Engineer vs. Scientist

Figure 1. Fake Physics?

There are a number of definitions for an engineer.  The one I like the best is this:1 

Engineer:

noun:  a person who designs, builds or maintains engines, machines, or public works.

synonyms: Originator, designer, inventor, developer, creator.

verb:  Design and build (a machine or structure)

I always thought of an engineer as an applied scientist. The term “design” is typically conflated with “build and test. They are two separate phases of an engineering project to an engineer.  Design involves creating the concepts and documenting them such that a prototype can be built.  The building includes constructing a prototype, testing, and making design changes until the device performs its function as planned.

Similarly, a scientist is defined as:2

Scientist:

noun:  a person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.

The difference between an engineer and a scientist is that an engineer has to make something work.  To work, the object designed has to follow the laws of physics and chemistry; not theory, or possibilities.  Often, thinking purely in theoretical terms blinds one to common sense and/or other theory that is overlooked.3  The scientist deals with possibilities; the engineer must deal with the impossibilities.  

When Steve played the video at his book release party, I really didn’t know what to expect as I thought that secret chemical reactions that make life function would be revealed.

What I saw instead was tasks being performed by molecular machines. Impossible!  How could such complexity exist?  Inside a cell, impossible squared! I spent my life designing and building much simpler systems. I knew that the video was a vastly simplified representation. The complexity of all the process control details that must exist is staggering.

In a very real sense, what I was witnessing was magic. To this day, I do not believe those in the field of biology realize the complexity of what must exist in the cell.  Process control requires sensor, signal processing (think computer) functionality and actuators. It has to acquire the energy and matter required.  It has to get rid of the waste.  And reproduction???   ?

I truly believe that only engineers who have been involved with complex process control systems can appreciated the complexity that must exist in the cell, One does not realize the level of detail, the number of overlooked, or misunderstood issues, the wrong science or calculation that will cause failure.

Engineer vs. Scientist

Engineer vs. Scientist

Engineer vs. Scientist

Figure 1. Fake Physics?

There are a number of definitions for an engineer.  The one I like the best is this:1 

Engineer:

noun:  a person who designs, builds or maintains engines, machines, or public works.

synonyms: Originator, designer, inventor, developer, creator.

verb:  Design and build (a machine or structure)

I always thought of an engineer as an applied scientist. The term “design” is typically conflated with “build and test. They are two separate phases of an engineering project to an engineer.  Design involves creating the concepts and documenting them such that a prototype can be built.  The building includes constructing a prototype, testing, and making design changes until the device performs its function as planned.

Similarly, a scientist is defined as:2

Scientist:

noun:  a person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.

The difference between an engineer and a scientist is that an engineer has to make something work.  To work, the object designed has to follow the laws of physics and chemistry; not theory, or possibilities.  Often, thinking purely in theoretical terms blinds one to common sense and/or other theory that is overlooked.3  The scientist deals with possibilities; the engineer must deal with the impossibilities.  

When Steve played the video at his book release party, I really didn’t know what to expect as I thought that secret chemical reactions that make life function would be revealed.

What I saw instead was tasks being performed by molecular machines. Impossible!  How could such complexity exist?  Inside a cell, impossible squared! I spent my life designing and building much simpler systems. I knew that the video was a vastly simplified representation. The complexity of all the process control details that must exist is staggering.

In a very real sense, what I was witnessing was magic. To this day, I do not believe those in the field of biology realize the complexity of what must exist in the cell.  Process control requires sensor, signal processing (think computer) functionality and actuators. It has to acquire the energy and matter required.  It has to get rid of the waste.  And reproduction???   ?

I truly believe that only engineers who have been involved with complex process control systems can appreciated the complexity that must exist in the cell, One does not realize the level of detail, the number of overlooked, or misunderstood issues, the wrong science or calculation that will cause failure.

© 2016 Mike Van Schoiack

The Nature of Processes

The Nature of Processes

The Nature of Processes

A process is defined as a series of actions that achieve an end.  Petroleum processing plants probably comes to mind for most people because the term “process” is normally associated with the phrase.  However, just about any task is a process.  Each has a beginning and an end.  Fortunately, the human Life Process has not ended yet!

A petroleum processing plant is running a specified, intelligent process.  But there is another type of process: natural.  Weather, for example, uses the forces of nature to accomplish ends that are not intelligently directed. We usually do not distinguish between the two but should when discussing the differences.

Specified (or Intelligent) Processes Require Means to Sense, Process, and Act: Accomplished by Machines

To run a process, there must be a means to sense conditions and intelligently process the information to determine the action required. The instructions to do the required work are relayed to the actuators. The system must have a raised free energy 4 power source capable of being controlled with the correct form and amount to accomplish the specified intelligent work, information acquisition, transfer, and processing. Continous power is required because the sensors and processing must be active when the process is running. This power that is not recovered, is increasing the entropy of the universe. Natural causes have no analog to this functionality and the raised free energy power source. In either case, the change in the system’s entropy and the relationship to the energy expended do follow the laws of physics when all actions are accounted for. Machines perform these functions.

Natural work and resulting outcomes occur due to initial conditions, free energy availability, and the laws of physics. Intelligent work and resulting outcomes result from initial conditions and machinery that follows the laws of physics. These are different paradigms. Intelligent work requires additional energy to power the intelligent functionality.

Our Brain Shields Us From the Complexity of Processes

Think of the process of cooking a meal.  Your first planning level is to design a menu, gather the food, cook, set the table, and serve the meal.  The second level is to write out the menu, listing each ingredient, the amount, the steps of preparation before cooking, the method, temperature and time, and so on.

If you had to write a program for a robot to do this work, you would eventually get to a detail level that provides instructions such as position both arms, shoulder angle 180 degrees y-z plane, 5 degrees x-z plane, and elbow joint 90 degrees, palm up.  Move from coördinates: x1, y1, facing θ1 to coördinates: x2, y2, facing θ, etc.

And it gets worse.  At an even lower level, commands must be supplied to the actuators that perform the work required in a form that the actuator “understands,” e.g., relax interior shoulder actuator, extend exterior shoulder actuator to position 22.2, relax exterior elbow actuator, retract interior elbow to position 13.4, with similar instructions for legs and all finger joints.  Each such instruction is a process step. There are probably thousands of individual carefully orchestrated process steps that must be executed by the robot to fix breakfast.

The reason for going through this exercise is to emphasize we are unaware of the individual actions required by a complex machine such as ourselves to accomplish even the simplest tasks as they are being executed unconsciously.

An engineer designing process control systems quickly aware of the minute detail step that must be executed.  Doing intelligent work is far more complex and involved than an outsider realizes.  Think of all the computations required to determine how hard to squeeze, which direction to turn, how big of a step to take, then convert this into commands to each muscle, etc.  One cannot appreciate the gap between perception and reality of complexity of doing intelligent work. Here are a few videos of engineered robots that now exist and involve hundreds of man-years of development time.

DNA appears to be the database for the parts (proteins & RNA), and it, in conjunction with proteins, must also act as the “operating system.”  From it, RNA and proteins, are constructed, and apparently, these parts end up being the control processor, sensors and actuators that do the physical work.  The proteins/RNA involved with some functions have been identified, very little is understood5.  Very likely the ratio of “learned” to “to be learned” is probably about equal to “protein expression DNA” to “non-protein expression DNA”.  Upon learning the “what and how” of the rest of the DNA will most probably be surprises; technology we have not discovered analogous to the discovery of neural networks in the body.  Until the detail functionality, both of the cell and organisms is reverse-engineered, for the most part, we will be in the dark.

Specified (Intelligent) Processes Cannot be the Result of Natural Causes.

Processes (exclusive of natural processes) require intelligent choices.  The simplest example is a binary input that is processed to provide two output choices, 0 or 1, X or Y, Yes or No.  This means that someplace in the process system, there has to be matter that can be set to one state or another based on some external condition.

Natural causes have only one input state, its environment, and one output, the state of highest entropy of the system (or the most stable equilibrium point, lowest potential energy).  A logically driven system must have the ability to hold matter away from the environmentally driven equilibrium in order to carry the logical information. Therefore, natural causes cannot conduct an intelligent process. 

© 2016 Mike Van Schoiack

 

The Concept of Realms

The Concept of Realms

The Concept of Realms, and Levels Within

Table 1. Hierarchy of Realms

This engineer thinks of physics and philosophy as two different realms.  And within these realms are different levels within the realm.  As an example, in the realm of space (physics), there are the levels of position, velocity and acceleration.  It seems to this engineer that there is a similar hierarchy of intelligence (philosophy) that would be information, logic and abstraction.  The lowest level of each is similar insofar as a point really isn’t space and information really isn’t intelligence, but both are related to the realm they are in, and a product of their realm.

This engineer believes that it is proper to define another realm, actualization (process)6, as actualization is a combination of physics (matter, energy, space and time) and philosophy (intelligence).  Similarly, tools, logically intelligent machines and abstract intelligent machines are levels of the actualization realm.

© 2016 Mike Van Schoiack

Heirarchy of Intelligence

Heirarchy of Intelligence

The Hierarchy of Intelligence

Humans have the ability to design and build (create) machines in the macro world that do incredible things.  But humans cannot create life as we know it – our fingers are too big and we do not have the intelligence to design something that is as “smart” as we are.  Obviously this is an opinion of this engineer and is not shared by everyone.  But if this limitation is true, then the hierarchy is shown in Table 1, but more clearly in Figure 3, exists.

Figure 3. Hierarchy of Intelligence

Figure 3 can be opened up in a separate window by clicking on it.  Each box represents an entity.  Each column represents different forms of entities.  The left column lists the actualizations that occur in our universe – the physical reality that we experience.  The Universe entity box surrounds the header title to indicate that the actualizations are in the realm of the Universe and follow the laws of physics of the Universe.  It wraps around the human actualization processes because those actualizations occur in our universe.

We do not know where or how the “supreme actuator” actuated, so it is not shown as being “in our universe” which may or may not represent reality.

Figure 3 also assumes the “supreme creator” created the universe and solar system.  If one does not have that point of view, that the universe and solar system exist from natural causes, then remove the Universe and Earth creation boxes.  They have no bearing on the discussion herein and are not mentioned elsewhere on this site.  However, since we know from the proof above that life cannot be accounted for by natural causes, the create life and human boxes must remain unless some other explanation can be made for our existence other than a superior intelligent entity.

The three realms listed are Science (physics), Actualization (Actualization Processes), and Philosophy (intelligence/logic).  We already know about Science and Philosophy, Actualization is new.  It perhaps should not be considered a separate realm, rather a combination of Science and Philosophy, hence the arrows illustrating this connection.  It exists as an artifact because of the fact that intelligent manipulation of matter and energy makes it possible to create a whole new class of creations – all the kinds of entities that life, especially man, creates, but most important, life itself.

The realm of philosophy, in the form of information, logical intelligence, abstract intelligence, and supreme intelligence are inherent by the presence of these properties in the creators and the creations.  For this reason, color codes are used to signify levels of intelligence.  This shows that it took a supreme intelligence to create life and life with abstract intelligence, and it takes at least abstract intelligence to create entities with logical intelligence or with embedded information.

Another central theme is that all actualizations are actualized by an entity that uses machines doing intelligent work to execute a process designed by the actualizer. The term actualizer is used instead of the designer because to an engineer, the design process is just one task of many to create a product.

It is the view of this engineer that the term “design” by those in the field of biology covers all aspects of actualization (the process of bringing something into existence).  The design portion of creation is a mental process, which is not in the realm of physics, rather the realm of philosophy.  The actual building of the “something” is physical, is in the realm of physics.  Actualization is a process that merges the realms of philosophy and physics.  This is a fundamental understanding that is missing from the arguments put forward by both the Materialists and the Intelligent Design community.

From Intelligence to Actualized Entities

Philosophers have forever recognized the difference between living and nonliving things.  Living things contain much more detail and do many more things than natural causes are able to do.  However, today we are being taught that science can explain everything, there is no need to invoke a creator to explain the existence of life.  This prospect can be disproved if one can show scientifically that natural causes cannot produce (as opposed to design) the molecules we find in our life.7  This is the approach taken here – an engineer’s way of thinking about the problem.  An engineer finds out if his mental design, and the science behind it, are valid by the success or failure of converting a mental design to physical reality.

The Thermodynamic Impact of Intelligence

From a thermodynamic point of view, the addition of intelligence with physics has an additional energy cost, above all other thermodynamic considerations, just to be able to do intelligent work.  This expenditure exists as long the machines that are doing intelligent work are “running”.  The amount of energy actually consumed is a function of the design of the machine, how long it running, and how hard it is working.  There is no way to be able to relate entropy change due to intelligent work or to the amount of energy consumed.

In addition to the increased quantity of energy required, energy of a potential higher than the free energy of the system is required, for two reasons, one to do the intelligent work (like move something uphill) and two, to perform the logical functionality of the machine.

There is an energy cost related to the realm of Actualization, and it should be somehow stated as a law that relates to the realms of physics and philosophy.  And perhaps there should be a term designated for the ongoing energy required to supply intelligence for an intelligent machine.

It Starts With Intelligence

The term intelligence is used differently by different people and professions.  Most people use the term as associated with humans – the ability to think, comprehend, analyze.  Engineers also use the term to indicate the ability to process information, like a computer program.  The military uses the term for information that has military value.  It is important to understand that intelligence in all forms is not a physical entity, it is an ability to process information.  For purposes of this discussion, we need to consider different levels of intelligence and propose the terminology described below.

Information

Information is not really a level of intelligence, rather it is a product of intelligence.  It is static, non-material/energy/space/time abstraction that is the product of an intelligent entity, not science/physics.  However, information can be embedded into matter based on designed languages and/or protocols and/or codes and/or standards.  Examples include the information carried by books, tapes, CD’s, computer memory, handwriting, and DNA. These are examples where information is embedded in matter for the purpose of storing the information for some later use by an intelligent device, such as a computer, a TV set, an audio player, and in the case of DNA, the information needed to run the cell’s life process.  Information of this sort can only be created by an abstract or supreme intelligent entity.

But information can also be embedded in matter to provide function other than to store the information.  It can be manipulated to form art or to be a tool.  Examples are paintings, sculptures, jewelry, hammer, nails, pliers, windows, passive electronics parts, birds nest, and beehive.  Items that fall into this category of actualizations can be actualized by entities that have an abstract or logical level of intelligence as illustrated in Figure 1.

Logical Intelligence

Logical intelligence is the ability to make decisions based on conditions or circumstances.  The simplest form is a binary switch.  An example would be a switch that is off when there is sufficient light and turns on when there is insufficient light.  A logical device must have means to receive an informational input signal, in this case, a light sensor, and an output, in this case, a light bulb and power source. A characteristic of any logical device is that it requires energy to perform the logical function – it takes energy to operate the light sensor and to flip the light switch in this example.

All machines have some sort of embedded logic.  Think of an engine.  The logical functionality is the result of the shape of the crankshaft and camshaft and valves, the timing of the ignition spark all coordinate the component parts to be in the proper position to make the engine work. But it requires an Abstract intelligence to design the engine as shown in Figure 3.

Abstract Intelligence

Abstraction is the ability to think, invent, to deal with ideas.  This capability goes beyond the logical processing of information.  It is a capability that is unique to humans among life on earth.  Even though humans have this capability, it is the opinion of this engineer that we will not be able to duplicate this capability in machines of our design unless we can “reverse engineer” this capability in ourselves.

© 2016 Mike Van Schoiack