2012/9/10 benjayk <benjamin.jaku...@googlemail.com>

>
>
> > > No program can determine its hardware.  This is a consequence of the
> > > Church
> > > Turing thesis.  The particular machine at the lowest level has no
> > bearing
> > > (from the program's perspective).
> > If that is true, we can show that CT must be false, because we *can*
> > define
> > a "meta-program" that has access to (part of) its own hardware (which
> > still
> > is intuitively computable - we can even implement it on a computer).
> >
>
> It's false, the program *can't* know that the hardware it has access to is
> the *real* hardware and not a simulated hardware. The program has only
> access to hardware through IO, and it can't tell (as never ever) from that
> interface if what's outside is the *real* outside or simulated outside.
> <\quote>
> Yes that is true. If anything it is true because the hardware is not even
> clearly determined at the base level (quantum uncertainty).
> I should have expressed myself more accurately and written " "hardware" "
> or
> "relative 'hardware'". We can define a (meta-)programs that have access to
> their "hardware" in the sense of knowing what they are running on relative
> to some notion of "hardware". They cannot be emulated using universal
> turing
> machines


Then it's not a program if it can't run on a universal turing machine.


> (in general - in specific instances, where the hardware is fixed on
> the right level, they might be). They can be simulated, though, but in this
> case the simulation may be incorrect in the given context and we have to
> put
> it into the right context to see what it is actually emulating (not the
> meta-program itself, just its behaviour relative to some other context).
>
> We can also define an infinite hierarchy of meta-meta-....-programs (n
> metas) to show that there is no universal notion of computation at all.
> There is always a notion of computation that is more powerful than the
> current one, because it can reflect more deeply upon its own "hardware".
>
> See my post concerning meta-programs for further details.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://old.nabble.com/Why-the-Church-Turing-thesis--tp34348236p34413719.html
> Sent from the Everything List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> --
> 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.
>
>


-- 
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.

-- 
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