Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[∄ uǝʃƃ]

The parallelism theorem of labeled transition systems is, I think, 
misinterpreted sometimes.  It's too strong to claim that for any parallel 
process a sequential process can be defined that operates/funtcions the same 
way.  The theorem relies on the existence of hidden transitions within the 
parallel process that don't need to be in the sequential process.  So, it's 
better to say:

For any given parallel process where the set of observables is smaller than the 
set of all its states and transitions, a sequential process can be defined that 
has the same observable states and transitions.  I.e. for any given parallel 
process, a sequential one can be defined that SIMULATES it.  This is a core 
simulation principle and it's why systems engineers focus so much on 
validation, matching observables between the simulation and its referent.

I'm not arguing that parallelism is sufficient for machines that construct 
themselves.  As I pointed out in the other thread, we still have deadlock 
(which is the computer equivalent of Rosen's primary objection).  I'm just 
arguing that the parallelism theorem is not the right formal tool to show why 
parallelism is insufficient.

On 10/27/18 5:20 AM, John Kennison wrote:
> I think that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel machine (in 
> which various operations happen simultaneously) will not do the trick because 
> given any parallel machine one can define a sequential machine that functions 
> in the same way.


-- 
∄ uǝʃƃ


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Nick Thompson]

Frank, Jon, John, etc., 

 

I wish you guys would look at Rosen.  I would be happy to loan you my copy.  In 
Chapter 4, The Concept of State, he is arguing that assumptions deep in 
Newtonian Mechanics preclude or constrain a discussion of biological 
organization (let alone, a psychological one) leading to a fallacious sense of 
reduceability.  His argument is mathematical, and involves assumptions built 
into what he calls Newtonian “chronicles”, mathematical expressions that have 
time of occurrence on the x axis and position, or velocity, or acceleration, or 
… or etc. on the Y.  Something about the manner in which Newton sets this all 
up is claimed to obscure organizational properties of systems.  Somehow, the 
problem of organization is made to disappear.   Best I can do.  

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/> 
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Frank Wimberly
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:24 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

 

Well, I'm not a sequential machine although my wife has her doubts.

 

Thanks for the algebraic geometry suggestions.  Jon Zingale and I will try to 
master the subject.  Others may join us on Saturday mornings if they wish.

 

Frank

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://wacsequentisl mww.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly 
<http://mww.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly> 

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

 

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 5:16 PM John Kennison mailto:jkenni...@clarku.edu> > wrote:

Hi Frank,

 

I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant 
example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:

 

 . . . there is a historical survey in 
https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf


 <https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf> 
Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra

www.ime.usp.br <http://www.ime.usp.br> 

Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s): 
Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83, No. 6 
(Jun. - Jul ...

 

 

If you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more 
thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and 
Engineers'' (including computer scientists. 

 

--John

  

  _  

From: Friam mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com> > on 
behalf of Frank Wimberly mailto:wimber...@gmail.com> >
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2 

 

Sorry, John.  It was a weak attempt to be humorous. 

 

Also, I mistyped.  I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a book 
recommendation.

 

Frank

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

 

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels mailto:mar...@snoutfarm.com> > wrote:

John writes:

 

“Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we 
can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”

 

A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random 
numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not 
its memory).   One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had 
an instruction to do that random dispatching.   To counter the arguments of 
Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.

 

https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941

 

There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical 
supercomputers, of course.

 

Marcus


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Frank Wimberly]

Well, I'm not a sequential machine although my wife has her doubts.

Thanks for the algebraic geometry suggestions.  Jon Zingale and I will try
to master the subject.  Others may join us on Saturday mornings if they
wish.

Frank

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://wacsequentisl mww.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 5:16 PM John Kennison  wrote:

> Hi Frank,
>
>
> I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant
> example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:
>
>
>  . . . there is a historical survey in
> https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf
> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra
> <https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>
> www.ime.usp.br
> Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s):
> Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83,
> No. 6 (Jun. - Jul ...
>
>
> <https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>If
> you read that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more
> thorough survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and
> Engineers'' (including computer scientists.
>
>
> --John
>
>
> --
> *From:* Friam  on behalf of Frank Wimberly <
> wimber...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
> Sorry, John.  It was a weak attempt to be humorous.
>
> Also, I mistyped.  I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a
> book recommendation.
>
> Frank
>
> ---
> Frank Wimberly
>
> My memoir:
> https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly
>
> My scientific publications:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2
>
> Phone (505) 670-9918
>
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels 
> wrote:
>
> John writes:
>
>
>
> “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do
> which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
>
>
>
> A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random
> numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself
> (not its memory).   One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that
> even had an instruction to do that random dispatching.   To counter the
> arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
>
>
>
> https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
>
>
>
> There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical
> supercomputers, of course.
>
>
>
> Marcus
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[John Kennison]

Hi Frank,


I didn't realize it was supposed to be a joke --it seemed like a relevant 
example. I'm not an algebraic geometer but:


 . . . there is a historical survey in 
https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf

Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related 
Algebra<https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>
www.ime.usp.br
Historical Ramblings in Algebraic Geometry and Related Algebra Author(s): 
Shreeram S. Abhyankar Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 83, No. 6 
(Jun. - Jul ...




<https://www.ime.usp.br/~pleite/pub/artigos/abhyankar/abhyankar.pdf>If you read 
that you can tell if you like Ahbyankar's style. He wrote a more thorough 
survey in 295 pages called "Algebraic Geometry for Scientists and Engineers'' 
(including computer scientists.


--John




From: Friam  on behalf of Frank Wimberly 

Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 5:53:53 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

Sorry, John.  It was a weak attempt to be humorous.

Also, I mistyped.  I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a book 
recommendation.

Frank

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels 
mailto:mar...@snoutfarm.com>> wrote:

John writes:



“Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we 
can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”



A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random 
numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not 
its memory).   One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had 
an instruction to do that random dispatching.   To counter the arguments of 
Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.



https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941



There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical 
supercomputers, of course.



Marcus


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Frank Wimberly]

Sorry, John.  It was a weak attempt to be humorous.

Also, I mistyped.  I meant "algebraic geometry" when I was asking for a
book recommendation.

Frank

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 12:56 PM Marcus Daniels  wrote:

> John writes:
>
>
>
> “Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do
> which we can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”
>
>
>
> A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random
> numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself
> (not its memory).   One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that
> even had an instruction to do that random dispatching.   To counter the
> arguments of Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.
>
>
>
> https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941
>
>
>
> There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical
> supercomputers, of course.
>
>
>
> Marcus
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Marcus Daniels]

John writes:



“Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we 
can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?”



A sequential computer program could simply be a loop that sampled random 
numbers and indexed into the address space of the computer program itself (not 
its memory).   One could make a specialized computer using a FPGA that even had 
an instruction to do that random dispatching.   To counter the arguments of 
Penrose, one could do the same using quantum states.



https://www.springer.com/us/book/9781402078941



There are all kinds of physical processes that are simulated on classical 
supercomputers, of course.



Marcus

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[John Kennison]

P.S. I just realized that when Frank said "Look no further than me" he was not 
referring to his considerable knowledge, but to himself. It's a nice point.

JK


From: John Kennison
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 2:32:37 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2


Hi Marcus, Frank, et al,


I am a mathematician who knows category theory, which Rosen seems to have found 
exciting. My thinking about a machine that would learn how to reprogram itself 
is surely at a naive level, but it seems to me that it would feel more like a 
being than a machine. All I know about Genetic Programming is what I just read 
after Googling that term and it looks like great idea. Frank's credentials are 
impressive but I don't know enough to, as yet, formulate a reasonable question 
to him.


It looks that some very sophisticated programs can evolve and reprogram 
themselves which means, I think, that sequential machines can do amazing 
things. I guess my question would be:


Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we 
can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?'


I have read Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" and Hofstadter's "I am a 
Strange Loop". There are parts of each book which still seem vague to me, but 
it seems likely that the answer to the above question is "No".  But then I 
would need a different approach to trying to figure out what Rosen might be 
driving at. (I once had s copy of Rosen's "Life Itself" but I can't find it now 
--so I ordered a used copy for about $9.).


On Geometric Algebra --my Googling of this term suggests that it has to do with 
what I would call tensors, which I saw briefly in an undergraduate Physics 
course, and very abstractly in a graduate Math course. I convinced myself they 
were about the same thing


--John


From: Friam  on behalf of Marcus Daniels 

Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 11:11:10 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2


How idoes genetic programming with automatic function definition not achieve 
this?



From: Friam  on behalf of John Kennison 

Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Date: Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 6:21 AM
To: "Friam@redfish. com" 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2



I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose 
operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I 
don’t see how to go about constructing such a thing, unless I assume that there 
are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will settle on 
trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential machine. I think 
that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel machine (in which various 
operations happen simultaneously) will not do the trick because given any 
parallel machine one can define a sequential machine that functions in the same 
way. One might make a machine in which the outputs only happen with a certain 
specified probability, but I don’t think that is different enough. So I 
rephrase the problem as describing an entity that receives inputs and produces 
outputs that is cannot be duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic 
sequential machine (one in which the outputs happen with a specified 
probability). I thought of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules 
for how to react to inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that 
the rules may change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems 
more biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of 
reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For example, 
if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous performance, then 
there is a new state, of being dissatisfied, and the reprograming activity can, 
it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated rules for producing an output.



--John



From: Friam  on behalf of Tom Johnson 

Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
To: Friam@redfish. com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2



Yes, but not with multiple signatories.  Sorry.


Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
NM Foundation for Open Government<http://nmfog.org>
Check out It's The People's 
Data<https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>

http://www.jtjohnson.com<http://www.jtjohnson.com/>   
t...@jtjohnson.com<mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com>






On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson 
mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net>

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[John Kennison]

Hi Marcus, Frank, et al,


I am a mathematician who knows category theory, which Rosen seems to have found 
exciting. My thinking about a machine that would learn how to reprogram itself 
is surely at a naive level, but it seems to me that it would feel more like a 
being than a machine. All I know about Genetic Programming is what I just read 
after Googling that term and it looks like great idea. Frank's credentials are 
impressive but I don't know enough to, as yet, formulate a reasonable question 
to him.


It looks that some very sophisticated programs can evolve and reprogram 
themselves which means, I think, that sequential machines can do amazing 
things. I guess my question would be:


Is there something that animals, or more particularly humans, can do which we 
can prove cannot be duplicated by a sequential machine?'


I have read Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" and Hofstadter's "I am a 
Strange Loop". There are parts of each book which still seem vague to me, but 
it seems likely that the answer to the above question is "No".  But then I 
would need a different approach to trying to figure out what Rosen might be 
driving at. (I once had s copy of Rosen's "Life Itself" but I can't find it now 
--so I ordered a used copy for about $9.).


On Geometric Algebra --my Googling of this term suggests that it has to do with 
what I would call tensors, which I saw briefly in an undergraduate Physics 
course, and very abstractly in a graduate Math course. I convinced myself they 
were about the same thing


--John


From: Friam  on behalf of Marcus Daniels 

Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2018 11:11:10 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2


How idoes genetic programming with automatic function definition not achieve 
this?



From: Friam  on behalf of John Kennison 

Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Date: Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 6:21 AM
To: "Friam@redfish. com" 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2



I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose 
operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I 
don’t see how to go about constructing such a thing, unless I assume that there 
are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will settle on 
trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential machine. I think 
that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel machine (in which various 
operations happen simultaneously) will not do the trick because given any 
parallel machine one can define a sequential machine that functions in the same 
way. One might make a machine in which the outputs only happen with a certain 
specified probability, but I don’t think that is different enough. So I 
rephrase the problem as describing an entity that receives inputs and produces 
outputs that is cannot be duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic 
sequential machine (one in which the outputs happen with a specified 
probability). I thought of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules 
for how to react to inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that 
the rules may change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems 
more biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of 
reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For example, 
if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous performance, then 
there is a new state, of being dissatisfied, and the reprograming activity can, 
it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated rules for producing an output.



--John



From: Friam  on behalf of Tom Johnson 

Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
To: Friam@redfish. com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2



Yes, but not with multiple signatories.  Sorry.


Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
NM Foundation for Open Government<http://nmfog.org>
Check out It's The People's 
Data<https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>

http://www.jtjohnson.com<http://www.jtjohnson.com/>   
t...@jtjohnson.com<mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com>






On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson 
mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net>> wrote:

Thanks, Tom,



Still trying to figure out logistics.  I have written the NM-ican to find out 
how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response.  Do you have any 
experience with this?



Nick



Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Marcus Daniels]

How idoes genetic programming with automatic function definition not achieve 
this?

From: Friam  on behalf of John Kennison 

Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
Date: Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 6:21 AM
To: "Friam@redfish. com" 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose 
operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I 
don’t see how to go about constructing such a thing, unless I assume that there 
are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will settle on 
trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential machine. I think 
that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel machine (in which various 
operations happen simultaneously) will not do the trick because given any 
parallel machine one can define a sequential machine that functions in the same 
way. One might make a machine in which the outputs only happen with a certain 
specified probability, but I don’t think that is different enough. So I 
rephrase the problem as describing an entity that receives inputs and produces 
outputs that is cannot be duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic 
sequential machine (one in which the outputs happen with a specified 
probability). I thought of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules 
for how to react to inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that 
the rules may change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems 
more biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of 
reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For example, 
if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous performance, then 
there is a new state, of being dissatisfied, and the reprograming activity can, 
it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated rules for producing an output.

--John

From: Friam  on behalf of Tom Johnson 

Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
To: Friam@redfish. com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

Yes, but not with multiple signatories.  Sorry.


Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
NM Foundation for Open Government<http://nmfog.org>
Check out It's The People's 
Data<https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>
http://www.jtjohnson.com<http://www.jtjohnson.com/>   
t...@jtjohnson.com<mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com>



On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson 
mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net>> wrote:

Thanks, Tom,



Still trying to figure out logistics.  I have written the NM-ican to find out 
how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response.  Do you have any 
experience with this?



Nick



Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/



From: Friam 
[mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com<mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>] On Behalf 
Of Tom Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
To: Friam@redfish. com mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2



I will sign on, Nick.

Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University



Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
NM Foundation for Open Government<http://nmfog.org>
Check out It's The People's 
Data<https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>

http://www.jtjohnson.com<http://www.jtjohnson.com/>   
t...@jtjohnson.com<mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com>






On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM Nick Thompson 
mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net>> wrote:

Hi, all,



Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New Mexican’s 
requirements.  I have a few signatories, would love some more.  I will bring 
the letter with me to our service on Friday.  Even if you don’t plan to sign, 
please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.



Nick



To the New Mexican

We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in Santa 
Fe.  We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young voters and their 
parents.  Institutions of learning and their students are under stress.
Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning as our best research 
students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as cashiers, ride hail drivers, 
waiters and waitresses.  Under present conditions, these talented young people 
cannot afford to go to university and

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Frank Wimberly]

Look no further than me.  I don't know how my component parts work.

John, do you have a recommendation for a book on geometric algebra?

Frank

---
Frank Wimberly

My memoir:
https://www.amazon.com/author/frankwimberly

My scientific publications:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

Phone (505) 670-9918

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 6:20 AM John Kennison  wrote:

> I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose
> operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I
> don’t see how to go about constructing such a thing, unless I assume that
> there are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will
> settle on trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential
> machine. I think that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel
> machine (in which various operations happen simultaneously) will not do the
> trick because given any parallel machine one can define a sequential
> machine that functions in the same way. One might make a machine in which
> the outputs only happen with a certain specified probability, but I don’t
> think that is different enough. So I rephrase the problem as describing an
> entity that receives inputs and produces outputs that is cannot be
> duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic sequential machine
> (one in which the outputs happen with a specified probability). I thought
> of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules for how to react to
> inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that the rules may
> change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems more
> biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of
> reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For
> example, if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous
> performance, then there is a new state, of being dissatisfied, and the
> reprograming activity can, it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated
> rules for producing an output.
>
>
> --John
> --
> *From:* Friam  on behalf of Tom Johnson <
> t...@jtjohnson.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
> *To:* Friam@redfish. com
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
> Yes, but not with multiple signatories.  Sorry.
>
> 
> Tom Johnson
> Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> 505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
> *NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org>
> *Check out It's The People's Data
> <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>*
> http://www.jtjohnson.com   t...@jtjohnson.com
> 
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson 
> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Tom,
>
>
>
> Still trying to figure out logistics.  I have written the NM-ican to find
> out how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response.  Do you
> have any experience with this?
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Tom
> Johnson
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
> *To:* Friam@redfish. com 
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> I will sign on, Nick.
>
> Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University
>
>
>
> 
> Tom Johnson
> Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> 505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
> *NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org>
> *Check out It's The People's Data
> <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>*
>
> http://www.jtjohnson.com   t...@jtjohnson.com
> 
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM Nick Thompson 
> wrote:
>
> Hi, all,
>
>
>
> Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New
> Mexican’s requirements.  I have a few signatories, would love some more.  I
> will bring the letter with me to our service on Friday.  Even if you don’t
> plan to sign, please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> *To the New Mexican*
>
> *We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in
> Santa Fe.  We urge all

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[John Kennison]

I like the idea of a non-sequential machine, or perhaps, a being, whose 
operation is NOT determined by knowing how its component parts function. I 
don’t see how to go about constructing such a thing, unless I assume that there 
are laws of physics which remain undiscovered. So for now, I will settle on 
trying to describe a ``machine’’ which is not a sequential machine. I think 
that Rosen is right in saying that having a parallel machine (in which various 
operations happen simultaneously) will not do the trick because given any 
parallel machine one can define a sequential machine that functions in the same 
way. One might make a machine in which the outputs only happen with a certain 
specified probability, but I don’t think that is different enough. So I 
rephrase the problem as describing an entity that receives inputs and produces 
outputs that is cannot be duplicated (or reasonably modeled) by a probabilistic 
sequential machine (one in which the outputs happen with a specified 
probability). I thought of starting with a sequential machine, which has rules 
for how to react to inputs when in a given state. But now let’s suppose that 
the rules may change. The entity is capable of learning new rules. This seems 
more biological –the entity can reprogram itself. But I find that naive ways of 
reprograming can probably be duplicated by a sequential machine. For example, 
if the machine reprograms when dissatisfied with previous performance, then 
there is a new state, of being dissatisfied, and the reprograming activity can, 
it seems, be re-expressed as more sophisticated rules for producing an output.

--John

From: Friam  on behalf of Tom Johnson 

Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:23:01 PM
To: Friam@redfish. com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

Yes, but not with multiple signatories.  Sorry.


Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
NM Foundation for Open Government<http://nmfog.org>
Check out It's The People's 
Data<https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>
http://www.jtjohnson.com<http://www.jtjohnson.com/>   
t...@jtjohnson.com<mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com>



On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson 
mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net>> wrote:

Thanks, Tom,



Still trying to figure out logistics.  I have written the NM-ican to find out 
how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response.  Do you have any 
experience with this?



Nick



Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/



From: Friam 
[mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com<mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>] On Behalf 
Of Tom Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
To: Friam@redfish. com mailto:friam@redfish.com>>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2



I will sign on, Nick.

Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University



Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
NM Foundation for Open Government<http://nmfog.org>
Check out It's The People's 
Data<https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>

http://www.jtjohnson.com<http://www.jtjohnson.com/>   
t...@jtjohnson.com<mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com>






On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM Nick Thompson 
mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net>> wrote:

Hi, all,



Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New Mexican’s 
requirements.  I have a few signatories, would love some more.  I will bring 
the letter with me to our service on Friday.  Even if you don’t plan to sign, 
please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.



Nick



To the New Mexican

We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in Santa 
Fe.  We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young voters and their 
parents.  Institutions of learning and their students are under stress.
Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning as our best research 
students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as cashiers, ride hail drivers, 
waiters and waitresses.  Under present conditions, these talented young people 
cannot afford to go to university and, without that training, will never take 
up the leadership positions their talent should make possible.  The nation will 
need these students as our generation retires from institutes, government 
laboratories, colleges, and universities.  Please take time to vote and to tell 
your representatives to support ed

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Tom Johnson]

Yes, but not with multiple signatories.  Sorry.


Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
*NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org>
*Check out It's The People's Data
<https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>*
http://www.jtjohnson.com   t...@jtjohnson.com



On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:45 AM Nick Thompson 
wrote:

> Thanks, Tom,
>
>
>
> Still trying to figure out logistics.  I have written the NM-ican to find
> out how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response.  Do you
> have any experience with this?
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Tom
> Johnson
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
> *To:* Friam@redfish. com 
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2
>
>
>
> I will sign on, Nick.
>
> Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University
>
>
>
> 
> Tom Johnson
> Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> 505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
> *NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org>
> *Check out It's The People's Data
> <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>*
>
> http://www.jtjohnson.com   t...@jtjohnson.com
> 
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM Nick Thompson 
> wrote:
>
> Hi, all,
>
>
>
> Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New
> Mexican’s requirements.  I have a few signatories, would love some more.  I
> will bring the letter with me to our service on Friday.  Even if you don’t
> plan to sign, please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> *To the New Mexican*
>
> *We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in
> Santa Fe.  We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young voters
> and their parents.  Institutions of learning and their students are under
> stress.Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning as our
> best research students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as cashiers,
> ride hail drivers, waiters and waitresses.  Under present conditions, these
> talented young people cannot afford to go to university and, without that
> training, will never take up the leadership positions their talent should
> make possible.  The nation will need these students as our generation
> retires from institutes, government laboratories, colleges, and
> universities.  Please take time to vote and to tell your representatives to
> support education at every level.  The future safety and prosperity of our
> nation depends on it. *
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Nick Thompson]

Thanks, Tom, 

 

Still trying to figure out logistics.  I have written the NM-ican to find out 
how to submit a letter from many signers, but got no response.  Do you have any 
experience with this?

 

Nick 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

 <http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/> 
http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Tom Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:14 AM
To: Friam@redfish. com 
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

 

I will sign on, Nick.

Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University






Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
 <http://nmfog.org> NM Foundation for Open Government
Check out It's The People's Data 
<https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671> 

http://www.jtjohnson.com <http://www.jtjohnson.com/>
t...@jtjohnson.com <mailto:t...@jtjohnson.com> 


 

 

On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM Nick Thompson mailto:nickthomp...@earthlink.net> > wrote:

Hi, all, 

 

Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New Mexican’s 
requirements.  I have a few signatories, would love some more.  I will bring 
the letter with me to our service on Friday.  Even if you don’t plan to sign, 
please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.  

 

Nick

 

To the New Mexican

We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in Santa 
Fe.  We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young voters and their 
parents.  Institutions of learning and their students are under stress.
Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning as our best research 
students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as cashiers, ride hail drivers, 
waiters and waitresses.  Under present conditions, these talented young people 
cannot afford to go to university and, without that training, will never take 
up the leadership positions their talent should make possible.  The nation will 
need these students as our generation retires from institutes, government 
laboratories, colleges, and universities.  Please take time to vote and to tell 
your representatives to support education at every level.  The future safety 
and prosperity of our nation depends on it. 

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove


FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

Re: [FRIAM] Open Letter, draft #2

[Tom Johnson]

I will sign on, Nick.
Tom Johnson, Professor Emeritus, San Francisco State University



Tom Johnson
Institute for Analytic Journalism   -- Santa Fe, NM USA
505.577.6482(c)505.473.9646(h)
*NM Foundation for Open Government* 
*Check out It's The People's Data
*
http://www.jtjohnson.com   t...@jtjohnson.com



On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM Nick Thompson 
wrote:

> Hi, all,
>
>
>
> Here is a new draft of the open letter, pared down to meet the New
> Mexican’s requirements.  I have a few signatories, would love some more.  I
> will bring the letter with me to our service on Friday.  Even if you don’t
> plan to sign, please feel free to point out typos and other infelicities.
>
>
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> *To the New Mexican*
>
> *We are industrial researchers and retired college professors, living in
> Santa Fe.  **We urge all Santa Feans to vote, but particularly young
> voters and their parents.  Institutions of learning and their students are
> under stress.Every day, we meet young people as dedicated to learning
> as our best research students in the 70’s and 80’s, yet are working as
> cashiers, ride hail drivers, waiters and waitresses.  Under present
> conditions, these talented young people cannot afford to go to university
> and, without that training, will never take up the leadership positions
> their talent should make possible.  The nation will need these students as
> our generation retires from institutes, government laboratories, colleges,
> and universities.  Please take time to vote and to tell your
> representatives to support education at every level.  The future safety and
> prosperity of our nation depends on it. *
>
>
>
> Nicholas S. Thompson
>
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology
>
> Clark University
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/
>
>
> 
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove