On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 09:35:02PM -0700, Lee Corbin wrote: > Bruno writes > > > If minds are turing-emulable then indeed minds cannot > > perceive something as being provably non-turing-emulable, but minds > > can prove that 99,999...% of comp-Platonia is not turing-emulable. > > I don't pretend to understand this at all. You are saying > that minds (e.g. we) cannot *perceive* something as being > provably non-turing-emulable, yet minds can nonetheless > *prove* that something is non-turing-emulable. > > I (very naively, of course) would have supposed that as soon > as a mind proved that X was Y, then that very mind would > have perceived that X was provably Y. > > How confusing. > > Lee
I think what Bruno is saying is that the set of noncomputable strings
is of measure 1 within the UD output (ie comp-Platonia), even if it is
impossible to ascertain whether any particular string is
noncomputable. (Some strings are provably computable, of course).
Cheers
--
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics 0425 253119 (")
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australia http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
International prefix +612, Interstate prefix 02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
pgpDjw31iHltX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
