No LLM generated, heavily assisted/co-written, or otherwise reliant work.
Insufficient Quality for AI Content.
Read full explanation
Epistemological State: Speculative, but based on computational complexity theory and thermodynamic constraints.
Author's Note: I am responsible for the views expressed in this post. Large language models are involved in representation optimization, but all arguments are my own and have been reviewed line by line.
Note: The following topics originate from the opening chapter of my long science fiction work; this discussion focuses solely on ASI and "relative irreducibility."
【Observer-Class】Refers to humans or intelligent agents whose end-to-end verification capabilities are on the same order of magnitude for a given family of tasks—channel capacity / energy budget / representation bandwidth, etc.
1. Observer-Level Theory: ASI's apparent superiority over human intelligence does not stem from any epistemological or ontological privilege, but rather from the exorbitant cost of cross-level interpretation.
For any given observer class (e.g., humans or AGI), this manifests as "interpretive unreachability" under the upper limit of channel capacity and thermodynamic budget—even if it is correct in principle.
Relationship with "Vinci-style Uncertainty"
This provides a physical resource interpretation of Vinci-style uncertainty: unpredictability may stem from end-to-end bottlenecks in the characterization and verification process, rather than simply the limits of formal reasoning.
2. ASI's "NP → Engineering-Efficient Class Quasi-P Path" is merely a behavioral-level phenomenon for our family of observers, not an "absolutely irreducible" phenomenon at the complexity level.
2. Any theory T becomes operationally indistinguishable for observer class O if the evidence required to distinguish T from its competing theories (within a specified error tolerance ε) exceeds the verification bandwidth/budget of observer class O—even if it is falsifiable in principle.
* Computational irreducibility is a property of system-description pairs, while observer class is a relational property: it describes the gap between the verification bandwidth required by the theory and the physical limits of the observer.
A theory may be completely falsifiable in principle, but if the observer's end-to-end verification bandwidth is too narrow to capture the necessary data (within the error tolerance ε), then the competing theories are operationally indistinguishable for that observer-class.
Crux
The above explanatory framework can be considered valid if (i) AI performance continues to improve under reproducible evaluations, and (ii) the end-to-end verification and explanation burden grows faster than the verification capability of the observer class.
If such a stable state does not exist, then the above framework needs to be completely restructured.
Related Discussion
The above claims partially overlap with the discussion on thermodynamic budget, complexity, and falsifiability in LessWrong. My incremental advancement lies in treating “unpredictability” “apparent tractability” and “operationally indistinguishable” as different manifestations of the same constraint: namely, the upper limit of channel capacity and the thermodynamic budget for a given observer class.
Comments and criticisms are welcome, especially regarding whether this framework adds additional explanatory power or predictive insights.
Epistemological State: Speculative, but based on computational complexity theory and thermodynamic constraints.
Author's Note: I am responsible for the views expressed in this post. Large language models are involved in representation optimization, but all arguments are my own and have been reviewed line by line.
Note: The following topics originate from the opening chapter of my long science fiction work; this discussion focuses solely on ASI and "relative irreducibility."
【Observer-Class】Refers to humans or intelligent agents whose end-to-end verification capabilities are on the same order of magnitude for a given family of tasks—channel capacity / energy budget / representation bandwidth, etc.
1. Observer-Level Theory: ASI's apparent superiority over human intelligence does not stem from any epistemological or ontological privilege, but rather from the exorbitant cost of cross-level interpretation.
For any given observer class (e.g., humans or AGI), this manifests as "interpretive unreachability" under the upper limit of channel capacity and thermodynamic budget—even if it is correct in principle.
Relationship with "Vinci-style Uncertainty"
This provides a physical resource interpretation of Vinci-style uncertainty: unpredictability may stem from end-to-end bottlenecks in the characterization and verification process, rather than simply the limits of formal reasoning.
2. ASI's "NP → Engineering-Efficient Class Quasi-P Path" is merely a behavioral-level phenomenon for our family of observers, not an "absolutely irreducible" phenomenon at the complexity level.
2. Any theory T becomes operationally indistinguishable for observer class O if the evidence required to distinguish T from its competing theories (within a specified error tolerance ε) exceeds the verification bandwidth/budget of observer class O—even if it is falsifiable in principle.
* Computational irreducibility is a property of system-description pairs, while observer class is a relational property: it describes the gap between the verification bandwidth required by the theory and the physical limits of the observer.
A theory may be completely falsifiable in principle, but if the observer's end-to-end verification bandwidth is too narrow to capture the necessary data (within the error tolerance ε), then the competing theories are operationally indistinguishable for that observer-class.
Crux
The above explanatory framework can be considered valid if (i) AI performance continues to improve under reproducible evaluations, and (ii) the end-to-end verification and explanation burden grows faster than the verification capability of the observer class.
If such a stable state does not exist, then the above framework needs to be completely restructured.
Related Discussion
The above claims partially overlap with the discussion on thermodynamic budget, complexity, and falsifiability in LessWrong. My incremental advancement lies in treating “unpredictability” “apparent tractability” and “operationally indistinguishable” as different manifestations of the same constraint: namely, the upper limit of channel capacity and the thermodynamic budget for a given observer class.
Comments and criticisms are welcome, especially regarding whether this framework adds additional explanatory power or predictive insights.