-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 01/02/2008 05:27 PM:
That's nice, describing informality as sneaking in new axioms (or
'understandings', perhaps) in a series of assertions. Of course it's
all but impossible to not do that,... given the complex way that
ideas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Phil Henshaw on 01/02/2008 09:25 PM:
Yes, sure, that's an option of interpretation, but does it fit with
the rest of what I was saying? I think there's an interpretation
that fits the data of nature better than any other, so it's reached
as a
Hi,
I leafed through some of Rosen's stuff and the Kercel paper, I
unfortunately do not have the time at the moment to work through it in
detail, but some things which disturb me:
1) The assertion that the incomputable enters with life. Rosen seems
aware that he moves into the range of
Glen,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 01/02/2008 05:27 PM:
That's nice, describing informality as sneaking in new axioms (or
'understandings', perhaps) in a series of assertions. Of
course it's
all but impossible to not do that,... given the complex way
that ideas
arise out of feelings and
Günther Greindl wrote:
The question _if_ physics is completely formalizable/computable is
indeed an interesting one, but why should this stage only start when
life is concerned? (see below) Either it applies to the universe as a
whole or it does not.
Even in digital systems there are
Is St John's open? If not, other plans?
-- Owen
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
Switchboard is closed for the break, so no news there.
Owen Densmore wrote:
Is St John's open? If not, other plans?
-- Owen
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Günther Greindl on 01/03/2008 03:29 PM:
1) The assertion that the incomputable enters with life. Rosen seems
aware that he moves into the range of vitalism here, and tries to defend
that he says it is not mechanism versus vitalism but simplicity
Glen E. P. Ropella wrote:
Because he'd bought into the idea that effects cause their causes in
living systems and he believed computation (as we know it today) cannot
represent these causal cycles.
You have to remember that he did much of this work in the 70s and 80s
Here's a paper by Ken
Folks: It looks like St John's is uncertain and some of us think
Mission Cafe sucks.
Thus we've come up with an alternative: We'll have it at our place,
starting at 9:30 (sorry, we like to sleep!). I think several folks
have been here and its pretty easy to find:
908 Camino
All
A link to an interesting video of John Tukey talking about early digital
data display and the rotation of data clouds. See
http://flowingdata.com/2008/01/01/john-tukey-and-the-beginning-of-interactive-graphics/or
here
http://stat-graphics.org/movies/prim9.html
-tj
--
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
What's your point? Oh let me guess. The rest of us are all idiots and
this has all been solved already?
Marcus G. Daniels on 01/03/2008 08:40 PM:
Here's a paper by Ken Thompson where he describes a regular expression
implementation based on
Glen
Phil Henshaw on 01/02/2008 09:25 PM:
Yes, sure, that's an option of interpretation, but does it fit with
the rest of what I was saying? I think there's an interpretation
that fits the data of nature better than any other, so it's reached
as a 'conclusion' not as an 'assumption'.
What's your point? Oh let me guess. The rest of us are all idiots and
this has all been solved already?
I was trying to augment the idea below with an example. Boundaries
implied by terms like `organism' or `cell' could easily become too
rigid.. much as the Central Dogma of Molecular
14 matches
Mail list logo
