On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 , Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote: >> And what reason do you have to believe that consciousness has anything >> to do with solving NP complete problems in polynomial time? >> > > > I don't, and I didn't say that. >
OK, so you don't have any reason to believe that consciousness has something to do with solving NP complete problems in polynomial time. And I agree with you, if it were otherwise we should be able to consciously solve NP complete problems one hell of a lot better than we can. > What I said if only you could read, is that what could render > computationalism false is iff consciousness depends on a non-computable > feature of reality > Obviously if you could show that consciousness, or anything else in nature for that matter, was non-computable then computationalism would be false. But non-computability is overkill, if you can just show that nature has the ability to solve NP complete problems in polynomial time that alone would be more than enough to prove that the Church-Turing Thesis is wrong. And if donkeys could whistle then pigs could fly. > NP problem *are* computable. > Yes, but not in polynomial time; our brains can't do it, our computers can't do it, and there is not one scrap of evidence that nature can do it either. 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/d/optout.
