On 28 Jan 2011, at 18:52, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 1/27/2011 10:08 PM, Rex Allen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Brent
But if the
emulation attempts to be local then it must include inherent
which I think is not Turing computable.
The Turing machine could draw the required randomness from a tape of
random bits, couldn't it?
The question might then be asked:
"Where did the tape of random bits come from?"
To which I guess a response of sorts might be:
"Well, where did the Turing machine come from? Probably from there."
If you can have unexplained order, then you can have unexplained
randomness, can't you?
Sure, but then you've gone beyond Turing emulation. A tape
providing the random numbers would have to be a realized (not just
I hope Rex doesn't mind, but I don't understand Brent's remark.
Anyway, the UD compute all machines on all inputs, and big inputs acts
like oracles from the first person point of views. We cannot enumerate
the reals, but the dovetailer dovetails on all the finite sequences as
parameters, and from the first person views, which abstracts from the
UD-time delays, it already makes a background random noise. A priori.
Think about the iterated self-duplication. In that case it is easy to
define a notion of normality, like when a laser beam split in two a
sheaf of photon prepared in the complementary base.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at