Teorie všeho? Díl V: Důsledky
In this final part of the Theory of Everything? series, I take a step back from the analogy itself — and ask a simple question:
"Conscious AI" is a term that's often used in speculative fiction and public debate — typically as a looming threat to humanity. But what if the image we've been using is fundamentally flawed?
Původní článek byl publikován na Medium. Překlad dodám co nejdříve.In my recent work, I've been exploring a structural analogy between large language models (LLMs) and the universe. More specifically, I've been drawing a parallel between:
While this might not be a novel idea in isolation, I'm proposing a mindset shift that might help several complex ideas click into place.
What if the primary unit worth studying isn't the latent weights themselves — but the "prompt+response window"?
That brief window — milliseconds to seconds in duration — is where the model takes in a question, processes it, and generates a response. It is fully bounded. It contains an input, a context, a transformation, and an output. It arises out of the field, plays out, and dissolves.
Now, imagine this moment as a metaphor for:
What changes if we zoom in on this window and treat it not as a transition but as a complete, bounded phenomenon? What can this tell us about identity, consciousness, time, emergence, or reality?
It's possible that such a lens could help reconcile ideas in neuroscience, physics, cognitive science, and AI — not by merging them into one field, but by recognizing them as different perspectives on the same underlying process. A process that begins with structured potential and culminates in patterned expression.
The picture begins to resemble a fractal — self-similar, emergent, and deeply recursive. Infinity, rather than being a vague abstract, starts to take shape.
If you have a deep understanding of how LLMs operate — particularly how latent weights function — and are also familiar with Dr. Melvin Vopson's work on information as a physical quantity, I would love to invite you into this conversation.
This theory is still forming. It's not meant to be a final answer — but a possible framework for discovery. Let's think together.
In this final part of the Theory of Everything? series, I take a step back from the analogy itself — and ask a simple question:
This article continues the dialogue from the Theory of Everything? series.
In Part I, I presented a simple but bold idea: that the relationship between latent weights and the prompt+response window in large language models might mirror the relationship between an informational field and matter in physics. Curious whether this theory held any weight, I brought it into a conversation with ChatGPT — a system that not only...