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 integers. 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/ Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
