E.N. Martynova - Research Scientist, Scientific Research Institute for Pediatry and Pediatric Seurgery (Moscow) E-mail: lemart@yandex.ru

The topic of artificial intelligence arouses such interest that it is often discussed in the most unexpected places. But the very notion of intelligence (derivative from the Latin intellectus - comprehension) brings up the concept of reason, i.e. human consciousness. Thus, there is a question that requires a special consideration: To what level of consciousness must artificial intelligence correspond - Or, in other words: What is the consciousness that needs to be artificially replicated? Reflections about consciousness have accompanied the human kind since its inception. They vary from psychological self-analysis to different forms of public discussions. Still, people have not yet reached a single, generally accepted concept of consciousness. Mainly because consciousness (the mind) is perceived as an immaterial part of a material body. This leads to two unsolvable questions: Where is the line between the material and immaterial; and what is the mechanism of existence of intangible consciousness in a tangible body - On the other hand, if we accept that consciousness is as material as the body, we are left with "just" one question: What do we actually know about matter? The aim of this work is to find the correlation between physical science and fundamental ancient knowledge, which could clarify the nature of consciousness and possibilities of its artificial replication. The search for "material" explanations led to the theory of a physical vacuum that unifies and explains all physical laws, never contradicting them, but enabling one to assess the existing knowledge from a new viewpoint. All physical theories, from classical mechanics to modern theories of fundamental interactions, investigate behavior of four levels of reality: solid bodies, liquids, gases, various fields, and elementary particles. The universal principle of relativity and equation of perfect vacuum extend the image of the world around us and enable us to single out seven levels of reality. Thus, contemporary physics develops in the direction that explains the validity of the ancient universal religion. Appar-ently, humanity is moving not forward for knowledge but rather backward for knowledge.

 

1. Ramacharaka (Atkinson U.U.). Filosofija, religija i ehzotericheskie uchenija Indii. M.: Starklajjt. 2009. S. 28-30, 44, 57, 59.
2. Vasant Lad. Diagnostika po pulsu. M.: Sattva. 2007. S. 12, 13, 15.
3. EHnciklopedija Ajurvedy. SPb.: Svjatoslav. 2004. S. 141.
4. Dipak CHopra. Sovershennoe zdorove. SPb.: Budushhee Zemli. 2005. S. 39.
5. Filosofija. M.: EHksmo. 2015. S. 35.
6. SHipov G.I. Teorija fizicheskogo vakuuma. M.: Nauka. 1997. C. 135-137, 141-143, 145-146, 148, 267.
7. Akimov A.E. EHvristicheskoe obsuzhdenie problemy poiska dalnodejjstvijj: EGS - koncepcija. M. 1991. S. 63. Prepr. MNTC VENT. №7A.
8. Hagelin J.S. Restructuring physics from its foundation in light of Maharishi-s Vedic Science // Modern Science and Vedic Science. 1989. V. 3. № 1. P. 3-72.
9. SHipovG.I. Teorija fizicheskogo vakuuma. Novaja paradigma. M.: NTCentr. 1993. S. 362.
10. Terletsky J.P. Masses propres positives, négatives et imaginaires // J. Phys. Radium. 1962. V. 23. P. 910-920.
11. Terleckijj JA.P. Paradoksy teorii otnositelnosti. M.: Nauka. 1966.
12. Okun L.B. Fizika ehlementarnykh chastic. M.: Nauka. 1988. S. 272.
13. Martynova E.N. Konceptualnoe modelirovanie nejjroanatomicheskikh korreljatov smerti mozga na osnovanii ispolzovanija drevnikh predstavlenijj i sovremennykh znanijj // Nejjrokompjutery: razrabotka, primenenie. 2014. № 3. S. 63-71.
14. Martynova E.N. Razvitie bolevojj chuvstvitelnosti u cheloveka kak model poznanija nejjrofilosofii // Nejjrokompjutery: razrabotka, primenenie. 2015. № 4. S. 56-57.