Bruno Marchal writes: > > Are you suggesting that of two very similar programs, one containing a > > true random > > number generator and the other a pseudorandom number generator, only > > the former > > could possibly be conscious? I suppose it is possible, but I see no > > reason to believe > > that it is true. > > > > > It *has* been proved (by diagonalization) that there exist some problem > in number theory which are soluble by a machine using a random oracle, > although no machine with pseudorandom oracle can sole the problem.
That's interesting: does this imply it is possible to test a number sequence to see if it is random? > KURTZ S. A., 1983, On the Random Oracle Hypothesis, Information and > Control, 57, pp. 40-47. > > But it is not relevant given that self-duplication is already a way to > emulate true random oracle. Do you mean by this an algorithm that explores every possible branch, by analogy with the MWI of QM? Stathis Papaioannou _________________________________________________________________ Be one of the first to try Windows Live Mail. http://ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
