On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 11:48:02PM -0700, Liz R wrote: > Thanks, Russell. Bruno tried to explain this to me a while ago but I probably > didn't take it all in. Am I right in thinking this has something to do with > "no > oracles" - that is, reality contains no sources of infinite unpredictable > data? > A naked signularity would presumably count as an oracle, while it appears any > area of space-time contains finite data (the Deckenstein bound?) - does that > make it Turing complete, in principle? Or am I talking nonsense?
It sounds vaguely plausible, but could well be the latter :). At least its not egregious nonsense like immigrants eating you pets :P. Cheers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders [email protected] 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/20240912071044.GC2031%40zen.
