Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-05-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 01 May 2013, at 20:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 10:49:11 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Apr 2013, at 20:58, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:31:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Apr 2013, at 15:40, Craig Weinberg wrote: On

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-05-02 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, May 2, 2013 4:39:43 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 May 2013, at 20:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 10:49:11 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Apr 2013, at 20:58, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:31:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-05-02 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 02 May 2013, at 17:35, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, May 2, 2013 4:39:43 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 May 2013, at 20:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 10:49:11 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Apr 2013, at 20:58, Craig Weinberg wrote: On

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-05-02 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, May 2, 2013 11:54:34 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 02 May 2013, at 17:35, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Thursday, May 2, 2013 4:39:43 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 01 May 2013, at 20:09, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 10:49:11 AM UTC-4, Bruno

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-05-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 30 Apr 2013, at 20:58, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:31:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Apr 2013, at 15:40, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:50:07 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:26, Craig Weinberg wrote:

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-05-01 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 30 Apr 2013, at 22:10, Craig Weinberg wrote: It seems like there's nothing to bet on though. Comp is not really giving any guidance as to whether Comp itself is valid - it only shows that some machines believe it isn't, and that suggests that it is, and some machines see through that

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-05-01 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, May 1, 2013 10:49:11 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Apr 2013, at 20:58, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:31:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Apr 2013, at 15:40, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:50:07 AM UTC-4,

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-30 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:31:44 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 24 Apr 2013, at 15:40, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:50:07 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:26, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:58:33 PM UTC-4,

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-28 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 27 Apr 2013, at 17:10, John Mikes wrote: Dear Stathis and Bruno, Stathis' reply is commendable, with one excessive word: r e a l . I asked Bruno several times to 'identify' the term 'number' in common-sense language. So far I did not understand such (my mistake?) I still hold

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-28 Thread Russell Standish
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 02:15:31PM +0200, Bruno Marchal wrote: I know you like Robert Rosen, who asserted that Church Turing thesis is false, but he has not convinced me at all on this. Where did he assert this? Admittedly, I haven't read all his works, mainly just What is life?, but I

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-27 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers. Every number in a computer is represented as rational. No computer can represent pi or

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-27 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 27 Apr 2013, at 11:40, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers. Every number in a computer is

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-27 Thread John Mikes
Dear Stathis and Bruno, Stathis' reply is commendable, with one excessive word: r e a l . I asked Bruno several times to 'identify' the term 'number' in common-sense language. So far I did not understand such (my mistake?) I still hold *'numbers'* as the product of human thinking which

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-27 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Saturday, April 27, 2013 5:40:18 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers.

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-27 Thread Stathis Papaioannou
On 28/04/2013, at 3:31 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday, April 27, 2013 5:40:18 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-27 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Saturday, April 27, 2013 2:20:20 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On 28/04/2013, at 3:31 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: On Saturday, April 27, 2013 5:40:18 AM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote: A

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-25 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 24 Apr 2013, at 23:54, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: Perhaps one should define things such that it can be impolemented by any arbitrary finite state machine, no mater how large. Then, while there may not be a limit to the capacity of finite state machines, each such machine has a finite

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-25 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 25 Apr 2013, at 00:47, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:49:00 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:07, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 5:11:06 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 22 Apr 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg wrote: A

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-25 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Thursday, April 25, 2013 6:04:55 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 25 Apr 2013, at 00:47, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:49:00 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:07, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 5:11:06 AM UTC-4, Bruno

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Brian Tenneson
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 11:37:14 PM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: You keep claiming that we understand this and that or know this and that. And, yes, saying something along the lines of we know we understand

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 4:31:55 AM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 11:37:14 PM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: You keep claiming that we understand this and that or know

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:07, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 5:11:06 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 22 Apr 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:26, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:58:33 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.com wrote: If you think about your own vision, you can see millions of pixels constantly, you are aware of the

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:50:07 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:26, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:58:33 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote: If you think about your own

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Brian Tenneson
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 4:31:55 AM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 11:37:14 PM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote:

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 23 Apr 2013, at 21:29, Brian Tenneson wrote: Interesting read. The problem I have with this is that in set theory, there are several examples of sets who owe their existence to axioms alone. In other words, there is an axiom that states there is a set X such that (blah, blah, blah).

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 24 Apr 2013, at 15:40, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:50:07 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:26, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:58:33 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Craig Weinberg

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:09:44 AM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 4:31:55 AM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Craig Weinberg

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Brian Tenneson
I probably shouldn't be talking to someone who thinks distinguishing a sack of potatoes from a woman means understanding women. News flash: understand tacitly implies understand completely. On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Wednesday, April 24,

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 11:58:08 AM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: I probably shouldn't be talking to someone who thinks distinguishing a sack of potatoes from a woman means understanding women. News flash: understand tacitly implies understand completely. If you define complete

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread smitra
Perhaps one should define things such that it can be impolemented by any arbitrary finite state machine, no mater how large. Then, while there may not be a limit to the capacity of finite state machines, each such machine has a finite capacity, and therefore in none of these machines can one

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-24 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 8:49:00 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 23 Apr 2013, at 22:07, Craig Weinberg wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 5:11:06 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 22 Apr 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments?

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Bruno Marchal
On 22 Apr 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers. Every number in a computer is represented as rational. No computer can represent pi or any other real number... So

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Monday, April 22, 2013 10:23:04 PM UTC-4, Russell Standish wrote: On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:06:29PM +0200, Telmo Menezes wrote: On 22 avr. 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Brian Tenneson
Interesting read. The problem I have with this is that in set theory, there are several examples of sets who owe their existence to axioms alone. In other words, there is an axiom that states there is a set X such that (blah, blah, blah). How are we to know which sets/notions are meaningless

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Jason Resch
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: If you think about your own vision, you can see millions of pixels constantly, you are aware of the full picture, but a computer can't do that, the cpu can only know about 32 or 64 pixels, eventually multiplied by

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 5:11:06 AM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 22 Apr 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers. Every number in a computer is represented as

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:58:33 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: If you think about your own vision, you can see millions of pixels constantly, you are aware of the full picture, but a computer can't do

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Brian Tenneson
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: Searle wasn't wrong. The whole point of the Chinese Room is to point out that computation is a disconnected, anesthetic function which is accomplished with no need for understanding of larger contexts. How do we

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Jason Resch
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:58:33 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote: If you think about your own vision, you can see millions of pixels

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:31:05 PM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: Searle wasn't wrong. The whole point of the Chinese Room is to point out that computation is a disconnected, anesthetic function

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:46:52 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:58:33 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote:

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Jason Resch
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:46:52 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:58:33 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23,

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Brian Tenneson
On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.comwrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:31:05 PM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote: Searle wasn't wrong. The whole point of the Chinese Room is to point

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:59:26 PM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:31:05 PM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Craig Weinberg

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Brian Tenneson
You keep claiming that we understand this and that or know this and that. And, yes, saying something along the lines of we know we understand because we care about what we understand *is* circular. Still doesn't rule out the possibility that we are in a Chinese room right now, manipulating

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 7:09:42 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 5:19 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:46:52 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comwrote:

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-23 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 11:37:14 PM UTC-4, Brian Tenneson wrote: You keep claiming that we understand this and that or know this and that. And, yes, saying something along the lines of we know we understand because we care about what we understand *is* circular. No, it's not. I'm

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-22 Thread Telmo Menezes
On 22 avr. 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers. Every number in a computer is represented as rational. No computer can represent pi or

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-22 Thread smitra
See here: http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~zeilberg/mamarim/mamarimPDF/real.pdf Saibal Citeren Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers. Every number in a computer is

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-22 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Monday, April 22, 2013 2:06:29 PM UTC-4, telmo_menezes wrote: On 22 avr. 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg whats...@gmail.comjavascript: wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers. Every number

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-22 Thread Craig Weinberg
On Monday, April 22, 2013 2:28:46 PM UTC-4, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote: See here: http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~zeilberg/mamarim/mamarimPDF/real.pdf Ah yes, we come full circle... Develop math to help understand reality realize that math is different from reality build instruments using

Re: Rationals vs Reals in Comp

2013-04-22 Thread Russell Standish
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 08:06:29PM +0200, Telmo Menezes wrote: On 22 avr. 2013, at 19:14, Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com wrote: A quote from someone on Facebook. Any comments? Computers can only do computations for rational numbers, not for real numbers. Every number in a