if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Discussion regarding the Outsider webcomic, science, technology and science fiction.

Moderator: Outsider Moderators

Post Reply
Bamax
Posts: 1040
Joined: Sat May 22, 2021 11:23 am

if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Bamax »

All technology is based on the accumluated knowledge of those before us.

Scenario: Human engineered offshoots designed so that they instinctually have various knowledge bases pre-downloaded in their brains as instinct.

If they so desire they know exactly what is needed to say... build a nuclear reactor, even if they only have sticks and stones in the forest



Grand scenario: Breed a thousand of these supermind guys and gals... with a working engineering knowledge of ALL known rocket science and theoretical rocket science... could they build stuff we have not already?



My guess is yeah!

Since they would be well aware of what has been done, they would be well prepared to improve on it. More than you group of average.... humans who have less memory overall.



They have a headstart.... and fictionally there is nothing preventing humans who made them from giving them compelling reason to tackle what challenges normal humans.

Namely.... do what they were made for or else!

They were not made to just.... take it easy.



I am fully aware of all the drama this would cause... but when has technology ever come about without struggle or drama?

User avatar
TerrifyingKitten
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2021 8:34 am
Location: about 3 feet behind you.

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by TerrifyingKitten »

A wise alien once said "superior ability breeds superior ambition".

gaerzi
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2020 5:14 pm

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by gaerzi »

So you make people with literal science infuse. That means they are born knowing a lot of stuff about physics and engineering. But to make them truly superior physicists and engineers than regular humans, you run into three problems.
  1. You can only give them innate knowledge of stuff you actually know. So their innate knowledge doesn't go past human learned knowledge.
  2. You did not give them superior cognitive capacity. As a computer analogy: you gave them a ROM chip with a big database on it, but not a better CPU.
  3. More importantly, all that knowledge they have from birth is knowledge they don't have to learn. And this means they do not need to learn to learn.
This last point is what's important. Learning is hard. Young children are driven to learn due to curiosity, but pretty quickly, once the average individual feels like they have learned enough to understand the world around them, intellectual laziness sets in and they stop caring about learning new things. There aren't that many people who crave learning for learning's sake. Your fictional people, who start life with enough knowledge to get a PhD right out of the womb, will not feel the need to learn more. And this will rob them of the discipline they need to develop so as to learn new stuff, what I mean by "learning to learn".

But supposing this issue of mental discipline is solved somehow. What you're achieving by giving them innate knowledge is really basically skipping 25 years of studying. So you could achieve the same effect with enhanced lifespan through delayed aging. Engineer people so that their childhood lasts so much longer, and they become adolescent at 40 and adult at 50 and get their midlife crisis at 100 with senility striking only once they're around 200. These folk will go far. A long childhood is key because that's when the brain is optimal at learning stuff.

Bamax
Posts: 1040
Joined: Sat May 22, 2021 11:23 am

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Bamax »

gaerzi wrote:
Sun Feb 13, 2022 9:41 am
So you make people with literal science infuse. That means they are born knowing a lot of stuff about physics and engineering. But to make them truly superior physicists and engineers than regular humans, you run into three problems.
  1. You can only give them innate knowledge of stuff you actually know. So their innate knowledge doesn't go past human learned knowledge.
  2. You did not give them superior cognitive capacity. As a computer analogy: you gave them a ROM chip with a big database on it, but not a better CPU.
  3. More importantly, all that knowledge they have from birth is knowledge they don't have to learn. And this means they do not need to learn to learn.
This last point is what's important. Learning is hard. Young children are driven to learn due to curiosity, but pretty quickly, once the average individual feels like they have learned enough to understand the world around them, intellectual laziness sets in and they stop caring about learning new things. There aren't that many people who crave learning for learning's sake. Your fictional people, who start life with enough knowledge to get a PhD right out of the womb, will not feel the need to learn more. And this will rob them of the discipline they need to develop so as to learn new stuff, what I mean by "learning to learn".

But supposing this issue of mental discipline is solved somehow. What you're achieving by giving them innate knowledge is really basically skipping 25 years of studying. So you could achieve the same effect with enhanced lifespan through delayed aging. Engineer people so that their childhood lasts so much longer, and they become adolescent at 40 and adult at 50 and get their midlife crisis at 100 with senility striking only once they're around 200. These folk will go far. A long childhood is key because that's when the brain is optimal at learning stuff.

It is not solved.... but enforced.

Humans: "You say you do not wish to put all the knowledge we loaded onto you to develop it further? That is NOT an option. Either you perform or else.... we both created you and can destroy you."

Rebellious Superminds: "Curse youuu!"

Humans: "Die!"

Superminds who value self-preservation more: "Alright humans, we will cooperate with uou." Meanwhile they would plot all the while to ensure their survival if humanity ever turned on them.

Their endgame would be a situation where humanity either cannot afford to destroy them or simply lacks the power to.

I can assure you that you do not want WW3 to occur with Superminds around.... as they would likely be prepared for such an eventuality and be ready to supplant human dominance now that they have a golden opportunity.

User avatar
Werra
Posts: 840
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:27 pm

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Werra »

Why would you ever imprint people with the specific knowledge to build reactors by instinct? Anyone in the position to follow up on that would also have access to books detailing the process. It wouldn't even help with improving upon old designs, as that requires an understanding of the scientific principles behind the materials and fission. These top level, executive brain functions are not in the realm of instinct.

Imagine you'd wanted to design a modern train, but your dummy grandparents gave your line the instinctual knowledge to build a coal train. You can build one of those without thinking. But an electric one? You' have to fight your subconscious and non verbalized assumptions at every step.

Like, what are you going to do with your "superminds" if during their adolescence somebody comes up with a more efficient way to generate power or some downside to their instinctual design becomes apparent?

gaerzi
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2020 5:14 pm

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by gaerzi »

Bamax wrote:
Sun Feb 13, 2022 10:33 am
It is not solved.... but enforced.

Humans: "You say you do not wish to put all the knowledge we loaded onto you to develop it further? That is NOT an option. Either you perform or else.... we both created you and can destroy you."
You're still stunting them by not letting them learn naturally and therefore not developing the aptitude for it.

If I tell you "flap your arms really fast until you fly... or die!" well I doubt you're going to actually manage to fly despite the threat. Human arms are terrible at being wings. So coercion isn't a magical problem-solver.

User avatar
Arioch
Site Admin
Posts: 4486
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:19 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Arioch »

The difficulty here is that the information capacity of DNA is far less than that of human brains; since DNA information capacity is limited by the amount that every cell can carry, whereas the amount of information in our brains is limited by the number of interconnections of the neurons. Using estimates from the Cosmos episode "Persistence of Memory," human DNA contains roughly 5 billion bits of information, whereas the number of bits represented by our neural interconnections is perhaps 100 trillion.

In order for the DNA of an artificial human to encode the knowledge of even a single human mind, the length of the DNA sequence would have to be increased by five orders of magnitude. Genetic operations (such as replication) would take ten thousand times as long, and mutations would be ten thousand times more likely. DNA isn't a good storage medium for science or technology. I think you would need to use some kind of artificial extension to the mind, like the "cyber-brains" in Ghost in the Shell. But I have my doubts whether that sort of brain-machine interface will really work, given the very different ways that brains and computers process information.

Bamax
Posts: 1040
Joined: Sat May 22, 2021 11:23 am

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Bamax »

Arioch wrote:
Mon Feb 14, 2022 5:27 am
The difficulty here is that the information capacity of DNA is far less than that of human brains; since DNA information capacity is limited by the amount that every cell can carry, whereas the amount of information in our brains is limited by the number of interconnections of the neurons. Using estimates from the Cosmos episode "Persistence of Memory," human DNA contains roughly 5 billion bits of information, whereas the number of bits represented by our neural interconnections is perhaps 100 trillion.

In order for the DNA of an artificial human to encode the knowledge of even a single human mind, the length of the DNA sequence would have to be increased by five orders of magnitude. Genetic operations (such as replication) would take ten thousand times as long, and mutations would be ten thousand times more likely. DNA isn't a good storage medium for science or technology. I think you would need to use some kind of artificial extension to the mind, like the "cyber-brains" in Ghost in the Shell. But I have my doubts whether that sort of brain-machine interface will really work, given the very different ways that brains and computers process information.
Well yes.... that is why suspension of disbelief allows me to enjoy certain telekinetic/telepathic aliens that just so happen to look expressive or cute.

User avatar
Cthulhu
Posts: 910
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Cthulhu »

The problem is manifold, actually:
1. DNA is primarily meant as a blueprint for the hardware, not the software, so to speak. This means that it contains a very basic set of rules what the hardware should or could be filled with. This enables the brain to be highly adaptable.
2. Information is not static, it updates much quicker than the lifetime of an individual, but how can you update a DNA in a living being?
3. Additionally, the amount of information also increases, so this would also need an ever-increasing size of the DNA.

Therefore, if given the ability to do so, it would be better to increase the number of instincts instead, and fine-tune them for the life in a high-tech society. We humans still have the mannerisms of our hunter-gatherer ancestors. All the other information should be stored in a dedicated device, the brain. At higher tech levels, the borders with artificial means of additional capacity would become less of a problem, until we reach a full integration.

User avatar
Arioch
Site Admin
Posts: 4486
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:19 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Arioch »

Cthulhu wrote:
Mon Feb 14, 2022 8:12 pm
1. DNA is primarily meant as a blueprint for the hardware, not the software, so to speak. This means that it contains a very basic set of rules what the hardware should or could be filled with. This enables the brain to be highly adaptable.
2. Information is not static, it updates much quicker than the lifetime of an individual, but how can you update a DNA in a living being?
Well, brains are a relatively recent evolutionary development, so genes can and do govern a lot of behavior. Also epigenetic mechanisms allow an organism to turn genes on and off, allowing for adaptation even within the life of an individual organism.

User avatar
Cthulhu
Posts: 910
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Cthulhu »

Arioch wrote:
Mon Feb 14, 2022 8:23 pm
Well, brains are a relatively recent evolutionary development, so genes can and do govern a lot of behavior. Also epigenetic mechanisms allow an organism to turn genes on and off, allowing for adaptation even within the life of an individual organism.
Those would contain a very limited set of instructions, merely some instincts. I doubt that it's possible to stuff the entire set of commands about how to build a nuclear power plant in there. At best, you could try and devise a networking bio-computer, where each cell, equipped with just a basic program, would function like a single neuron or microprocessor.

User avatar
Arioch
Site Admin
Posts: 4486
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:19 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Arioch »

Brains are certainly more effective higher-level control mechanisms than genes, but it's not accurate to say that genes are only blueprints for biological "hardware." Genes control very complex processes that build and operate our bodies, and there are Earth organisms without brains that have some very complex higher-level behaviors, and organisms with brains can have very high-level behaviors that are inherited "instinct."

For example, this episode of PBS Eons describes how the ability to spot snakes is hard-coded into primate genes.


User avatar
Cthulhu
Posts: 910
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Cthulhu »

Thanks for the video, genes can indeed do a lot. But we're still at the level of instincts, while Mr. bamax wanted highly advanced super-science. Although, I think that there are certainly a number of instinctive behaviors that could benefit science. Deactivate group biases, increase curiosity, encourage learning regardless of age, etc.

Bamax
Posts: 1040
Joined: Sat May 22, 2021 11:23 am

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Bamax »

Cthulhu wrote:
Mon Feb 14, 2022 9:00 pm
Thanks for the video, genes can indeed do a lot. But we're still at the level of instincts, while Mr. bamax wanted highly advanced super-science. Although, I think that there are certainly a number of instinctive behaviors that could benefit science. Deactivate group biases, increase curiosity, encourage learning regardless of age, etc.
For what it is worth... this video below kind of inspired the OP.

No human I know could get this right on his first attempt.... especially without a pen and paper or any preparation.

I do believe the 'skill set' for what the pufferfish does is hardwired, encoded into his instincts.

I seriously doubt he gets as any practice apart from times he fails to attract a female.


Demarquis
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2021 9:03 pm

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Demarquis »

This is an interesting idea, but I don't think that applying it to the physical sciences is necessarily the most effective way to utilize it's potential. As was pointed out, the hard sciences continually advance, and new knowledge is effectively shared across all of society, so anyone hardwired for a particular type of technology will become obsolete within a generation, or less. But social skills operate by a different dynamic: they tend not to advance very much over time, people vary considerably in their skills such that in any generation, only a few will display the best approach to building and maintaining productive relationships. If you hardwired a generation of kiddies with the best social skills that humans can display, you would improve the quality of society significantly within a very short period of time. Make it instinctive so that no one can cheat nor can a future generation "backslide" in a way that would undermine whatever progress we would have achieved by then. It's possible that in the future, especially talented individuals may exceed even the best of the current generation, so the occasional update might become advisable, but for the most part, no one will become "obsolete", and the benefits of the new social instincts should last for a considerable period into the future, if not forever.

Bamax
Posts: 1040
Joined: Sat May 22, 2021 11:23 am

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Bamax »

Demarquis wrote:
Tue Feb 15, 2022 12:20 am
This is an interesting idea, but I don't think that applying it to the physical sciences is necessarily the most effective way to utilize it's potential. As was pointed out, the hard sciences continually advance, and new knowledge is effectively shared across all of society, so anyone hardwired for a particular type of technology will become obsolete within a generation, or less. But social skills operate by a different dynamic: they tend not to advance very much over time, people vary considerably in their skills such that in any generation, only a few will display the best approach to building and maintaining productive relationships. If you hardwired a generation of kiddies with the best social skills that humans can display, you would improve the quality of society significantly within a very short period of time. Make it instinctive so that no one can cheat nor can a future generation "backslide" in a way that would undermine whatever progress we would have achieved by then. It's possible that in the future, especially talented individuals may exceed even the best of the current generation, so the occasional update might become advisable, but for the most part, no one will become "obsolete", and the benefits of the new social instincts should last for a considerable period into the future, if not forever.
What you propose is hard since that involves good behavior, which is more choice and nurture than nature.

I never limited the downloadble knowledge base to space travel tech, but another good 'download' would be multiple languages. Basic arithmitic is a given.

Demarquis
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2021 9:03 pm

Re: if Knowledge Is Power.... Could This Cause Science Breakthroughs?

Post by Demarquis »

"What you propose is hard since that involves good behavior, which is more choice and nurture than nature."

Ooooh, that's tricky. Depends on how you define "choice", which is harder to do in an objective manner than you might think (don't even ask me about "Freewill"). What is a choice? Computer science provides one answer, philosophy many others (some of which contradict each other, and all of them more nuanced than the CS one).

"Nature vs. nurture" is a complete misnomer. In every instance that I am aware of, research indicated that biological factors (which include, but are not limited to, our evolutionary heritage) and environmental factors (which include, but are not limited to, the effects of learning) interact with each other in a manner that aligns them toward a common behavioral outcome. They do not compete with each other. Most often, we learn to do those things that nature selected our ancestors to learn, depending upon the specific environmental triggers that each of us encounters during our lives.

Bottom line, productive social behavior is at least as ingrained in our genes as a proclivity toward technical science.

Post Reply