On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > And the, what is the meaning of "computation is physical"? >
Which word didn't you understand? > It looks to me that this consists in single out some universal system and > declare that only running it makes things real.[...] What does mean > "physical"?. I don't take that notion for granted. > I'll explain what "physical" means just as soon as you explain what "real" means, and what "means" means. >> So your great discovery is that you don't know what the end of a >> computation will be until you come to the end of the computation. > > > > Some have said exactly this to Feynman for his sum over histories > formulation of QM. It is the same problem, with similar conclusions, and > both are testable and comparable. > Feynman's theory said the magnetic moment for the electron should not be exactly 1 as had been thought but 1.00115965246, what number does your theory say it should be? > You have study only 2/8 of part UDA, > True, I have only read the first 2 steps (or maybe it was 3, I forget) of your Ulster Defense Association proof, but proofs are built on the foundation of what comes before, so when one comes upon a ridiculous blunder in step 2 (or maybe 3) it would be equally ridiculous to keep reading. And in none of your writings do you factor in the IHA principle. > and 0/8 of AUDA, so you might try to be cautious in your judgment. > I don't see how friend of Lawrence of Arabia, Auda ibu Tayi, is relevant to our conversation. John K Clark -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
