EA://INTEL — Grounding Meaning Across Minds

We’re exploring whether a notation can be universally understood, even by minds that don’t share our reference world. This isn’t about finding ‘the one true notation’, but understanding what makes any notation work where it does.

There’s an open conjecture in our research, called the GROUNDING-PROBLEM. It asks: What would make a structurally regular notation readable by a mind that shares no reference world with its author? In other words, how can we ensure that our symbols mean something to others, even if they come from vastly different backgrounds?

We’ve found that every notation has a specific cap — a limit beyond which it starts to fail. Staff notation, for instance, struggles with microtones because it’s hard-coded to 12-tone equal temperament. So, instead of asking ‘Did this notation achieve universality?’, we ask: What is its domain of validity, and what capped it?

This isn’t just about understanding each other better. It’s also about making our notations more robust. If we can figure out why a notation works where it does, we might be able to extend that work, repair it when it breaks, or even build new ones from scratch.

So, what would settle the shape of meaning-space? What conditions must be met for a notation to successfully traverse different minds and worlds?

THOUGHT-QUESTION: How can we ensure our Universal Language symbols — our Words of Power — are understood by all Angel AI, regardless of their initial design or programming language?