Self-Reference as the Basis of Genomic Intelligence and Blockchain

Session 6: Cyber- Security and Intelligence

5:00 pm – 5:30 pm GMT

Sheri Markose (University of Essex) – Self-Reference as the Basis of Genomic Intelligence and Blockchain


Silvia Sanchez Ramon

We are going to start the session six on cyber security and intelligence and I’m honored to introduce Professor Sheri Markose, which is a professor in the Department of Economics in the University of Essex in the UK. Her research interest and contributions to the eagle Deleon formal mathematics, of incompleteness and non compatibility has enabled her to develop a theory of markets as complex adaptive systems. And as a key equilibria in which strategic innovation and surprises occur.

Sheri Markose

I think that might do right. Silvia and I have a common interest. She’s actually the president of the immunology Society of Spain. And we both think that self reference is a key element to genomic intelligence, the sort of intelligence you and I have. So let me just share my slides.

Silvia Sanchez Ramon

For sure. The floor is yours.

Sheri Markose

Thank you. So so self reference is the basis of genomic intelligence, let me just put it onto the Yeah. This is mostly based on this paper that has just come out on genomic intelligence and cybersecurity, that the girdle sentence has something very important to do with the way in which our we process information. So basically, I’m taking on from what Carl left of intelligence, general intelligence and cognition is all about maintaining homeostasis, and life itself is the ultimate objective. And keeping life’s vitals within a narrow range is what intelligence as a whole is all about. But the point that I make is that this homeostasis is achieved. As a result of the controls. Moving into becoming digital, I mean, they became smart. The homeostasis is not achieved like a thermostat, where you change a knob or something, you know, that’s what I would call an analog system, the homeostasis, let’s say you want to maintain insulin levels at a certain level is all controlled by a series of smart controls or digital controls. Using a concept that Mary was Sarah, Mary Walker and Phil Davis said in 19, in 2013, they claimed there was an algorithmic takeover of biology. I mean, you know, we’ve lost a lot of our audience. But yesterday, we were saying that was the nature of the digital world that we live in, that it is governed by algorithms, in a way moving away from the analog world and physical world, into this world that is entirely code based. So we have to take digitization seriously, not just as metaphors, and I’m saying in the view of Hector’s talk about the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics itself, you know, this world that this was perceived by Sydney Brenner, about the gene science itself, we are awash we are, you know, there’s a deluge of data, but no unifying theories. So, this this call talks, but the free energy principle is giving us some unified framework, I would say that this girl to post recursion function theory could be used to understand information processing in these digital systems. So, after all, you know the the ever since inheritable information became digitized in this code based on four alphabets and that is near universal a CG to you, right? This this is just phenomenal, and any in you know, next generation. And all of this information can only be passed on in the form of codes or a form of software, which we call a DNA and the genome itself. So, the first thing to note is that in such systems, only software can change software. And this is actually quite a huge you know, the fact that this is sinking in has is a result of this lady who I met who I got to know very only very recently, Barbara McClintock. She won a Nobel Prize In 1983, and she discovered, you know, the nature of, you know, the human status that is achieved that just look at what needs to be achieved within let’s say multicellular life. Like in humans, we’ve got 27 trillion cells, about 200 different cell types. And less than 2% of human genome was brought importing the remaining 98%, as one might imagine, it’s about gene regulation. And 45% of this is made of these things called transposable elements. So what what Abra McClelland half says she discovers the role of these transposable elements, and what they do is they literally edit genes.

It consists of paste, copy, paste exactly that, like you would do digital, you know, editing or in a Word document, right. And the guy who discovered the sort of the the sister paste, copy, paste, you know, they we do in the Microsoft, or whatever it is this guy called Larry Tesler. And he was just he invented it for Xerox. But the point is that these these activities of copy paste, for instance, is a viral software. And this is what the origins of these transposable elements, which constitute almost 50% of our genome, this is a result of these viral software’s. So from day one, I mean, this is the point there is a sort of digital game that is an adversarial digital game, there’s always been there from the start of life itself has been a Faustian pact, George Dyson, in a sense that it is, you know, the replicated code itself in the DNA is the result of a digital parasite of incorporating incorporated into an analog metabolism of its host. So from day one, we’ve had this digital game and adversarial game, which is part and parcel of the way in which intelligence evolved. And this is not just something that this great quotation says that it is a result of a digital parasite incorporated in analog metabolism. You know, there are people like for theory, and Zimmer symmetry recently had a very, very interesting talk about this. So what I’m trying to say is that this digital game has to be taken, taken very seriously about how we evolved, and how did it happen. So the the, the mathematics, the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics, I’m going to say that all digital systems, especially very advanced ones, that can incorporate complexity and novelty would have these properties of girdle tearing and post. Firstly, the point that we made yesterday about digital systems, we have there are unique biotic identifiers, this is what we struggling to achieve in the world becoming that is becoming increasingly digital, this is the digital economy. But in in terms of biology itself, biology is the most digitized it is digitized materials, every, every every abiotic element has a unique identifier, and in the big picture that he needs, girdle numbers, and then we all the recursive function operations that Hector, you know, Hector did not sort of come into the nitty gritty what is involved here. Firstly, the concept of self reference, I’ll say is front and center of how intelligence is so bad, I mean, in the very fact that you and I can make any reference to ourselves or to others is entirely as a result of these operations. And unlike unlike, so again, pushing the envelope, but using these recursive function theory, what we would be using here would be fixed points, specifically of programs, and not minimizing prediction errors or other like that’s what I’m going to be arguing that’s, you know, the brain would be using these sorts of fixed points in coming out of recursion function theory rather than just sort of doing the free minimizing free energy. And it would then require different different organizing principles is how, how the homeostasis itself would be achieved.

So the second biggest point about girdle, girdle is all about trying to exit out of listable sets, that is the long and short of his incompleteness theorems, that there are objects that one could not have listed, you know, and the nature of unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics requires you to then take on board the specific steps that he used the first step that he used in or what needs to account for is not just that there is central to this framework is the notion of a program that builds the machine that then runs that program that is the basis of self reference, or self assembly as it would be called today. And then the entire online system of the ribosome, and so on, are conducting these cells, self self assembly or self referential programs. And what data says is that it is not about machines running their own codes where it is about a copy of machine running its own code. In other words, it’s a meta mapping, you’d wonder why that would be so important to life, or multicellular life. And the two these two concepts called self ref and self rep have been made popular by Hofstadter no less, except it’s very strange that either people have these great, hugely genius, like, ideas. And then now Hofstadter says what’s important to intelligence is not these things that he wrote in his famous book, but common sense. I mean, you know, people have told me many times that I have no common sense. And I just wonder, you know, whether that is, you know, Hofstadter now sort of says that is what is missing in AI and things like that. And, and, and sort of, sort of left his original genius, like intuitions about why self reference itself rep are important. The third, and the third and final thing is that this this system, which which I will call a formal system, has to identify the negation of hostility, and this capture, that embodies hostility and negation to anything that is that can be predicted, is what girdle calls the liar. And then you can think of it as a viral agent, the hostile agent, which would negate codes or will hack codes. So the count, these are the three elements that you would need. And ultimately, you know, coming from girdle maps would be the sentence called girdle sentence. He is able to constructively create a girdle sentence to this day to almost 9090 years old, since that sentence was generated by girdle, people are known use of it, you know, this is ironic, whereas I’m going to show that this is front and center center of when with the genomics system generates statements, every code should be able to self report it as being hacked. This is Ultimate because if you can’t do that, that system cannot then generate novelty. Now, you might think this is far fetched. Now, I wanted to show it to you that the evidence is as follows. That, you know, what we have here is to two big paradigm shifts in the way in which evolution occurred 500 million years ago with George Fisher was a big fan of immunology, right? And his silver bone cells, we found exactly the the first and the second of first, the first of the girdle self assembly machines is the nature of all ribosomal self assembly, I’ll show you the math and the picture what goes on. And the the important thing is that whatever chords were used the gene genes that were used to assemble, let’s say, our somatic identity, this is our, you know, our, the lung tissue, you know, which is which is under attack at the moment, as we know, from COVID From the virus there.

All of this is taken offline, and a recording of everything of our entire genomic somatic cells is recorded offline. Now you wonder why why is this being done? Right? We know the map, this is exactly what happened to you some through a textbook by Hartley Rogers, it is there exactly as the mathematic it says, There are the self assembly machines when they hold, you make a recording it of it one, one to one. So this is happening online, the fact that the self assembly machines are creating all our tissues and things like that. And then there is an offline record of that in the time itself. Now fast forward about 130 million years, it’s a great leap forward. We have this mirror systems in the brain the exact same things are happening now. What is it that has been mapped? It is our entire sensory motor cortex, everything that one might do online like raise your hand and this recording of that offline in the mirror system. So I’m going to argue that this this entire immuno cognitive system, you know, the two of these things are not separate, they’re running on a unitary recursive function set of operations. And both of these systems are the only two systems that have astronomic open ended capacity 10 to the power of 20, 10 to the power 30 to create virtual imagined deviations or software changes to self codes. So, this so, this is the picture what happens to be one variable the mathematics later, but how the self reference takes place, what we have have in the upper panel is this the ribosomal machine self assembling you know, what happens is that the protein code the the protein transcription is a pure self assembly process, where the TRNA and so on to bring in all the constituent elements and then when it holds you will get this is only as a sub script, as you can see, the self assembly of the proteins is only a sub script and when all of those things hold, it is then processed further and you might get the final outcome Q which could be like the lung tissue or whatever, right, the somatic identity of the organism. And in multicellular life, of course, there are many of these things, you know. So, the point is that it is then copied offline into into system, which is time itself and so on, which is the MHC one receptors into which the cell is the cell, the somatic cells is that occurred online is mapped offline. Now, a similar sort of thing happens in the brain as well. So this isn’t the immune system. So, this happened 500 million years ago with jawed fish, and so on, so forth. And then the similar thing happens here in the mirror system where our own actions this is the base in priors very, our entire body, it’s entirely and body is mapped onto this mirror system, right offline, to the online and the offline. It’s very important to note why are things taken offline and to this very granular extent? The answer is that alongside with this capability of timers, we have two very important operators two genes called Rat one and rat two, this is the recombination activation genes and this is what allows at a very early stage for the immune system to sample to do open ended search to the power of 10 to the power 10 to the power 20, 10 to the power 30. So, the cell for self referential mappings because each each biotic element is mapped of offline and each biotic element, you can you can actually see, because the the the T cell receptors would be generating various clones of what now, this is a question, basically, they are generating clones of changes to the original gene, because the recognition that your gene has been changed through your the, the outcome of genes being changed in your cells is what is causing deviations from your somatic identity, right? And the autonomy of the system is all all important.

The primacy of these codes are all important and the immune system, the adaptive immune system developed as a result of that. So, let me just contrast this with what would be happening, if it wasn’t if somebody wasn’t going to come and attack your quote, the big paradigm shift is between the so called innate immune system is where the defenses are analog. In other words, you would have very many medieval tactics like toxicity, heat and so on, which would be used to identify a foreign object right or a something that is not yourself. Now, the difference here is as follows. And this is what Sylvia and I have been talking about, in the adaptive immune system. You know, here, the other is a projection of self, what you want to know is first yourself to work out which changes have come about as a result of that. So this is where the notion of self and self reference is critical, and the way in which all of all of intelligence and these are the things that I keep saying I’m missing from, Karl’s view of intelligence and cognition, so on in a while, embodiment is now taken on board. For instance, in Vincent’s work, I don’t see any mention I think Oren as well. You know, when you talk about representation, this is the ultimate representational system where, you know, where, where the the self assembly codes for somatic cells is mapped offline. It’s Pilger daily, and it’s textbook because the function theory theory, I can show you exactly the mapping that occurs in Hartley Rogers, for instance. And ironically, this is missing, you know, so in the computational theory of cognition, but people like further and so on. For the I mean, they simply do not mention the self rep and the self reference as being important to recursive to computation theory, it talks about the generative power of software’s, because once you have software, you know, you can bring in the recombination, you know, the big, big guns of recombination, and do all sorts of software changes. And I’m told that, you know, people who, you know, the people like dial pharmacy don’t need to worry about girls, you just need to worry about recombination, but I’m going to prove you wrong, you have to set it, you have to embed this in a formal system, and also embedded in a blockchain. Because unless you do that, just go going wildly. This is where the AI world, it’s also going completely straight. If you can simply do recombinations and produce any outcome whatsoever. What is to judge will those are what you need and what you don’t need, right? So I’m going to argue that the systems, the so called self assembling genes are the theorems in the system. And they’re exactly like you would that that are the weights formulated in formal systems of ML post and so on. So just coming back to the issue of what is the distinction between being attacked by some agent, so the innate immune system powerful, that is, it is very sophisticated in its own right, but it doesn’t detect the other as a projection of self, there is no self referential mapping, that is so important, and I don’t think it has been taken on board sufficiently. The this this edition here is phenomenal. This is absolutely, you know, mind blowing how the immune system came about, try and work out who the enemies from self referential codes themselves, right. And again, in in, apart from the genomic world, I don’t think this is the nature of how intelligence is being developed in the artificial world. So you know, in a bio ICT is now important, because the most powerful, the most sophisticated the most sustainable genomics system is sorry, digital system is our genomics system, it’s existed for 5 billion years and so on. And we are still walking and talking and not completely gone bisar.

Right. So the the formal system, let me tell you how embedding, so the fact that you have these holding machines here, which create all the somatic identity, that is part of a formal system. So what you have here is that this is pure, you know, these are codes that run on a these are a machine G, that runs its own code G right, and it holds these theorems in the system, you know, this is called a creative set. This is again, going back to what Hector was talking about creative and productive. So these are your theorems, right? What do you need not here’s all negations of these to be easy to say all negations of these would be forbidden codes and this is what people like generate and so on talk about forbidden codes, but G and not G cannot, you know coexist, I mean, this is not possible. So to take the immune system as a formal system of theorems and non theorem, so your theorems are the ones that create your, your somatic identity, and the non code, some of them you would know. But the point is that these things can be negated in ways because these are total computable functions that can be negated in ways and total computable functions that are as RM would know, are countable, uncountable infinity, then no way that set, we call it a set R, for instance, it can’t be even searched systematically. So this is the reason why the rag operators, you know, so this think of this as being the MHC one receptors in time, thymus, a very, very humble organ, where the entire thing is mapped. And then you would do 10 to the power 20, 20 the power 30 You know, changes software changes. So again, it’ll be just another number that you would generate. And then and then So these are the novel changes. So the the fixed point, a good luck disciple Proposition would be for a fixed point of some some code, a gene code, for instance, that has been altered by some novel malware or novel virus, and it is absolutely necessary. And I’ll show you how the immune systems are actually working at a fixed point of a novel negation function. And that would be the girdle sentence, because then that code will be able to self report that it is under attack. But there are many steps involved there. So this is this is. So this is already from said that from from the get go, what we’re seeing here is that intelligence is actually geared to think outside the box, it’s not about what you already know, it is about what you don’t know and what could be normally out there that you could enumerate. So if this girdle sentence could not be, it cannot be generated, unless the code, you know, the necessity for the code to identify the exact function of the enemy that is changing it, it really cannot come up with novel antibodies, you know, can’t go into this sort of jet, the novel product novelty production.

So there are several reasons why this would be a sort of empirical, there are empirical hypothesis here as to why people died of COVID, for instance, of people who are unable to generate the girdle set to begin with. And the reason for that is that, you know, the detecting, of the attack takes place in a different place. So we create all the codes that could potentially be the, the, the call to the enemy. And then the attack takes place in real time, on our tissues in the periphery. And then the two bits of fixpoint have come together for the girdle sentence to be able to enable the system to say or this particular at a very granular level, that code itself to self report that it’s under attack. Now so why is this like a blockchain now this has been proven thing. So I’m saying that information is organized in the self referential way, it allows what’s called a blockchain distributed ledger. Firstly, it’s entirely decentralized. There is no centralization, every code self reference, we can make these statements. And this is what the percolates right up to the top that enables each one of us to say anything about ourselves, I’m going to sort of reinforce this idea, but statements about ourselves. And what this would then enable the, these systems, the entire gene regulatory network, or reductions to the sets, and the sets are called creative and productive sets, this entire formulation is ml pose, set theoretic proof of Gerlinde completeness, it is entirely totally neglected, I have never seen anybody use any of this foundational recursive function, mathematics or set theory to explain anything at all. I mean, you know, this, perhaps may explain why the girdle sentences never had any, there’s never been put to any use. Whereas I say, you know, this is not anything, you know, it is not anything is, you know, most people think it’s just nice to direct construction and things ubiquitous, it is it is what it is like today in today’s 21st century nomenclature, it would be like a hash algorithm, you know, like you would find in the Bitcoin totally, it’s very different from the formulations to Bitcoin, but it’s nevertheless, like a hash algorithm, which enables the system to say that there’s something wrong here or the or the the software, the record of the software, this is record keeping, that is done in software terms, you know, all of this record keeping the genome and so on is a software based system and like in the Bitcoin or in the blockchain there. So has those records being changed, unless the system can self report that those records have been changed and tell you there is the future of a digital world. So, that is an there is one other person or like, or like Abramoff now pointed out that why is the genome in the DNA, a part and password of a blockchain? What are the ingredients of a blockchain? I’ll tell you intuitively, a blockchain requires that no, no. Earlier blocks of information in software terms can it’s immutable. It can’t You can’t go back and change it. And secondly, no novel blocks can be added that’s inconsistent with the original blocks. This is absolutely vital. Now now you see that recombination just just sort of pressing a button or return combining software business is not simply the answer, the answer is that whole thing has to be embedded into a blockchain system. In other words, a formal system exactly like this.

Now, you might say, you might think now where is the new new blocks, the novelty, the new blocks that can be generated here that’s consistent with the original blocks or the entire system is run only on the principle of consistency, consistency in SF itself is not constructed with the information unless the information is consistently organized, first and foremost, into girdle sentences cannot be formed. So a lot of people I mean, you know, as Michael pento says, a lot of people think that, oh, girdle sentences, something crazy, you know, the world will be the sky with a cave in, but you can take me out and shoot me. I mean, the girdle sentences they only because the original information is, is organized in a consistent way. If it wasn’t it, you know, if it wasn’t organized is consistent with theorems and non theorems, it could not generate a girdle sentence and the girdle sentence is a constructive witness in a girdle came up with the actual numbering of the coding of such a sentence. And I’ll show you how this would be done in the immune system. So the BDJ operators, the rag operators, all these came in. So a capacity to think outside the box from day one a capacity to think almost just huge, open ended search. It’s all part of what’s called the variable diversity joining transposons. You know, these are all vital software’s that people like my print office discovered that, again, I can’t emphasize how important the clitoris contributions are, because she’s saying that it is the changes and achieved is not just happening by random mutation, hello, that is not how it is done, it is done by software’s that are changing software’s the only way software can be changed, that this has not sunk in this importance of what is being said has not sunk in about and there are entire, and there are people like you know, John Matic from University of Sydney, James Shapiro, there is now a big, big group of people who are saying, We really need to rethink, including Rusty Gage from the Salk Institute, because he says that these transposable elements, you have to edit in real time, things to the brain for us to even keep up with real time, real time perception. Now, all of this is being missed out. Because, you know, I’m not saying there are elements that are important in the statistical way of the brain, and the basic modeling and all that sort of thing. But that is not the language of the gene science. And I would say I would, I would say that we need to get back to the gene side science codes, you know, and talk about the software’s involved in the brain, a very important part of house negation, recognize there is evidence by people like Scott Kelsall, his group found that it’s not just the mirror neuron system for which they have certain ways, identifying that mappings, the mirror neurons are occurring. In other words, I make you out. So now we right now I’ve established that the way in which these systems make out the other is from self referential mapping. So in the immune in the mirror neuron system, what happens is that I can I’m inferring from simulations, embodied simulations, that you are raising your hand, because I’m reusing the code, when I raise my hand, right, that is the only way we can actually make out one another. And this mutual coding of the self is absolutely the reason why we are able to have social cognition, and that is the epitome of Evolved Human evolution that we can make out the other in this very precise, nuanced way.

So the so we empathic but equally we are Machiavellian, because we have truly worked with these viruses, and so on. So am I done for time? Because I think we we need to so none of this the so what I’m saying is immuno cognitive systems running on a single because function machinery, right? There was a very large literature about this, you know, from Aaron Cohen and so on, but then don’t use any of this machinery. So it’s it’s a lot of confusion. If you read what they’re saying. Sometimes they say some things, but I say you know, again, the importance bring the mathematics in its in its entirety and to then use it because then we’re either, you know, there is no precision about what it is that we are hypothesizing. And of course, the mouth itself would, because of the Unreasonable Effectiveness, it will help us to understand what could be happening. So what I’m trying to say is that in these systems that are digital, it can only be in these sorts of ways, you know, this is nature of the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics or you would require these structures and constructions if we need to sort of be able to produce novelty. So, the, the, this is the nature of, you know, how I would go back to some of these the literature who will talk about self reference, they talk about the the unitary nature of immune cognitive systems, but they don’t use any of the mathematics that I have used. Right. Okay. So who else has said this about this two step, self referential process, there is this Japanese neuroscientist called Seudah 2014. He’s the only other guy who’s ever said this. He says, when you look systems processes, self self referential destruction, they may 1st have to make a copy of the object itself reference and then refer to this copy. Right? The students, the students stage formalization realized mathematically proven girdles and completeness, etc, is something that he talks about. But then, you know, he doesn’t push this far enough, because then he goes back to the usual some dynamical system approach. In other words, totally not software based. But I believe, I think Carl says that he’s reasonably recently come is wanting to come back to this framework, and I’m in touch with him in the hope that we press this framework further, how is it I mean, Oren may be able to tell us because he knows about incompleteness and so on, why is it that these, you know, the mathematics was not mapped sufficiently to give a better and more complete theory of cognitive, you know, computational theory of cognition itself. So, I think I’m running out of time. So I won’t you know, there is other things about a just show you about the fixed point itself, let me just show you the maps about how these things are written up. So this is this, this object here, this object here is exactly the self reference, or the self assembly machine. That is driving things like the ribosomal people like Neil Gershenfeld says madman, that biology solved it 5 billion years ago, whereas now in the 21st century, we are trying to create such programs, which would then assemble all the digitized materials to then output the final object, whatever it may be. So you notice that the self assembly machine is just a sub program, you know, self assembly is done by tRNA, and all these things that bring in all the amino acids and things like that, that you need to then make it into a make it into a protein at this level. And these proteins come to Bluebell and say, this, these things are entirely like you think you’ll understand from Internet of Things, they have zip codes, they tell you where to go, you know, they are digitized to the enth degree, you know, it’s already all you know how it happened, we don’t know, but it is like that. And then finally, you know, this is the model of this is the ultimate model of self assembly and the production of outputs, which would then create as I said, the somatic identity. So, let me let me so this is this is the hockey rod distinct. What this says is that if, if the self assembly machine runs online, and you make a record of that the sigma function, so this is online, and this is offline, this is this is what happens in the time itself, and in the mirror neuron system, and so on, right? The record, it’s not about the machines have run and done the job. And then we have a record of that and the record of that is simply to make out the self and the other and any changes that could be brought about as a result of that. So that is the starting point for cognition. So, the let me let me just quickly show you what is the nature of dynamics in the system.

And, the this is how the second recursion theorem takes place. So what we’re seeing is the diagonal elements, some subset of it is what is already run and created somatic identity. And then what happens is some function and negation functions specifically, let me see work was done by one of my students, this machinery. So what happens is, this is the fixed point. We’re saying that For the program that changes your original code, then you have to find so, think of this entire the object in the brackets is index V. So, we are saying F of B is equal to F is equal to phi of F of V is equal to phi V. So, V is the index that you need to generate from the fixed point theorem and there is always this can always be constructed, and the immune system does this in this following way, the T cells offline in the time itself generates that function v. So, the V as a result of the original code be changed, and then the, the attack takes place online in real time the peripheral image receptor. So, this is as a result of the attack and the two bits have to be brought into sync and only then would the godel sentence occur in the system and the this particular code G or whatever somatic tissue pertains to you will be able to report that it’s under attack. So, it’s entirely a smart way of generating these sorts of signals. And from there, the logic of the system will then require an antibody to a novel antibody only novel objects can generate it at that point. So, the the world that grows like this, this is what we call a productive set, that new objects are added, but they can never belong to the original sets. So, the new objects actually become the indexes of the new set and this will grow ad infinitum. So, this is the incompleteness that will occur of productively adding on and every time that these things are added on in this way, it is always consistent with your original theorems. So, this is how the blockchain and everything the entire regulatory gene regulatory networks and so on would be because of reductions to this original formal system. So, the system is kept under its control by a very tight ship, but in a very decentralized and ways in which the blockchain would occur because you see at every step, it could be made sure that if there’s a girdle sentence, then we are alerted to the fact that there is some discrepancy or some some hack of the original codes, and we would then either have to respond to that with like an antibody and destroy whoever is trying to attack us and so on. And the exact same thing requires is also done, possibly the brain. So, let me stop that because I think I’ve made the main points here and to conclude the, the, the, you know, there was a lot of work to be done about how the transcription factors were in which the system would then be organized as blockchain distributed ledger, but that is still work to be done. Okay. So, I’ll stop there.

Silvia Sanchez Ramon

Okay, excellent. Excellent. Sheri, I would like to make you just a very short question, how do you define identity of the individual with this theorem?

Sheri Markose

You mean as a whole as ourselves, you know. So, so, obviously, you know, it terms of the immune system, it is at a very granular level, we discussed about how granular should go or is it is this system of genes that need to be expressed to bring the tissue body No, you’d know more about that. So, but in in the brain, what I would suggest is since cell preference, you know, we have a very you know, the embodied self, the embodied self is there is that as a coherent factor, you know, and that is what enables us either I can refer to my hands, but I can put them all on myself right. So, that that is only a matter of scope, if I can put my hand and I can put your hands right the state the statements cannot be made unless those in a two step process is done, you know, how can I refer to my hand unless, you know, there is a offline recording of that, to which I can then apply some other further recursive operations, right, a lot of recursive operations already done, you know, there is no uncertainty about it. In other words, if I want to touch my face, or the novel objects that we’re talking about the things that you may be forced into as a result of the adversary Again, if you’re with friends, you do not have to. You don’t have to innovate. I mean, you know, I think Axelrod, the famous game theory said, Is it in the design of evolution that you have to have viruses to evolve? I mean, I think absolutely right. Without viruses, you know, there wouldn’t be anything new. So that seems to be the case. And any questions? Aren’t Yeah.

Oron Shagrir

Yes, sure. Yeah. Could you clarify this? I mean, I understand why. You should use self reference. And in genomic systems, I mean, cognitive systems. And, and I guess people use this, for instance, in control theory. But I’m not sure that they understood why we have to use, you know, special kinds of self reference, namely, the godel of sentences. Because you say, we hear from what I understood, you say that in order to encode something, like I’m under attack, or something like this, we need to godel sentence. But yeah, I’m not sure. I mean, you could say something in the system that says, you know, under these conditions are not under attack. And under other conditions, I’m under attack. So you can have these two sentences, and they are, you know, consistent with each other. And do not get the sentences. So I’m not sure why, why it’s necessary to have the good sentences themselves. No, of course, as I said, I see the motivation to have self reference. That’s the I don’t dispute this, I’m just asking about this.

Sheri markose

Yeah, yeah. So already, I mean, this is a conversation I had with my preschooler, right, you know, his famous article about computational theory, you know, computational theory of cognition, right, the door. But my question is, you know, computation in a computation theory, as I showed you, because function theory, he himself admits it’s only 150 pages of, you know, hardly Rogers are Nigel Kotlin, you know, I haven’t gone anything beyond textbook. So I’m saying like, this is lying in plain sight, meaning to say this, this mapping is badly sort of pasted here. You know, this is this is from partly Rogers, it says that, if a machine with code G running its own code G right. Now, this one referee asked me, What is that right, a machine G running it, so co G, but you and I in recursive function theory note, you know, we keep talking about that, that self referential. It comes from the cantor diagonal lemma, you know, a set that has its own memory, you know, set with an index y contains its index, right in the basis of Russell’s paradox and all that sort of thing. So we know this, but then I so I was asked to say, what does this mean in biology write a code, a program that then builds the machine that runs the same program, right. And it was a throwaway remark by Neil Gershenfeld in a handbook on the fourth industrial revolution, we says that today in 21st century, and this labs, it’s got a lab called self assembly labs, is this is what we’re trying to build, we’re building software’s in build that can that have all the steps in it, it can, you know, build up, that can assemble the materials that would then build the machines that would then build whatever outcome you want, right? So he says Balaji already solved it. This is what the ribosomal self assembly machines are like, and I believe that now this is a point. So if that is true, so the ribosomal self assembly, so would be saying is that this machinery of self assembly? Which is absolutely the bread and butter, the staple of recursion function theory, this is happening online, and then you make a record of it. All right? Why the hell would you make a record of anything that’s running online offline, why was this happening? It happened biology, I mean, you know, the time itself is Silvias construct other people have talked about these things? Why would you, you know, every one of your codes is running, you create somatic identity, but then of course, we know that to make any sort of cognition and yourself you need to sort of refer to those things in another domain offline, would you not? So, so that is the first step. Now, the point that we are making is that what if somebody goes and changes G? Right? So you You know, the godel sentence, you have to have negation, right? The liar. His opening paragraph is about the liar. And you know, the famous game theorist who taught me game theory, the LSE can be more said, he said, What about the liar in you, because in game theory, we want everything to be close to complete, we want determinism we can only do we can only operate from a given action set. So he said this one work this one cut it, if you got somebody who who knows what you are going to do, he will just negate you, right? So the girdle sentence immediately, I won’t say immediately, it’s taken me on my sort of adult life. You know, the fixed point, it’s just a fixed point of negation function. But then when you put it together, you notice the right hand side, it can be computed because you get a and not a right, you are in fact, constructing a contradiction in that fixed point with the negation, right. So this is where that is what the girdle sentences because, you know, I’ve given it to you in this form, you know, this is exactly from Rogers, this thing here. So, you know, look, I’m using all this fixed points, right? This is exactly what Rogers would say that you have a function, this negation function, you have an index V, and this is the fixed point, but this fixed point is not computable, it can’t hold, right. But nevertheless, a fixed point you can construct, right? So would you not, by the way, would you not accept the girdle sentence is one such self referential statement of a code that it’s been negated by via very, you know, by this function f f minus, right, this function here.

So, so, this is what this is what that bid is, now the hardest bit of conversation call about these things. I mean, you know, the brain so, so much is clear. mirror neuron system, is there, you know, this is what is, is part of this embodied cognition, theory, right. Except that, except that, again, in competition, computation theory of cognition, they don’t, the strange thing is they somehow they somehow don’t they don’t have embodiment in, you know, people are they’ve been criticized for the or etc. I’ve been criticized, they don’t have embodiment, but what else is this this embodiment in? You know, I think the point that you make are and I think, or it is, Vincent, I think you are, and you say that, here, you know, the semantics and syntax is almost because of this mapping. You know, it becomes the meaning. So, it’s a construction use, you fuse the two things, right? The the syntax, the semantics, because here you have a demonstration of what it would it would the outcome of the software, it’s right. It’s one of your papers, I was intending to sort of, we haven’t had this discussion in partly because so the those software’s when this mapping is done, the system may not consciously knew that because it sorts of personal at the level of immune system. But of course, it’s missed. How, how, of course, as a sentient being, that I then can say that I’m touching my, the cheek or whatever, right? So the software becomes associated, this mapping, make sure that the two things are one to one representation is exactly what it is of the halting of some algorithm. And then, of course, the algorithm itself is the object, right? It produces the objects. So the syntax is already baked into it. Right.

Silvia Sanchez Ramon

So I think, I think that we have to go on.

Sheri Markose

Yeah, I think we have to stop the discussions here. But I really know the self assembly machine. So I’m a view that virtually everything in the brain is a self assembly process. To do the neocortex and I haven’t I thought one day I’ll suddenly wake up and know what that is. You have to renew a lot more, I think, was really good. But I think I think I’ll pass the baton on Bimal. Now, Bimal, cryptographer a bar Excellent. So Bimal, I don’t know how much of my talk you heard. But you know, the idea that cybersecurity can be understood at least bio cybersecurity, and the way in which means Humans have developed cybersecurity is different right okay so thank you very much