On Fri, May 15, 2015 Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> Why would Turing machine obeys the laws of physics? >> > > >> Because a Turing Machine like all machines involves change. > > > The change are injection in N. >
So what? A injection is a function and a function is a machine that MOVES from one element in a set to another and ASSOCIATES it with elements of another set. All these things involve change. > >> and determine if it is white or black, and a clockwork must determine >> if it should change the color of that cell or not, and a clockwork must >> determine if it should move the tape one space to the right or one space to >> the left or just stop. And nobody knows how to make clockwork without using >> matter that obeys the laws of physics. Nobody, absolutely nobody. > > > > Oh, so you do assume primitive matter. > I assume nothing, I know for a fact that NOBODY knows how to make a clockwork without using matter and the laws of physics, maybe someday somebody will figure it out but as of today NOBODY has the slightest idea of how to do it. > >>> You can implement Turing machine in Lambda calculus > > > >> No you can not! > > Then not only Turing and Church were wrong, as they will both proves this. > Don't tell me show me. I think you're talking Bullshit but it would be easy to prove me wrong, just make a Lambda Machine that makes no use of matter that obeys the laws of physics and make a calculation, any calculation with it. Do that and you will have not only won the argument but I will personally buy your airline ticket to Stockholm for your Nobel Prize ceremony. > > You confuse [...] > Enough with the "you confuse" crap! Every post of yours contains a "you confuse", put a little variety into your phrases. > if you agree that 2+2=4, and if you use the standard definition, then you > can prove that a tiny part of the standard model of arithmetic run all > computations. > The word " run" involves changes in physical quantities like position and time. And what sort of thing are you running these calculations on? >> Nothing can divide all arithmetical truth from all arithmetical >> falsehoods. Nothing can do it including arithmetic. > > > > Sorry Arithmetical truth does it, trivially. > What a steaming pile of Bullshit. > You just dismiss a whole branch of math. > I dismiss junk science. > > you are a comp1 believer, and "comp" is comp1. Then it implies comp2 > Oh for christ sake! As if "comp" wasn't bad enough now we have "comp1" and "comp2" and I'm not even going to ask what the hell this new form of babytalk is supposed to mean, assuming it means anything at all. > > you invoke a God for which we have no evidence. > Science is about evidence and what we have ZERO evidence of is anybody making one single calculation without using matter that obeys the laws of physics. Let me repeat that, we have zero evidence, zip nada zilch goose egg. > > Amen (you are a good Aristotelian Theologian). > Be creative think of a new insult, the one about me being secretly religious and being an admirer of Aristotle is getting old. > > the set of true sentences is well defined, > The set of all true statements is contained within the set of all statements, the trick is to separate the true from the false. I agree that the set of all true statements and no false statements has a definition that is not gibberish, but we know that nothing can produce such a set. The integer that is equal to 2+2 but is not equal to 4 is also well defined, but nothing can produce that integer either. >> in general there is no way to determine which statements it is possible >> to prove to be right or wrong and which statements you can not. > > > > Gödel and Post provided a constructive way to do exactly this. > So you think Turing was wrong when he claimed that he proved the Entscheidungsproblem had no general solution?? 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.
