@Eatsbluecrayon Another demonstration would be to bring a chessboard to class, along with extra pieces, and have the class play chess with an AI of their choosing. They’ll get to watch with their own eyes as the AI fabricates positions and pieces.

This is especially useful because computers have been beating human opponents at chess for a long time now, so people know that chess is something computers can do. That an AI can’t indicates it is worse than its predecessors.

@jadedtwin @WhiteCatTamer @Eatsbluecrayon

If you don’t believe everything can be expressed in numbers then consequently you must believe there is some “magic” in which numbers are meaningless.

That simply isn’t the case. From the count of neurons firing, to their relations and positions: every “emotion” can be described with numbers.

Magic or numbers. That’s the choice.

Thus: language is math (numbers encoded).

@Eatsbluecrayon @jadedtwin @WhiteCatTamer @altruios

One would have to define what ”expressed in numbers” and ”described with numbers” mean. Is Pi a number? And if it is, does the symbol express it, or is it an expression for the inability to describe that function as a number?

But the main thing is this: Language has no fixed meaning. A symbol (like a word) is not one thing, but many. And it shifts.

Math doesn’t.

@jadedtwin @WhiteCatTamer @Eatsbluecrayon @altruios

I’m no mathematician, but language would be something like the n-body problem. In a sense it can be expressed as numbers, but it can’t be solved.