On 30 Apr 2009, at 19:39, Brent Meeker wrote:

> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> On 30 Apr 2009, at 15:49, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
 >>Marchal wrote
>> That is weird.
>> I think that you believe that a rock implements computations, because
>> you believe a computation can be decomposed in tiny computations, but
>> this is not true, you need much more. You need a universal machine
>> which links and complexify the states in a precise way.
>> Some alive beings do some computations (like some flowers compute  
>> tiny
>> part of the Fibonacci function). But again, this is sophisticated and
>> took time to appear. Waves do analog computations, hardly universal
>> digital one, or only when put in some very special condition.
>> Interesting and rich computations are relatively rare and exceptional
>> until they self-multiplied, like amoebas.
> Does the universe compute its states?

Open problem, but most probably not, given that the universe  
appearance emerge from a statistic bearing on a infinite set of  
(finite and infinite) computations.

> How is the evolution of the wave
> function of the universe or of a flower not a computation?

For a reason similar to the fact that there is no algorithm capable of  
predicting if you will see an electron up or down when prepared in the  
state up+down. But comp makes the "wave" itself resulting from  
apparent (for the 1-person) arithmetical collapses.

>> Nor do I believe the filmed movie graph do any computation, it "read"
>> a description of one, but does not link them logically in real time.
>> Today, genetical systems, brains, and computer (human or engineered)
>> do "concrete" computations.
> But that seems like introducing a "magic" similar to the magic of
> physical existence, except now it is the magic of computational  
> connection.

Ok, but the magic of computational connection can be entirely reduce  
to the magic of succession, addition and multiplication of positive  
And it is magic, but it is a magic which explains why it has to be a  
magic. A TOE which does not postulate the natural numbers is a TOE  
without natural numbers. We have to assume the numbers, they cannot be  
reduced to anything simpler/



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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to