On 4/7/2011 9:48 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
I indulge myself in a slight correction on a statement, that you were
just doing for a second time, despite I thought having already
insisted on the point. I am sorry because it is not completely in the
On 07 Apr 2011, at 17:42, John Mikes wrote:
Thanks, Brent, - however:
I did not restrict myself to physics (lest: 'fundamental') and had a
shorthand-typo in my text:
- - - (=cause) - - -
which indeed means: "a change, effected by - what we call: a cause".
I was referring to our (conventional) system looking only inside the
'model' of already knowable knowledge, even those applied only "as
needed" to identify cause - or effect.
The unknown 'rest of the world' also influences those changes we may
experience within our model so our consclusions are incomplete.
That does not apply to a universal machine which 'knows it all' -
Universal machine knows about nothing.
They are universal with respect to computability, or emulability, or
simulability. Not on provability, believability or knowability.
Typically all humans being are universal machines. I can argue that
bacteria are already universal machine.
The UMs know about nothing, but they can become wise, that is Löbian.
This is when they realize that they are universal (in some sense which
I can make precise) in that case, they still know about nothing, but
they know that they know nothing, and they can know why it is
necessary that they know nothing. They also know that if they develop
knowledge, their ignorance-space will grow even more, so that by
learning, they can only be proportionnally more ignorant. that is why
they become extremely modest.
In the arithmetical interpretation of Plotinus hypostases, the
universal machine is the arithmetical correspondent of man. God is
arithmetical truth, and for "Him/It/Her" there is a sense to say that
He/It/her knows everything, but It is far beyond what *any* machine
can grasp. Machines cannot even give It a name, unless they assume
that they are machine, in which case the label "Truth" can indirectly
Universal machine are more like universal baby than omniscient knower.
With the Church-Turing Thesis, your laptop *is* a universal machine.
I doubt that it has enough memory.
The universal Turing machine is universal. All computer's are. And I
can argue that all living cells are universal.
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