Intelligence Principles of NET : Neumann Einstein Turing- AI asks Can Geneva 27 recurse Delhi 26..Bletchley 23

 Intelligence engineering is NET's legacy- Space, AI, Humanoids exponential livelihood change of e-mcsquared - its shocking how little their intelligence system principles are transparently valued especially in rich western nations, how little they are openly mapped  to integrate global scale  & deepest community -actioned locally by education ; how badly media has been engineered to obscure common sense of childrens'  & teachers' & parenting's intelligence development

. Note too how late 20th C media has designed overnight world champions on entertainments like sports and pop music but not on educators or intelligence children need to practice most.

1 Intelligence era need holistic system transformation redefine education and action learning - teachers, parents and students aim to improve each others brains and confidence - end systems where teachers examine students to fail more and more of the through the grades/ All three of the net's parents deeply respected theit child's self-confidence which is notably integral to maths as well as translating disciplines foundational /system assumptions (siloisation of expertise may have been convenient for academics as they aged but is disastrous in our era of unprecedented change). Moreover if youth minds are tested only on competition every aspect of communal collaboration gets lost - which is particularly disadvantageous to cultural depth as the main quality humans (natives of planet earth evolutionary intangibles) can always recursively value smarter than humanoids on) 

2 The NET knew that their gifts would test next generations (eg before and after Orwell's halfway mark og 1984) with unprecedented exponential change -in fact their belief in eg neural net algorithms predicted likelihood of designing machines with billion times more maths brainpower than separate human minds and the 3 million fold exponentials:

chips capacity purpose

computation design purpose

satellite purpose

3 Its important to acknowledge views of NET on

  • energy,
  • above zero-sum trading games,
  • wars. 
  • space,
  • humanoids,
  • official secrets,
  • copyright, 
  • media

intelligence engineering will need more and more energy- therefore stop making mathematicians and  energy engineers nations most hated and wanted 0of people; unlock natures abundant energy; in fact all of the net's work was rooted in transformations needed to humans mathematical understanding of earth science (biotech , pjysics ai, material sciences, vritocal minerals  meterology and climate models, disaster prevention alerts ahead of time - nee nvidia and taiwan earth2.0 data mapping...) emanating from einsteins 1905 paper e=mcsquared; sadly the uncivilised state of the world of teh early 20th centiry meant all of the net were tied up in race to win atom bomb for allies; dozens of other openings from eisnteins 1905 tranformation got lost from the net until neumann met turing; computing and coiding became the work neumann wanted to devote his lifetime to as soon as world war 2 was over; sadly he got less than 12 years much cncer ridden to open up futures of computing but he did make tehse things clear

4 design above zero sum trading games - indeed ensure that's a priority in exploring opportunities og natiures abundance and threats of man scaling system competing with natures planet deep scale

4a end wars- indeed define wars as an integenerational disaster - ie spilling youth blook becaus eof failiyres or change inabailities og elder generations

4b end public servants official secrets-ok another disster of war is that may temporarily be neecessary- there is no other time that serving peoples meanse keepind secrets

5 neumann was also agiant strong patenting - he reasoned once connected by networks 6 months lead should be emnough foir anyone advancing puiblic good to chhoose partners 

6 neumann would have seen the purpose if space as primarily satellites death of cost oif distance in designing data clouds integrating most urgent deiversley local soliution ; this would have been part of desiging win-win treade games; he would have argued for win-win within an nation and win-win south to north as well as east-west - indeed its arguable that both world wars were caused by landlocked central and north europe becoming better enginners than though coastal and empire nations (result war over engineers need to access more iron and coal as well as trading routes)

7 The NET expected their legacy to be applied to urgent reconciliations with history's worst colonial behaviors- slave trades, destruction of natives and cultureal diversity ...the stanfe geohraphy og how east west increasing cut off south north; ist also telling that all world main finacial capitals are north of tropics; the tropics were region where infant and maternal diseases were maximised. Indeed Einstein had deveoted lot pof 20s to geneva's league of nations tryong to establish coopertaive i9ntelligence as well as itu being open standards setter of both electricity and telecoms. It is to be hpoped that Geneva fully addrttesses this when it becomes 5th relay host of oai world series launched with King Charles support london nov 2023>Korea>Paris>Delhi (19 Feb 2026)

i belevee neumann would have celebrated how japan and then much oif asia ( accelerating tjhroughKorea S Taiwan HK Singapore ) peacefully rose by desinging transportation supercities and would have seen last mile humanoid design as a tool that world class cities could indeed leverage for safe transportation , repetitive health services like terminal illnesses; increasingly mobilising vital diagnostics and helping in the overall purpose of intelligence ending most chronic and infectious diseases

Its l.ikely that v neumann would not have seen population growth from 2 billion to 8 billion to be beyond earth';s capacity but everyone needed the UN to be authoritaive in modelling how bpodrers compound externalisation risks unless open geonomic undetsanding is mediated - surely a number 1 intelligence purpose of building internet. 

neumann saw human languages as culturally rich but scientifically vague - he sought naths to intehrate what hundereds of separate languages could not- 

all of above suggest intelligence needed to get maths pattern recognition of natiures systems, space and humanoids purposes optimal ; that no need to rush llm modelling ceterainly not untile every teacher role was supporting braimn development not examining it

overall the net maximised princeton and cambridge hubs of transnational immigrant minds; indeed almost all the core maths needed for intelligence had come from the old wor;ld; ameic still isnt in top 30 of teraching high svchool maths

the net would not have supported quarterly progit taking as be all and end all of national success -in fat if a nations largest organsiations only py=urpose is maximising extraction of money from all stakeholders to benefit a few big owners- that is the least syustainable governace maths possible- the net would not have given professions like law insuranace accounting taxation teh short term numbers monoploies that they have turned the  branch of paper monetisation economics into- they would likiely havve supported blockchain and bitcoin as UN's 21st c curreny particularly with 2007'-8 d worldwide collapse of paper currency p;oliticing at US and EU. Note how this coindided with what could have been transformational open leap of 3g-4G mobilisation of inteligence clouds.

AIHUMANS.docx 

Views: 22

▶ Reply to This

About

chris macrae created this Ning Network.
Create a Ning Network! »

A student raises his hand in my lecture room and the question forms before he can stop it. I'm afraid I don't
understand. Four words carrying more
weight than their sound suggests because
what he means is not that this
particular equation has eluded him or
that he has lost the thread of the last
10 minutes. What he means is that he is
standing on ground. He cannot feel that
the calculus or the quantum mechanics or
the differential equations have passed
through his mind without building
anything solid. and uh tomorrow there
will be an exam that measures whether
the solid thing exists. What he means is
make it stop moving. What he means is
tell me when it will feel like the other
things I know, the things I trust, the
things that stay known and the answer he
wants, the answer he thinks he deserves
after attending the lectures and reading
the textbook and working the problems is
that understanding will arrive. That
this sensation of skating over frozen
water he cannot see through is
temporary. That one more explanation,
one more worked example, one clearer
analogy will be the one that makes it
click. And after that click, the
knowledge will be his in the same way
his native language is his, automatic
and immovable and requiring no vigilance
to maintain. The night before an exam is
when this request becomes impossible to
honor. There is no time remaining for
understanding to arrive. The exam is in
8 hours. In 8 hours he will sit in a
room with a paper that asks him to
demonstrate possession of something he
does not possess. And the institutional
apparatus does not grade effort or good
faith or the sincerity of his confusion.
It grades answers. So the question
sharpens not when will I understand but
what do I do with the fact that I don't.
There is a story people tell about me
repeated in mathematics departments for
70 years. Sometimes as a joke, sometimes
as a coan, sometimes as a piece of
advice so brutal it sounds like
pedagogical malpractice. A young
physicist came to me the night before a
deadline that carried the weight of an
exam. He said, "I'm afraid I don't
understand the method of
characteristics." And I said, "Young
man, in mathematics, you don't
understand things. You just get used to
them. The line sounds like dismissal. It
sounds like a genius telling a
non-genius that comprehension is for lesser subjects, that mathematics is inherently beyond reach, that some people have access and others don't. It sounds like the kind of thing you say when you've never experienced confusion yourself when understanding arrives for you as effortlessly as breathing and you cannot fathom why others struggle. But that is not what I meant. And  the context matters.
The physicist did not leave that conversation unable to work He left it able to work. The advice functioned, which means it was not dismissal. It was something else. What it was, a description of what knowledge actually is in mathematics and everywhere else, delivered by someone who had looked carefully enough to see it.

Consider what you think you understand, not mathematics. Start with something simpler. You understand how to walk. You have been walking since you were 14 months old. If I ask you to walk across this room, you will do it without conscious thought without needing to calculate the angle of your ankle or the precise force required from your quadriceps or the balance adjustments happening in your inner ear 30 times per  second. You will simply walk. And if  I ask you whether you understand walking, you will say yes, of course, obviously. But uh if I ask you to explain it to articulate the process in language that would allow someone who has never walked to reconstruct the action from your description, you cannot. You can say some things. You shift your weight forward. You put one foot in front of the other. But this is not an explanation. This is poetry about walking. The biomechanics textbook will give you more. The role of the cerebellum, the firing patterns of motor neurons, the complex feedback loops between propriception and muscular  adjustment. But even the textbook is not explaining walking. It is cataloging observations about walking, naming components. And if you read that textbook cover to cover, you will not understand walking in any sense that differs from what you possessed at age two. You will have gotten used to different language about it. The action itself, the knowledge that allows you to cross the room, remains exactly as mysterious and exactly as functional as it was before you knew the word proprioception existed. This is not a failure of the textbook. This is what knowledge is. Familiarity that runs deep enough to be operationalized. 

You can walk and you can talk about walking and you can even predict certain things about walking. But the thing you 
are doing when you do it is not
understanding. It is an intimacy with a process that has stopped requiring explanation. You have gotten used to it and we call that understanding because 
we need a word for the thing that works and we have confused working with comprehending. I think about driving. You speak your native language with grammatical correctness you cannot articulate. You make ethical judgments using principles you cannot fully enumerate. You recognize faces using criteria you cannot specify.
You do mathematics. Everyone does some mathematics. Even if it is only arithmetic using relationships you have stopped questioning. 3 * 4 is 12 is something you know the way you know how to swallow. It is not something you understand. It is something you have done enough times that the action and
the answer have fused. The space between
the question and the response has collapsed. You have gotten used to it.
And this I think is what I had seen that mathematics is not exceptional in its resistance to understanding. Mathematics
is exceptional in its refusal to pretend that familiarity is something else
. In biology, you memorize the Kreb cycle and then you take the exam and then you continue to use the phrase KB cycle as though you understand cellular
respiration in some complete way. In history, you learn that the treaty of Westfailia ended the 30 years war and you carry this as knowledge even though the thing you possess is a sentence, not comprehension of the political, religious and economic forces that
converged in 1648. We permit this
We call it education. We agree collectively not to pull the thread that reveals how thin the fabric is. But mathematics does not permit it. Mathematics has proofs. Mathematics has logical dependencies. Mathematics will not allow you to use a theorem you cannot derive or invoke a principle you cannot justify or rather it will allow it. It allows it constantly but it never stops reminding you that you are doing it. The gaps stay visible. The foundations remain exposed.
You can calculate a derivative using rules you memorized. But the textbook contains the epsilon delta definition and the definition is still there on the page waiting. And you know that what you are doing is not understanding calculus but operating a mechanism. You have learned to operate. You have gotten used to the derivative. You have not understood it. Mathematics is the only field honest enough to let you see the difference. This is not a bug. This is not mathematics failing to be a teachable subject. This is mathematics revealing what teaching actually
accomplishes in every subject. It
produces familiarity. It produces
facility. It produces the ability to
manipulate symbols and execute
procedures and generate results that are quite often correct. 

WHAT's DATA SOVEREIGNTY & WHAT CAN INTELLIGENCE DO? Today engineers can help peoples of any place be comparatively best at what their place on earth offers to generate. For example beautiful island might wam to be a toursist destination but overtime it (eg Galapagos) might want to develop intergenerational friendships so its teenagers can connect goodwill around the world as well as any skills eg medical or green energy the island most urgently need. Generations ago, Singapore did something different; its 6 million person poluation saw itself as at the cross-seas of world's first superport. It also gave back to region asean encouraging celebration of every peoples cultures and arts. It has aimed to be the 21st C most intelligent isle- where education is transformed by every 2nd grade teacher being as curious about what will ai do over the next 5 years as anyone else. Taiwan, addmitedly a 20 million person island, chose 1987 to become world number 1 as chip design changed to maximise customer requirements instead of the moores law era where at most one new chip a year would be designed in line with Intel's 3 decades of promising 100 times more capacity every decade.

In 2025, the vibrant aAInations index is one way of looking at where is place being led to maximise its peoples intelligence opportunities for evryone to win-win (network entreprenurially)

Happy 2025- free offer first quarter of 2025 - ask us any positive question about von neumann's purpose of intelligence/brainworking - by April we hope there will be a smart agent of neumann! - chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk

Maths-Lab-Crisis.docx

Joun in perplexity chats 

Does AI have name for terrifying ignorance rsks eg Los Angeles failed insurance sharing

In these days of LLM modeling, is there one integral one for multilateral systems reponsibilities

Is Ethiopia's new secirity model an Africawide benchmark

can you hlep map womens deepest  intel nets

what can you tell us about ...

thanks to JvN

2025report.com aims to celebrate first 75 years that followers of Adam Smith , Commonwealth begun by Queen Victoria, James Wilson and dozens of Royal Societies, Keynes saw from being briefed 1951 by NET (Neumann Einstein Turing). Please contacts us if you have a positive contribution - we will log these at www.economistdiary.com/1976 www.economistdiary.com/2001 and www.economistdiary.com/2023 (admittedly a preview!!)

First a summary of what the NET asked to be meidiated to integrate trust during what they foresaw as a chaotic period.

Roughly they foresaw population growth quadrupling from 2 billion to 8 billion

They were most concerned that some people would access million times moore tech by 1995 another million times moore by 2015 another million times moore by 2025. Would those with such access unite good for all. If we go back to 1760s first decade that scots invented engines around Glash=gow University James Wat and diarist Adam Smith we can note this happened just over a quarter of millennium into age of empire. WE welcome corrections be this age appears to have been a hectic race between Portugal, Spain, France Britain Netherlands as probbly the first 5 to set the system pattern. I still dont understand was it ineviatble when say the Porttuguese king bet his nations shirt on navigation that this would involve agressive trades with guns forcing the terms of trade and colonisation often being a 2nd step and then a 3rd steb being taking slaves to do the work of building on a newly conquered land. I put this way because the NET were clear almost every place in 1951 needed to complete both independence and then interdependence of above zero sum trading games. Whils traidning things runs into zero sums (eg when there is overall scarcity) life critical knowhow or apps can multiplu=y value in use. Thats was a defining value in meidting how the neyt's new engineering was mapped. Of course this problem was from 1945 occuring in a world where war had typiclly done of the following to your place:

your capital cities had been flattened by bombing - necessitating architecture rebuild as well as perhaps an all chnage in land ownership

your peoples had gone through up to 6 years of barbaric occupation -how would this be mediated (public served) particularly if you were a nation moving from radio to television

yiu mifgt eb britain have been on winning side but if huge debt to arms you had bought

primarily you might be usa now expected by most outside USSR to lead every advance'

in population terms you might be inland rural (more than half of humans) where you had much the least knowledge on what had hapened because you had been left out of the era of connecting electricity and communications grids

The NETts overall summary : beware experts in energy will be the most hated but wanted by national leaders; and then far greater will be exponential risk is the most brilliant of connectors of our new engines will become even more hated and wanted. We should remember that the NET did not begin with lets design computers. They began with Einstein's 1905 publications; newtonian science is at the deepest limits systemically wrong for living with nature's rules.

WE can thrash through more understanding of how the NET mapped the challenges from 1951 at https://neumann.ning.com/ Unfortunatnely nobody knew that within 6 years of going massively public in 1951 with their new engineering visions, all of the net would be dead. One of the most amzaing documents I have ever seen is the last month's diary of von neumann roughly October 1955 before he became bedridden with cancer. All over usa engineering projects were receiving his last genius inputs. And yet more amazing for those interested in intelligence machines is his last curriculum the computer and the brain scribbled from his bedroom in bethesda and presented posthumously by his 2nd wife Klara at Yale 1957 before she took her own life about a year later. A great loss because while neumann had architected computers she had arguably been the chief coder. Just to be clear Turing also left behind a chief coder Jane who continued to work for Britain's defence planning at cheltenham for a couple of decades. Economistwomen.com  I like to believe that the founders of brainworking machines foresaw not only that women coders would be as produytive as men but that they would linking sustainability from bottom up of every community. At least that is a valid way of looking at how primarily 1billion asian women batted the systemic poverty of being disconnected from the outside world even as coastal places leapt ahead with in some cases (G Silicon Valley, whatever you call Japan-Korea south-Taiwan-HK-Singapore access to all of 10**18 times moore

Epoch changing Guides

1 AI Training AI Training.docx

 2 Exploring cultural weaknesss of encounters with greatest brain tool.docx

.2016-23.pptx

help assemble 100000 millennials summitfuture.com and GAMES of  worldrecordjobs.com card pack 1 i lets leap froward from cop26 glasgow nov 2021 - 260th year of machines and humans started up by smith and watt- chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk-

WE APPROACH 65th year of  Neumann's tech legacy - 100 times more tech decade - which some people call Industrial Rev 4 or Arttificial Intel blending with humans; co-author 2025report.com, networker foundation of The Economist's Norman Macrae -

my father The Economist's norman macrae was privileged to meet von neumann- his legacy of 100 times more tech per decade informed much of dad's dialogues with world leaders at The Economist - in active retirement dad's first project to be von neumanns official biographer - english edition ; recently published japanese edition - queries welcomed; in 1984 i co-authored 2025report.com - this was celebrating 12 th year that dad( from 1972, also year silicon valley was born) argued for entrepreneurial revolution (ie humanity to be sustainable would need to value on sme networks not big corporate nor big gov); final edition of 2025report is being updated - 1984's timelines foresaw need to prep for fall of brlin wall within a few months; purspoes of the 5 primary sdg markets were seen to be pivotal as they blended real and digital - ie efinance e-agri e-health e-learning and 100%lives matter community; the report charged public broadcasters starting with BBC with most vital challenge- by year 2000 ensure billions of people were debating man's biggest risk as discrepancy in incomes and expectations of rich & poor nations; mediated at the right time everyone could linkin ideas as first main use of digital webs--- the failure to do this has led to fake media, failures to encourage younger half of the world to maxinise borderless friendships and sdg collabs - see eg economistwomen.com abedmooc.com teachforsdgs.com ecop26.com as 2020s becomes last chance for youth to be teh sustainability generation


 

© 2026   Created by chris macrae.   Powered by

Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service