On 23 Sep, 08:00, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
> On 22 Sep 2009, at 23:47, Flammarion wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 22 Sep, 21:53, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Well little problem in gmail sorry.
>
> >> So I do it again /o\
>
> >> Sorry I wanted to write "it does *add* nothing".
>
> >> Level 0 is not part of the computation. And I still don't see how
> >> you can
> >> relate physically running a program on a computer, and running it
> >> on an
> >> abaccus, with a pen and a sheet of paper, in my mind. The only
> >> relation is
> >> the abstract computation.
>
> > 1. The notion of immaterial computation needs defense since all known
> > computers are material
>
> Physicisist cannot yet define computation (except in a sense
> immaterial quantum computations).

I have absolutely no idea why you would say that. Physicists tend to
have computers on their desks and tend to regard them as physical.

> it is a notion dicovered by mathematicians.

matehmaticians can discover numebrs, but they
still need matterial things to writh them with,

> I am no more sure what you mean by computation, now. How does your
> primary matter implements computations?

Same way it implements being a chair.
By beign the bearer of properties that
implement it.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to