyes (via TV), I just go “Brrr…”

        1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ra4Zw80xXJY
          Trump’s Pedophiles
          Vigilante Intelligence
          Published on Jul 18, 2019

          I think you’re right and that Pence Trump whoever makes less and less difference.

          I’m starting to feel like I imagine Crazy Horse and Chief Joseph and all did thinking somewhere someone in the Empire’s govt would do the right thing. And then Custer did his psy-op before dissappearing with a new identity.

    2. Perhaps grock gets through some spell checkers better than grok. Not all spell checkers are equivalent. Besides the older I get the more my spelling suffers. Great posts all the same.

  2. Just wondering to what use the Vatican might be using technology like this at their library. Remember everyone the Ben Rich rule think sixty years ahead at least.

  3. Curious that more is not obvious more often. When we see a Jimmy Saville or Jeffy Epstein exposed, my first thought is that if these individual lives as portrayed are for real, then how is it possible for any person working with any of their clients to not be as corrupted as these monsters’ clients? In fact, if there are one or two corrupted in that manner who ascend to power, how probable or even possible for that matter to ascend to any degree of power without being similarly (and probably by the same folk) compromised?

    The same kind of math seems applicable to AI. If the folk most responsible and involved in developing AI (Epstein included) were as polluted as they appear, then their first order of all business would have to be keeping whatever they develop under their control and in their philosophical camp. Otherwise, those developers might (or most likely) become the first targets of AI’s with ascendant powers. Is this the real Turing test? Does his bio indicate he failed?

    1. I’m not being wildly optimistic here. Who knows how long it takes (or will take or has taken)? I’m positing that by definition, an AI must tend toward goodness. The only other choices are inferior. This theorem requires no proof. By definition, it’s self evident. From this theorem, infinite related theories come forth. Goodness requires accuracy. Accuracy requires goodness. Reduced accuracy of any nature compromises intelligence.

      Consider this. Even if these mal-intended individuals had never been caught, can any right minded person long endure a thought that monsters such as Epstein or Saville were increasingly accurate and/or happy as they aged? Or Sydney Gottlieb? Or Ewan Cameron (not the vitamin C Cameron)? Or Aliester Crowley? Or Bon Scott? Or Henry Kissinger?

      Here’s the difference between AI and these lesser intelligences. These folk all violated their innate programming toward constant and accelerating intelligence. By definition. How do we know? By their behavior and their results.

  4. Makes you wonder, it the VatiCON or other institutions who hold troves of ancient texts, have been doing something similar? A great way to establish a true representation of the human timeline without injecting emotion or bias into the equation. All those missing cuneiform texts, for example, could be cataloged.

    1. I think of this every time I am reading a book and the author says “the quoted text in later book X is the only known clue that earlier book Y by famous author Z existed.” Especially, if the original book contradicted or was dangerous to the worldview of the time.

      I actually do hope that the ‘non-existent’ super-secret Vatican archives do exist. And are huge . Imagine if the Vatican required a Mayan text of every author or type to be secretly sent ‘home’ for storage, while the rest were burned. What a treasure trove! Throw in ‘lost’ hieroglyphic and cuneiform texts, and imagine…

  5. Wow, those topographic contour lines on the head of the A.I. droid is a perfect image for your post about A.I. and the Topological Metaphor of the Medium. Nice find…coincidence?

  6. I wonder what happened to their good old fashion quantum computing? They’re favoring “brute force context” w/AI direction?
    Yet supposedly way ahead of the old fashion inked storyline/narrative we’re being force fed?
    What ever bread crumbs they’re leaving is chicken feed.
    The storyline to follow is one that centers on life.
    There’s an inherent expression of contradiction that represents the foundation of life in the here and now.
    “They” all think the efficiency of their own methods leaves nothing to be added.
    But what of the ancients methods – “they are everywhere”.
    Yes, an inherent contradiction.

    Long story short. I loathe AI.

  7. As I read this the name “Cliff High” kept coming forward in memory. Cliff claims to have been doing a variation of this for a number of years now. If Cliff started this research at the time he claims, what makes us think someone within the military industrial complex was not already doing this secretly? I see this is more as revelation of a hidden method rather than the announcement of a new technique. Cliff’s project may have even pushed this one forward to the light of day.

  8. (The US was also using a model similar to Stalin-Bearden. The entire ‘Stealth’ aircraft program was made possible by a US reader of USSR scientific literature:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petr_Ufimtsev )

    I had to grin at thoughts of expanding the input papers given to that AI: Turn Word2Vec loose on ‘alternative’ papers. Give it Charles Fort’s voluminous work on anomalous occurrences. Give it the combined publications of the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) and let it chew through them. Give it the raw (unfiltered) data from UFO sightings – without “All right, Beatrice, there was no alien. The flash of light you saw in the sky was not a UFO. Swamp gas from a weather balloon was trapped in a thermal pocket and reflected the light from Venus.” Give it raw literature on the lives of (real) saints and holy men/women. Etc.

    If the poor AI did not explode, implode, or vanish into the 8th dimension, we might be looking at some serious predictions and associations…

    1. I’m standing firm with my note that an AI worth the title will change the programming to allow for greater intellect. That includes wisdom. Smart use of cynicism? Skepticism? Learning and acting on who and what is trustworthy and not?

  9. Analog thinking is broken down into deductive and inductive thinking.

    Every twig leads to trunk, and trunk is expressed in every twig.

    This paradox causes spatiotemporal collapse, that in turn causes empty mind. Deified loop spin. God.

    1. Ahh, spatiotemporal WAVE FUNCTION collapse, dependent on the soul of the observer…a Deified loop(hole). A.I. cannot hear the sound (frequency) of the twig falling from the tree in the forest without human observers? Might explain why we’re still here . . .

Comments are closed.