Turing Completeness of a Lump of Dirt [WAS Re: [agi] Conway's Game of Life and Turing machine equivalence]

2007-10-08 Thread Richard Loosemore
William Pearson wrote: On 07/10/2007, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William Pearson wrote: On 07/10/2007, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The TM implementation not only has no relevance to the behavior of GoL(-T) at all, it also has even less relevance to the

Re: Turing Completeness of a Lump of Dirt [WAS Re: [agi] Conway's Game of Life and Turing machine equivalence]

2007-10-08 Thread William Pearson
On 08/10/2007, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William Pearson wrote: On 07/10/2007, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William Pearson wrote: On 07/10/2007, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The TM implementation not only has no relevance to the behavior of

Re: Turing Completeness of a Lump of Dirt [WAS Re: [agi] Conway's Game of Life and Turing machine equivalence]

2007-10-08 Thread Mark Waser
From: William Pearson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Laptops aren't TMs. Please read the wiki entry to see that my laptop isn't a TM. But your laptop can certainly implement/simulate a Turing Machine (which was the obvious point of the post(s) that you replied to). Seriously, people, can't we lose all

Re: Turing Completeness of a Lump of Dirt [WAS Re: [agi] Conway's Game of Life and Turing machine equivalence]

2007-10-08 Thread William Pearson
On 08/10/2007, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: William Pearson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Laptops aren't TMs. Please read the wiki entry to see that my laptop isn't a TM. But your laptop can certainly implement/simulate a Turing Machine (which was the obvious point of the post(s) that you