Re: Radioactive Decay States

On Friday, June 22, 2018 at 10:13:37 AM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > > On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 6:48:53 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 11:18:25 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>> >>> The emergent nuclear interaction occurs on a time scale

Re: Fwd: "Finally, A Problem That Only Quantum Computers Will Ev

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 9:20 PM, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: ​> ​ > The birth of a fundamentally distinct new class of problems. > BQP has carved out a realm of its own... beyond the reach of the combined > set PH = {P, NP} > This new

Re: Fwd: "Finally, A Problem That Only Quantum Computers Will Ev

True, but as you mentioned, and we are in agreement this is a fundamentally new class of problem. Whether it turns out to be of practical utility or remains as an interesting oddball is yet to be determined.Chris Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 1:42 PM, John Clark

Re: Do we live within a Diophantine equation?

On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 5:09 PM, Jason Resch wrote: ​>* ​* > *The only thing I am asking is:* > *1) Physics -> Brains, Cars, Atoms, Etc.* > *2) ??? -> Physics -> Brains, Cars, Atoms, Etc.* > *Do we have enough information to decide between the above two theories? > Have we really ruled out

Re: Fwd: "Finally, A Problem That Only Quantum Computers Will Ev

The upshot is that with forrelation equivalent to the BPQ problem a match occurs with few oracles that with PH. An oracle is a sort of hypercomputing system outside the Church-Turing thesis or λ-calculus. If BPQ requires fewer oracle inputs it means it is a closer approximation to a

Re: Do we live within a Diophantine equation?

On 21-06-2018 23:46, Brent Meeker wrote: On 6/21/2018 6:33 AM, smitra wrote: On 21-06-2018 05:01, Brent Meeker wrote: On 6/20/2018 6:30 PM, smitra wrote: On 19-06-2018 23:22, Brent Meeker wrote: On 6/18/2018 6:03 PM, smitra wrote: On 17-06-2018 22:42, Jason Resch wrote: Hi Lawrence, Is

Re: Radioactive Decay States

On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 11:48:53 PM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 11:18:25 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >> >> The emergent nuclear interaction occurs on a time scale of >> 10^{-22}seconds. The superposition of a decayed and nondecayed nucleus >>

Re: Schrodinger's Cat vs Decoherence Theory

> On 19 Jun 2018, at 19:07, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 6/18/2018 10:21 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: >> From: Brent Meeker mailto:meeke...@verizon.net> >>> On 6/17/2018 10:41 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > But the lens doesn't send one color to one photoreceptor and another > color to a

Re: Do we live within a Diophantine equation?

> On 20 Jun 2018, at 04:02, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Jason Resch > wrote: > > ​>​Below is some Python code...[blah blah] John Clark often tells Bruno > mathematical truth won't put Intel out of business > > ​Yes, I have been known

Re: Radioactive Decay States

On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 6:48:53 PM UTC-5, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 11:18:25 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >> >> The emergent nuclear interaction occurs on a time scale of >> 10^{-22}seconds. The superposition of a decayed and nondecayed nucleus >>

Re: Do we live within a Diophantine equation?

> On 20 Jun 2018, at 17:56, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:06 AM, Jason Resch > wrote: > > ​> ​I am not sure I am seeing the relevance of your comments to what I > said.​ ​Are you disputing that computational relations are embodied by >

Re: Do we live within a Diophantine equation?

> On 20 Jun 2018, at 14:55, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:36 AM, Bruno Marchal > wrote: > >> On 17 Jun 2018, at 02:18, Jason Resch > > wrote: >> >> In solving Hilbert's 10th problem >>

Re: Primary matter

> On 21 Jun 2018, at 06:44, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 6/11/2018 8:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> Hi Telmo, >> >> >>> On 11 Jun 2018, at 13:53, Telmo Menezes wrote: >>> >>> Hi Bruno, >>> >>> Sorry for the delay, had a friend visiting. >> >> No problem. From tomorrow (Tuesday) to

Re: Do we live within a Diophantine equation?

> On 21 Jun 2018, at 19:11, John Clark wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 9:00 PM, Jason Resch > wrote: > > ​>> ​If mathematics was more fundamental than physics then Intel would be a > ridiculously unnecessary company and would have gone bankrupt decades ago,

Re: Do we live within a Diophantine equation?

> On 21 Jun 2018, at 21:49, John Clark wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 1:32 PM, Jason Resch > wrote: > > ​> ​We can use physical analogies to reason about mathematics, > We can't reason about ANYTHING without physics, that's why our physical > brain is

Re: Primary matter

> On 20 Jun 2018, at 13:51, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > Hi Bruno, > >>> I follow your reasoning, from one of your recent articles. This leaves >>> me dissatisfied, but if I try to verbalize this dissatisfaction I feel >>> stuck in a loop. Perhaps this illustrates your point. >> >> >> We might

Re: Primary matter

> On 21 Jun 2018, at 12:55, Telmo Menezes wrote: > > On 21 June 2018 at 00:53, Brent Meeker wrote: >> >> >> On 6/20/2018 4:51 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: >>> >>> Hi Bruno, >>> > I follow your reasoning, from one of your recent articles. This leaves > me dissatisfied, but if I try to

Re: Do we live within a Diophantine equation?

> On 21 Jun 2018, at 23:46, Brent Meeker wrote: > > > > On 6/21/2018 6:33 AM, smitra wrote: >> On 21-06-2018 05:01, Brent Meeker wrote: >>> On 6/20/2018 6:30 PM, smitra wrote: On 19-06-2018 23:22, Brent Meeker wrote: > On 6/18/2018 6:03 PM, smitra wrote: >> On 17-06-2018 22:42,