Hi Russell,
Can atoms exist in a 2D universe? AFAIK, physics is very different when
constrained to only 2D. My point is that the notion of computation is
meaningless if there is no possibility of a stable structure on and in which
to implement the computation. Platonic Numbers or
Le 03-nov.-05, à 17:13, John M a écrit :
Bruno,
I love your closing sentence! I am not a physicist.
Why do you think that philosophers don't use some
anthropocentric mind-work in identifying 'principles'?
They use that indeed. But they use also deeper xxx-thropocentric
principle. To focus
Le 03-nov.-05, à 19:29, Hal Finney a écrit :
Bruno Marchal writes:
And that illustrates the advantage of the comp theory, it gives by
construction the correct physics, without any need, for a comp
believer to verify it. Except, of course, that comp need to be
postulated and we must be open
Le 05-nov.-05, à 08:22, Russell Standish a écrit :
Game of Life is an example 2D system capable of universal
computation. I'm not sure this implies consciousness is possible in
2D, but it needs to be considered.
It is easy, although very tedious, to program a Universal Dovetailer,
in the
On Nov 5, 2005, at 2:22 AM, Russell Standish wrote:Game of Life is an example 2D system capable of universalcomputation. I'm not sure this implies consciousness is possible in2D, but it needs to be considered.It does imply that if the Game of Life is the laws of physics of your universe, then
Hi Bruno,
That is a fascinating claim! "...we could argue the UD is 0 dimensional: it computes an undefined function
with 0 arguments."
What is the quantity of computational
resources required for such a computation?
A new question is born from your comment:
Is your notion of a
Stephen,
your notion about Bruno's 0-dimensional reminds me
of Isaac Asimov's BEST book (not sci-fi): From Earth
To Heaven in which he deposits his scientific (in his
own sense, of course) credo of 'Earthly' sciences
(bio, geo, chemo related) and the 'Cosmo' related
scineces, all in the observable
7 matches
Mail list logo
