On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 12:53:33PM +0100, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > With some competence, I guess you mean. > Without competence, and giving time to the creature, any universal > machine do have an open-ended creativity. Well, certainly in the > sense of Post (I can explain this, but it is a bit technical). >
I'm interested to hear your explanation, but if its what I suspect it will be, I'll be disappointed :). Basically stating that the universal dovetailer emulates creative conscious being does not demonstrate a creative program, which needs to be creative relative to us (as observers). But if your idea is something different, I'm all ears! > > > > >I haven't had a chance to study and understand Post's definition (sure > >I've looked at it, but didn't grok it), but if you say it is > >equivalent to universality, then its not really going to contribute to > >the solution. > > I am not sure. Open ended creativity seems to me well captured by > Post. It makes the machine able to defeat all effective complete > theories about itself. It gives what I often called the comp vaccine > against reductionism. > Well - maybe if you explain more? Cheers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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.
