Jesse Mazer wrote
[snip]
...
Doesn't the UDA argument in some sense depend on the
idea of computing in the limit too?
Yes. This follows from the invariance lemma, i.e. from
the fact that the first persons cannot be aware of delays
of reconstitution in UD* (the complete work of the UD).
The
Russell Standish wrote:
Hal Finney wrote:
That would be true IF you include descriptions that are infinitely long.
Then the set of all descriptions would be of cardinality c. If your
definition of a description implies that each one must be finite, then the
set of all of them would have
Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim May wrote:
As I hope I had made clear in some of my earlier posts on this, mostly
this past summer, I'm not making any grandiose claims for category
theory and topos theory as being the sine qua non for understanding the
nature of reality. Rather,
3 matches
Mail list logo
