Dear Bob, I am not sure if I have right to reply, but you make a very important remark.
The answer is: computing nature performs much more than existing computers. What is computable in computing nature is what nature is able to perform through its continuous changes. Dialectical processes are also typical in nature and thus in the framework of computing nature, those also are computations. In short the question is: what kind of computations are those dialectical processes? That is what we want to learn. All the best, Gordana -----Original Message----- From: Robert Ulanowicz [mailto:u...@umces.edu] Sent: den 15 maj 2012 15:36 To: Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic Cc: Bruno Marchal; firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [Fis] Stephen Wolfram discussing his ANKS in Reedit this Monday Quoting Gordana Dodig-Crnkovic <gordana.dodig-crnko...@mdh.se>: > 2. Whatever changes in the states of the physical world there > are, we understand them as computation. Dear Gordana, I'm not sure I agree here. For much of what transpires in nature (not just in the living realm), the metaphor of the dialectic seems more appropriate than the computational. As you are probably aware, dialectics are not computable, mainly because their boundary value statements are combinatorically intractable (sensu Kauffman). It is important to note that evolution (which, as Chaisson contends, applies as well to the history of the cosmos [and even the symmetrical laws of force]) is driven by contingencies, not by laws. Laws are necessary and they enable, but they cannot entail. Regards, Bob _______________________________________________ fis mailing list email@example.com https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis