Sorry, It took me a bit to realize that I was the OP.
This has been tremendously useful for me, because it has given me a sense of what you all agree on and what is controversial. Author of the book, of course, writes as if everything he says would be agreed upon by everybody in theworld, including. I will restart the book with all of this discussion behind me. Thanks to you all, OP Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ -----Original Message----- From: Friam [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of glen ep ropella Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2016 3:38 PM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: Re: Understanding you-folks Heh, to be as clear as possible, there were 4 questions in the OP and several follow-up questions, summarized below. I think the additional ideas on computation were (mostly) addressing the follow-up questions, particularly the _exploration_ of the idea that not all inference is computational. But those additional ideas also address the OP question #2 to some extent. We have 1 answer to OP #1 from Dave. On 07/02/2016 08:30 AM, Nick Thompson wrote:> Dear Friammers, > 1. Has anybody read this book? > 2. Do you understand it? > 3. WTF is an Accept State? > 4. And why is it called an “Accept State?” On 07/05/2016 06:25 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > If one has to use an “artificial” stop rule such as “quit when you get to the > tenth decimal point”, is such a problem deemed “computable” or > “non-computable”? Can one “compute” the square root of two? On 07/06/2016 11:33 AM, Nick Thompson wrote:> Thanks, Glen, > I assume that the following is NOT a program in your sense. > ;;Compute the sum of 2 and 2;;. > Begin > Ask Dad, "Dad, what is the sum of 2 and 2? > Dad says, "Four" > Four > End. > It is, however, an algorithm, right? On 07/06/2016 12:05 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > I guess what I was fishing for is some sort of exploration of the idea that > not all procedures for arriving at answers are computations. On 07/07/2016 11:32 AM, Stephen Guerin wrote: > Nick, > > Owen asks: >> has the OP (original post) been satisfied? > > Has the this email thread answered your original question what an Accept > state is? And why it is called an Accept state? > > Are we in an accept or reject state. Or like many threads is this non-halting? > On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 8:10 AM, Owen Densmore <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Just to calibrate: has the OP been satisfied? >> >> I *think* so, we discussed FSM's discussing their input string and their >> final state and whether that was the designated accept state. >> >> And tho a Turing Machine is more than a FSM, the vocabulary of states, >> input strings and so on should answer the OP. >> >> I'm not sure the additional ideas on computation were coherent enough to >> add to his interest, but then, knowing Nick, I could be wrong! >> >> Hope the book reading is progressing with success, given our help. -- glen ep ropella ⊥ 971-280-5699 ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
