On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> 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
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 post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.