Ok, at a single point in time on a 600x400 screen, if one is using 24-bit color (usually called "true color") then the number of possible images is
2^(600x400x24) which is, roughly, 10 with a couple million zeros after it ... way bigger than a googol, way way smaller than a googolplex ;-) This is a large number, but so what? Of course, the human eye would not be able to tell the difference between all these different images; that's a whole different story... I don't see why these middle-school calculations are of interest?? ... this has nothing to do with any of the philosophical issues under discussion, does it? ben On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Ben, > > Thanks for reply. I'm a bit lost though. How does this formula take into > account the different pixel configurations of different objects? (I would > have thought we can forget about the time of display and just concentrate on > the configurations of points/colours, but no doubt I may be wrong). > > Roughly how large a figure do you come up with, BTW? > > I guess a related question is the old one - given a keyboard of letters, > what are the total number of works possible with say 500,000 key presses, > and how many 500,000-press attempts will it (or could it) take the > proverbial monkey to type out, say, a 50,000 word play called Hamlet? > > In either case, I would imagine, the numbers involved are too large to be > practically manageable in, say, this universe, (which seems to be a common > yardstick). Comments? The maths here does seem important, because it seems > to me to be the maths of creativity - and creative possibilities - in a > given medium. A somewhat formalised maths, since creators usually find ways > to transcend and change their medium - but useful nevertheless. Is such a > maths being pursued? > > > On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 8:37 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> Matt:The problem you describe is to reconstruct this image given the >> highly filtered and compressed signals that make it through your visual >> perceptual system, like when an artist paints a scene from memory. Are you >> saying that this process requires a consciousness because it is otherwise >> not computable? If so, then I can describe a simple algorithm that proves >> you are wrong: try all combinations of pixels until you find one that looks >> the same. >> >> Matt, >> >> Simple? Well, you're good at maths. Can we formalise what you're arguing? >> A computer screen, for argument's sake. 800 x 600, or whatever. Now what is >> the total number of (diverse) objects that can be captured on that screen, >> and how long would it take your algorithm to enumerate them? >> >> (It's an interesting question, because my intuition says to me that there >> is an infinity of objects that can be depicted on any screen (or drawn on a >> page). Are you saying that there aren't? - > > > > There is a finite number of possible screen-images, at least from the point > of view of the process sending digital signals to the screen. > > If the monitor refreshes each pixel N times per second, then over an > interval of T seconds, if each pixel can show C colors, then there are > > C^(N*T*800*600) > > possible different scenes showable on the screen during that time > period.... > > A big number but finite! > > Drawing on a page is a different story, as it gets into physics questions, > but it seems rather likely there is a finite number of pictures on the page > that are distinguishable by a human eye. > > So, whether or not an infinite number of objects exist in the universe, > only a finite number of distinctions can be drawn on a monitor (for > certain), or by an eye (almost surely) > > ben g > ------------------------------ > *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > > ------------------------------ > *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | > Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription > <http://www.listbox.com> > -- Ben Goertzel, PhD CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC Director of Research, SIAI [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
