Hi Pei,
One issue that make that version of the paper controversial is the term "computation", which actually has two senses: (1) "whatever computer does",and (2) "what defined as `computation' in computability theory". In the paper I'm using the second sense of the term. (I'm revising the paper to make this more clear.)
Ok, so just to be perfectly clear about this. You maintain that a "real computer" (say my laptop here that I'm using) is able to do things that are beyond what is possible with a "theoretical computer" (say a Turing machine). Is that correct?
If so, then this would seem to be the key difference of opinion between us.
I have no reason that I can think of to believe that a response toIf you are still unconvinced, think about this problem: say the problem you are trying to solve is to reply my current email. Is this problem computable? Do you follow an algorithm in solving it? What is the computational complexity of this process?
your email could not be generated by an algorithm. Perhaps a big
fancy one with a high computation complexity, but I don't see any
reason why not.
Cheers
Shane
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
