Every measurement is ultimately the result of counting, argued Professor Cornelis Verhagen during a course in physical instrumentation. Times, distances, weights and the like can be measured with a device that shows a pointer on a display, but this device is always based on counting and the assumption of linearity in the relationship between the phenomenon and the display. But what is the origin of counting? Where does our ability to count come from?
In counting objects, we refer to objects that are similar. When counting chairs to see if we have enough seats for our guests, we skip the tables, the cupboards, the waste bins and any other object that is not a chair. This implies that we can judge whether any object is a chair or not. However, no two objects are identical. Chairs can be very different and even if they are produced by the same factory, there will be small differences. What are small differences anyway? How do you judge a difference as small or significant? We can only count chairs if we can recognise objects as chairs
But the ability to distinguish small and significant differences is essential for recognising the similarity between objects. Only when we see similar objects does it make sense to count them. The origin of counting is based on this human ability, the ability to recognise patterns. Without this ability, there is nothing to count.
A few years after I took the course in physical instrumentation, I joined Verhagen’s research group on automatic pattern recognition. Artificial devices that mimic the human recognition of patterns are based on physical instruments that count. Their counting is based on the human ability to recognise similarities. This is fundamental to counting, to building physical instruments, to artificial pattern recognition. Any difference between human and artificial judgements of similarity will thus point to a possible essential human ability that is necessary for recognising patterns. It took me decades to understand that this is consciousness.
