On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> In arithmetic all emulation of programs exists, > That is totally unimportant, It's not worth arguing about because it wouldn't change anything even if it were true. But I'll tell you the REALLY important question, is physics a emulation of arithmetic or is arithmetic a emulation of physics? > > >>> >> >>> There is word for "100% accurate simulation", we call that an >>> emulation. The models of RA emulates all computations. >> >> >> >> Don't tell me this wonderful news tell INTEL, their stock price will >> skyrocket! And I own some INTEL stock. > > > > You have repeated this straw man argument a lot, > Straw man my ass, if what you say was true the universe would be *RADICALLY* different from the world we observe, the world where people have to pay money for INTEL silicon microchips. > > You do bad theology, like some fundamentalist. you invent a God > Wow, calling a guy known for disliking religion religious, never heard that one before, at least I never heard it before I was 12. > > > Like I said, you are a fundamentlist Aristotelians. And like I said, Aristotle was the worst physicist who ever lived. > >> >> >> It will be 100% crap unless the Algol or FORTRAN program is running on a >> computer made of matter that obeys the laws of physics. > > > > > False. Physics has no relevance at all here. > > What I said is true in both the case where the Algol interpreter or > compiler run > [...] > Run? RUN! Without physics nothing is running, your FORTRAN or Algol program is just static squiggles on a paper doing absolutely nothing. > > >>> >> >>> This does not make possible to extract the computations result directly, >>> as we live in a physical reality, and must implement the computations in >>> the physical reality to get that effect. >> >> > >> >> >> Why on earth would that be?? If the emulation is perfect and physical >> reality is of only of secondary importance and is being emulated by >> mathematics then we live in mathematical reality too. So why can't we >> extract the results of computations directly? > > > > Because that would be magical. > Indeed it would be but don't blame me for that, you're the one who said calculations don't need physics not me. > > > and should be able to make arbitrarily large calculations instantly. > > > > Yes, comp predicted that this is possible, > I don't care what "comp" predicts because "comp" is one colossal bore. 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.
