On 26.12.2012 13:45 Bruno Marchal said the following:


On 26 Dec 2012, at 12:45, Evgenii Rudnyi wrote:

I have recently seen a paper on a Physarum machine

A Adamatzky Physarum machine: implementation of a
Kolmogorov-Uspensky machine on a biological substrate
http://arxiv.org/pdf/cs/0703128

The author also has a book on this theme: Physarum Machines:
Computers from Slime Mould.

Any comment?

I love slime mold. Nice paper. Not sure if it is not a bit out of
topic except as a weak evidence for comp among many. It is convincing
for the implementation of variate UTMs by 'nature'. Our terrestrial
body future relies in coming back to bacteria and amoeba :)


Bruno,

John Yates starts experiments with physarum. On his blog

http://ttjohn.blogspot.in/2013/01/progress-towards-describing-tensed-time.html

he mentions that

"Now Adamatzky considers that a good model for physarum behaviour may be the KUM model, which basically is like a Turing machine but in many dimensions, i.e. we can abstractly think of a multidimensional tape. Now it turns out that a KUM machine will be Turing-complete but may have some computational advantages beyond those of a Turing machine. As I understand it the Turing machine and the KUM will be Turing-equivalent. In fact the KUMs are pointer machines."

Do you know what is the KUM model and how it is related to a Turing machine?

Evgenii

--
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