2013/8/24 Chris de Morsella <cdemorse...@yahoo.com>

> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> everything-list@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *John Clark
> *Sent:* Friday, August 23, 2013 12:58 PM
> *To:* everything-list@googlegroups.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: When will a computer pass the Turing Test?****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Chris de Morsella <cdemorse...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:****
>
> ** **
>
>  ****
>
> > The computer requires a substrate in which to operate upon -- the CPU
> chips for example are what our computers operate on. I know of no computer
> that does not require this external structured environment  ****
>
>
>  The human requires a substrate in which to operate upon -- the brain for
> example is what our human minds  operate on. I know of no human that does
> not require this external structured environment.   ****
>
> Yes… and?****
>
> > Every computer in existence requires external enabling hardware.****
>
>
> >>Every human in existence requires external enabling hardware.****
>
> Yes but humans are not universal computing machines, if indeed we are
> machines. Do we know enough about how our brains work and are structured to
> the level that we would need to in order to be able to answer that question
> with any degree of certainty? I was referring to the hypothesized
> deterministic universe,
>
Well it's not because the universe is deterministic that it is
computable... it may require infinite precision to get the next step...
that's why computability and cause and effect are not related contrary to
what John Clarck like to say (if something has a cause/reason then it is
computable, that's just plain wrong). It's not because it's determined that
it has a finite description...

A computation + an oracle is not a computation *alone*... it requires the
oracle doing an hypercomputation or handling the infinite stuff, while the
whole object could still be said to behave deterministically it is not
computable.

Quentin




>  in which everything that has happened can be computed from the initial
> state and has followed on from that original set of conditions… that we
> live in a deterministic universe and that everything that has or will ever
> happen is pre-destined and already baked in to the unfolding fabric of our
> experiencing of reality.****
>
> If a computer operates from within a local frame of reference and context,
> but far from being isolated and existing alone is instead connected to much
> vaster environments and meta-processes that are potentially very loosely
> coupled -- based on in direct means such as say message passing through
> queues or other signals – then can its own outputs be said to be completely
> deterministic – even if we consider its own internal operations to be
> constrained to be deterministic? Operations, especially ones that are parts
> of much larger workflows etc. are being mutated by many actors and
> potentially with sophisticated stripe locking strategies, for example,
> having their data stores being accessed concurrently by multiple separate
> processes. There are just so many pseudo random and hard to predict or
> model occurrences – such as say lock contention – that are occurring at
> huge rates (when seen from sufficiently high up any large architecture)***
> *
>
> I find it hard to see how the resulting outcomes produced by such kinds of
> systems can be determined based on a knowledge of the state of the system
> at some initial instant in time.****
>
>  > If a computer requires a substrate which it can manipulate in order to
> perform its logical operations then a universal computer is impossible
> because the substrate would necessarily be outside and foundational to its
> domain.****
>
>
> >>If a human requires a substrate which it can manipulate in order to
> perform its logical operations then a universal human is impossible because
> the substrate would necessarily be outside and foundational to its domain.
> ****
>
> Agreed. Humans are exceedingly far from being universal. Our very sense of
> self precludes universality.****
>
> Cheers,****
>
> -Chris****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.****
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>



-- 
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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to