Ha! Reading and comprehension are 2 different things. I read a lot and
understand almost nothing. So, there's that. But thanks for acknowledging
whatever effort I do put in.
Let me try a more pragmatic rhetoric. Marcus' story about debugging a GGC is useful, here. I spend
all day, every day,
m] On Behalf Of David Eric Smith
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2019 11:55 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Hi Nick, in turn,
On May 1, 2019, at 5:15 AM, Nick Thompson mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net> > wrote:
I k
> On May 2, 2019, at 8:21 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>
> Eric writes:
>
> < 4. The values of those microscopic observables can evolve jointly with
> values of more complicated large-actor observables that we describe as
> apparatus measuring spins etc., and the branches of the large-actor st
Eric writes:
< 4. The values of those microscopic observables can evolve jointly with values
of more complicated large-actor observables that we describe as apparatus
measuring spins etc., and the branches of the large-actor state vector can
evolve to have no coherence; but that evolution is st
earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 10:10 PM
> To: friam@redfish.com
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
>
;
>
>
> Do I need to be pistol-whipped on that point, too?
>
> Nick
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
> Clark University
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From:
rofessor of Psychology and Biology
> Clark University
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Eric Smith
> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 2:22 PM
> To: The Friday Morning A
> On May 1, 2019, at 2:33 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>
> I was just throwing out two, the wormhole idea of Maldacena & Susskind and
> super-determinism described by Hooft.They seem very different to me, and
> could imply two very different universes. That QM works for either doesn't
> he
On May 1, 2019, at 12:58 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
Marcus wrote:
> < Why do people seek this (as Eric puts it) emotional comfort with their ways
> of knowing? >
>
> Either spacetime works in a surprising way and commonsense intuition is just
> wrong -- to cling to a familiar way of knowing a
Hi Marcus et al.
> On Apr 30, 2019, at 10:41 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>
> Eric writes:
>
> < The important consequence of this understanding is that we have
> mathematical formalizations of the concept of state and of observable, and
> they are two different kinds of concept. It is precisel
Glen writes:
< To make that point concrete, I'll talk about the local VFW, which is
populated with racist, self-righteous jerks. Renee' and I tend to like aged
drinkers ... partly because we are aged drinkers in the making. So there's a
natural affinity with the regulars at the local VFW. I can
On 5/1/19 2:23 PM, Nick Thompson wrote:
> Historically, women have not found us much fun.
Induction is the Devil.
On 5/1/19 2:22 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> There are "leadership positions" on this mailing list?!Wow, there are two
> words that make me leave a party.
Ha! Unfortunately, lea
: Wednesday, May 01, 2019 2:55 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Yep. It is sexist. But lest we get confused, the sexists are men, not women.
I'm pummeled on a daily basis for my ... [ahem] "sensitivity". On Twitch
rece
There are "leadership positions" on this mailing list?!Wow, there are two
words that make me leave a party.
I became aware of some these cable shows staying with my uncle for a few days.
There are also the ones about plastic surgery.
It's incredible to imagine going under the knife to be a
Yep. It is sexist. But lest we get confused, the sexists are men, not women.
I'm pummeled on a daily basis for my ... [ahem] "sensitivity". On Twitch
recently, some jerk gamer accused me of being a CASUAL just for saying I liked
playing co-op games with Renee' ... the Texas analog for being call
A brief survey leads me to believe there are no non-satire Real Husbands of X
programs on cable.
This is completely sexist. There ought to be a way for a middle-aged man to
get a stylist, a trainer, a wardrobe, a television program *and* to have their
partners (male or female) celebrate the in
Agreed! But I've put on about 5 lbs of fat during this last winter season. Add
that to my bald head and it's obvious my dreams of being a trophy husband are
delusional. The best I could hope for is to rub my beard a lot and speak only
rarely in cryptic, pseudo-profound jargon ... maybe wearing t
niels
Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2019 11:57 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Glen writes:
< In fact, culturally, I wonder why so many of you *direct* your posts
at all >
>From a career of trying to redirect or humi
Glen writes:
"Now I suppose I have to read yours as well. I should just quit my job and read
full time. Renee' makes enough money to support us, I think."
I have a colleague whose husband is a F16 pilot. (Wow!) As he moves up
through the ranks, she is the main source of income.
She says thi
Nick writes:
"My basic New Thought (new to me, I mean) was, why talk about biology when we
can talk about computer programming, given the wonders that simple algorithms
(eg, cellular automata) can generate."
It's true it is all much more coherent. But the algorithms are simple and the
machin
Very nice! Had you prefaced the link to the paper with that, I would have
better understand *why* it might be a good idea to read it. I also failed to
infer the challenge to ... non-materialist? ... interpretations of phenomena
generated by CAs. Your text was too obtuse for me. I can defend at l
9 12:25 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
On 5/1/19, 12:06 PM, "uǝlƃ ☣" wrote:
< All that text is merely to provide context that my guess is your
depth-firsty commitment to a reasonably trustwor
: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
On 5/1/19, 12:06 PM, "uǝlƃ ☣" wrote:
< All that text is merely to provide context that my guess is your
depth-firsty commitment to a reasonably trustworthy reductionism isn't as
depth-firsty as you think it is. It's more like thos
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Heh, you mistake me for someone who thinks clearly and understands social
interaction. I have no idea why you forwarded that or why you direct it at me.
In fact, culturally, I wonder why so many of you *direct* your posts at all. So
many of you start
On 5/1/19, 12:06 PM, "uǝlƃ ☣" wrote:
< All that text is merely to provide context that my guess is your
depth-firsty commitment to a reasonably trustworthy reductionism isn't as
depth-firsty as you think it is. It's more like those massive muscles in your
back or leg that attract all the at
Very interesting. In the last post, I deleted a paragraph where I analogized
the human population to a swarm intelligence optimization problem, each human
being an ant pursuing her own little solution, but the whole circumscribing (up
to a convex hull) the solution space. I deleted it because I
Glen writes:
< In fact, culturally, I wonder why so many of you *direct* your posts at
all >
>From a career of trying to redirect or humiliate students in a classroom
>setting? :-)
Marcus
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group lists
Heh, you mistake me for someone who thinks clearly and understands social
interaction. I have no idea why you forwarded that or why you direct it at me.
In fact, culturally, I wonder why so many of you *direct* your posts at all. So
many of you start your posts with "Bob, ..." or "Tim, ...". It'
Glen writes:
< But, in my ignorant understanding of the process, neither physics nor
mathematical paradox resolution rely on that. It's always some munging of old
things to arrive at the new things, including munging the logic by which the
implications are inferred. Why is "shut up and calculat
But that's what's confusing to me. Why do we need the metaphysical extrapolation from the
model to "the true explanation"? I'm not saying I don't suffer from a similar
need. I'm asking for myself as much as anyone else.
By "seem very different", you're asserting classical logic, a fragility to
Frank writes:
“The question is, how does it accomplish "action-at-a-distance"? There are
explanations of other such phenomena. Particles sent back and forth, etc.”
Particles travelling at 10,000 times the speed of light?
https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.0614
Marcus
===
;>
>> Clark University
>>
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank
>> Wimberly
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 30, 2019 9:25 PM
>> *To:* The Frid
iversity
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank
> Wimberly
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 30, 2019 9:25 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> f
glen?C
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 9:54 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
I struggled to find the proper branch of the thread-tree to place this post.
But I decided to do it, here, because your invocation of "organism" confirms my
bias. The inclus
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 10:10 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For
:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 10:10 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Nick -
> That's both a tautology AND an oxymoron.
Did you just exclude the law of the excluded middle? How very human of you!
&
esigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 9:28 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Nick writes:
“But when you go on to say that nature is determi
net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/>
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 9:25 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Questi
Nick -
> That's both a tautology AND an oxymoron.
Did you just exclude the law of the excluded middle? How very human of you!
>
> "How do we explain consciousness?" in any way that is not inane. (Geez, was
> that a quadruple negative?)
And a 4 dimensional version of same?
- Steve
===
Nick writes:
“But when you go on to say that nature is determined by unknowable causes
that’s an oxymoron. To the extent that anything is caused, by whatever means,
it reveals its causes in its behavior. To the extent that events are random,
no cause is revealed and no cause exists.”
The ap
las S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Eric Smith
>
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Eric Smith
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 2:22 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
&g
, April 30, 2019 at 6:40 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Tell me if I am wrong. When we read Gauge Fields, Knots and Gravity by John
Baez I had the impression that wormholes were mathematical fictions. Is
hyperdeterminism
Tell me if I am wrong. When we read Gauge Fields, Knots and Gravity by
John Baez I had the impression that wormholes were mathematical fictions.
Is hyperdeterminism some form of the idea that if you knew the position and
momentum of every particle in the universe you could calculate the
trajectory
I was just throwing out two, the wormhole idea of Maldacena & Susskind and
super-determinism described by Hooft.They seem very different to me, and
could imply two very different universes. That QM works for either doesn't
help explain how one or the other or neither is the true explanatio
Yes, I understand your skepticism. I even share it. But nothing you've said
validates the dichotomy you laid out before. The wizard's spell sense you get
from entanglement across 3 meters of space is a reflection of how you (yes, and
most of us) model the world. Even if it's only like 5/7e9 peop
There are more people that catch fly balls than develop theories of physical
information. I don't believe a well-funded liberal culture will change that.
Maybe in a hundred or a thousand years if we are a reconfigurable species, a
large part of the population will spend their days experienci
You're trolling me, aren't you? 8^) I can't help myself, though.
It's not an exclusive or you've laid out. Some of us will have fast memory that
works well in common sense space and time. Some of us will have DSPs that work
well in other conceptions (I'm thinking of Hawking, here). Etc. And whi
< Why do people seek this (as Eric puts it) emotional comfort with their ways
of knowing? >
Either spacetime works in a surprising way and commonsense intuition is just
wrong -- to cling to a familiar way of knowing amounts to taking the blue pill
-- settling for crude satisficing heuristics to
I agree that the concepts of intuition or muscle memory apply to however
mysterious one finds any given phenomenon. But we don't need deep mysteries
like nonlocal entanglement for that. We can merely compare someone who knows
how to write an equation for ballistic trajectories versus someone who
Glen writes:
< I don't know. Eric's pointing out (I think) both the bootstrapping concept
(writing a compiler in the language it compiles) *and* the ontological status
of levels in, eg, physics, chemistry, biology, etc. Things like state space
reconstruction and the holographic principle seem
I don't know. Eric's pointing out (I think) both the bootstrapping concept
(writing a compiler in the language it compiles) *and* the ontological status
of levels in, eg, physics, chemistry, biology, etc. Things like state space
reconstruction and the holographic principle seem to flow directly
Eric writes:
< The important consequence of this understanding is that we have mathematical
formalizations of the concept of state and of observable, and they are two
different kinds of concept. It is precisely that both can be defined, that the
theory needs both to function in its complete fo
> I was in a forum with a bunch of physicists last year many of whom were
> wedded to the notion that nature was determined by things beyond experience
> that we would never know. That's both a tautology AND an oxymoron.
I think this requires care. Never wanting to defend the positions of pe
ogy
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of glen?C
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 9:54 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
I struggled to find the proper b
I struggled to find the proper branch of the thread-tree to place this post. But I decided to do it, here, because
your invocation of "organism" confirms my bias. The inclusion of "consciousness" is a red herring,
I think. And the expansion to "relations between entities", including "triads" i
Behalf Of
lrudo...@meganet.net
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 11:31 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
> It's as
> if I ran into God on the street and I said, "God, I have always
> wondered: How did you do
> It's as
> if I ran into God on the street and I said, "God, I have always
> wondered: How did you do this creation thing? And God answered "What
> creation thing?"
God:creation::fish:water
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Me
Behalf Of glen?C
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2019 11:04 AM
To: FriAM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
We can apply your ... pragmatism (not pragmaticism) inherent in "what good is
gut pain" to your story vs. model question, too. The significance of any thing
lies in what you can
We can apply your ... pragmatism (not pragmaticism) inherent in "what good is
gut pain" to your story vs. model question, too. The significance of any thing
lies in what you can *do* with it. Hence, any "taken as given", self-evident
propositions will only exist as tools, just like their derived
rom: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2019 10:37 PM
To: friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Nick -
>I think of “pain” as a damage sensor.
I think of "pain" a
Dave writes in relevant part:
> also, if the Turing machine, the programmer, and the 'user' form an
> appropriate triad, might it be said that the Turing machine 'knows' what
> the programmer programmed and the user observes? None of the three
> elements "possess" that knowledge in isolation, but
.com] *On Behalf Of *Steven
A Smith
*Sent:* Sunday, April 28, 2019 10:37 PM
*To:* friam@redfish.com
*Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Nick -
>I think of “pain” as a damage sensor.
I think of "pain" as a "threat" indicator. A great deal of the pain
I'
/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2019 10:37 PM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Nick -
>I think of “pain” as a damage sensor.
I think of "pain" as a "threat&qu
Nick -
>I think of “pain” as a damage sensor.
I think of "pain" as a "threat" indicator. A great deal of the pain
I've experienced in my life was not really commensurate with the damage
that has already occurred.
Touching a hot stove doesn't always lead to significant damage if you
react qui
plied Complexity Coffee Group mailto:friam@redfish.com> >
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Yes, you were unconscious. As you know, I had that experience a few days ago.
Frank
---
Frank Wimberly
My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/aut
; http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank
> Wimberly
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 27, 2019 12:16 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam@re
Last colonoscopy I was thoroughly anesthetized but totally conscious. In
recovery room, doctor explaining he had removed three minor polyps and I
interrupted to say I thought I counted four. Shocked look on his part then told
me the fourth was more like a skin tag. The anesthesia did prevent fee
> Thanks, Marcus.
>
> How often are proofs with errors published in refereed articles or
> textbooks?
Some years ago, when you guys in Santa Fe were reading Ruben Hersh's "18
Unconventional Essays on the Nature of Mathematics", I took the
opportunity to download a copy for myself. Assuming you(-a
Another example in different domain is Coq.
Scientists often aren't very good about reproducibility. Recently, the
psychology community has had a pound of flesh taken, but I'd argue it is a
fundamental problem. Good enough to publish isn't really that high a bar.
Marcus
On 4/27/19, 7
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 12:52:02AM +, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Russell writes:
>
> < However, conversely, there appear to interesting results that indicate P=NP
> for random oracle machines. There is some controversy over this, though, and
> personally, I've never been able to follow the proo
> Russell writes:
>
> < However, conversely, there appear to interesting results that indicate
> P=NP for random oracle machines. There is some controversy over this,
> though, and personally, I've never been able to follow the proofs in the
> area :). >
>
> Minimally, why is LaTeX the preferred fo
6:55 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam@redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
>
>
>
> I'm not following. What has LaTex vs Mathematica got to do with the
> proofs in question?
>
>
>
> --
on it. A
proof is just a best effort, so use machines to make it as good as it can be.
From: Friam On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 6:55 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
I'm not following.
I'm not following. What has LaTex vs Mathematica got to do with the proofs
in question?
---
Frank Wimberly
My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
Phone (505) 670-991
Russell writes:
< However, conversely, there appear to interesting results that indicate P=NP
for random oracle machines. There is some controversy over this, though, and
personally, I've never been able to follow the proofs in the area :). >
Minimally, why is LaTeX the preferred format and not
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:28:41AM -0600, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>
> Lee, Surely someone has developed probabilistic Turing Machines which can,
> very
> rarely, make errors. I am ignorant of the field since 1972 when I took a
> course which used Hopcroft and Ullman as a text.
>
> Nick, I agree t
m:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank
>> Wimberly
>> *Sent:* Saturday, April 27, 2019 12:16 PM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>> friam@redfish.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
>
h
> reviewing the issue. Perhaps not.
>
>
>
> -- Russ
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 8:55 PM Nick Thompson
> wrote:
>
> Larding below.
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark Universi
rly
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 27, 2019 12:16 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam@redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
>
>
>
> Yes, you were unconscious. As you know, I had that experience a few days
> ago.
&
M
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group mailto:friam@redfish.com> >
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Jon,
How about "experiences consciousness" in place of has consciousness.
Frsnk
---
Frank Wimberly
t; Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank
> Wimberly
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 27, 2019 11:33 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
esigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 11:33 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Jon,
How about "experiences consciousness" in place of h
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Jon Zingale
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 11:04 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A Question For Tomorrow
Nick,
I love that the title of this
ct: Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
Nick,
One of the most attractive things about your posts is how charming they are.
They are so well written! Thank you for keeping the discussion at such a
civilized and enjoyable level -- even when I don't agree with you.
--
Date: Saturday, April 27, 2019 at 11:29 AM
To: "russ.abb...@gmail.com" , The Friday Morning Applied
Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
Lee, Surely someone has developed probabilistic Turing Machines which can, very
rarely, make errors. I am ignor
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 10:45 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
Frank writes:
> I would hate to have to demonstrate that a modern computer is an
> instance of a Turing Machine. Among other things they usuall
Jon writes:
< For instance, in the heyday of analogue synthesizers, musicians
would slog these machines from city to city, altitude to altitude,
desert to rain-forested coast and these machines would notoriously
respond in kind. Their finicky capacitors would experience the
change and changes in
Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 11:29 AM
To: russ.abb...@gmail.com; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
Lee, Surely someone has developed probabilistic Turing Machines
Lee, Surely someone has developed probabilistic Turing Machines which can,
very rarely, make errors. I am ignorant of the field since 1972 when I
took a course which used Hopcroft and Ullman as a text.
Nick, I agree that your questions are charming. Your humanity is clearly
seen. By the way, it
Nick,
One of the most attractive things about your posts is how charming they
are. They are so well written! Thank you for keeping the discussion at such
a civilized and enjoyable level -- even when I don't agree with you.
-- Russ Abbott
Professor, Computer Science
California State University, Lo
Frank writes:
> I would hate to have to demonstrate that a modern computer is an instance
> of a Turing Machine. Among other things they usually have multiple
> processors as well as memory hierarchies. But I suppose it could be done,
> theoretically.
First a passage from a chapter I contributed
ickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-----Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of u?l? ?
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 3:38 PM
To: FriAM
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
What was the result of this morning's conversation?
On 4/25/19 10:50 PM, Nick Tho
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Frank
> Wimberly
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 27, 2019 7:33 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Gro
lexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
I will channel Nick based on our conversation yesterday. "A computer is a
Turing machine and it can answer questions."* I apologize, Nick, if that's not
your position.
*Al
sor of Psychology and Biology
Clark University
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
-Original Message-
From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of
lrudo...@meganet.net
Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 7:22 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Gro
I will channel Nick based on our conversation yesterday. "A computer is a
Turing machine and it can answer questions."* I apologize, Nick, if that's
not your position.
*Alexa, Siri, Hey Google
---
Frank Wimberly
My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimber
Maybe I've missed it, but has no one pointed out that a "Turing Machine"
is a mathematical formalism? I may be a stick in the mud, but I refuse to
extend the definition of "know" so far as to make "A Turing Machine knows
[something]" a meaningful statement. You might as well ask what a Goedel
Enu
f *Russ
> Abbott
> *Sent:* Friday, April 26, 2019 10:44 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam@redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
>
>
>
> Good to talk to you again also, Nick.
>
>
>
> You characte
Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] A question for tomorrow
Good to talk to you again also, Nick.
You characterized me as saying, "yours is an in principle argument against any
claim that machines and humans are ever doing the same thing, right?"
I wouldn't go that far. One might a
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
