On 7 February 2014 05:22, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05 Feb 2014, at 20:29, Craig Weinberg wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 12:53:56 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> On 05 Feb 2014, at 13:49, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 4:37:39 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 04 Feb 2014, at 18:07, Craig Weinberg wrote: >>> >>> Numbers can be derived from sensible physics >>> >>> That is a claim often done, but nobody has ever succeed without assuming >>> Turing universality (and thus the numbers) in their description of physics. >>> Turing universality can just be a property of physics, like density or >>> mass. >>> >> That is close to just nonsense (but I agree that some notorious >> physicists are attracted to this, but they don't convince me). >> > > Can you explain why? > > Because Turing universality is a mathematical notion. > > It has nothing to do with physics. > > I must admit I was quite surprised by this. I thought you generally argue that physics can be extracted from comp, and TU is part of comp (isn't it?)
-- 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.
